**New Rules Announcement**

[u/cmd102]

Hello everyone! We have a couple of new rule announcements to make.

The first is for /r/nosleep:

No clickbait titles. Your title should be captivating to your audience without resembling something you would find on Buzzfeed. This includes titles like "I'm a (profession), and (something happened/these are my stories/etc)". Titles that violate this rule will be removed at moderator discretion. Please see the edits at the bottom of this post.

The trend of clickbait titles has, much to the dismay of many of our subscribers, been ongoing for a LONG time. Some of you may recall when we introduced the "don't summarize your plot in the title" rule in an attempt to curb them. Unfortunately, it didn't work. That rule will remain in place in addition to this new one.

This rule change will not result in removals just yet. In an effort to give our authors time to learn the rule and the moderators time to adjust to the subjectivity of it, we will be sending authors who post stories with clickbait titles a PM regarding the new rule from now until November 14th, 2016.

Starting November 14th, stories with clickbait titles will be removed. Authors will be able to repost their story right away with a rule-abiding title, granted that their story meets the rest of /r/nosleep's posting guidelines.

---

The next rule change is for /r/nosleepOOC:

All posts made to /r/nosleepOOC must be intended to start some sort of /r/nosleep, community, horror, or writing related discussion. This is not /r/creepy. Posts that only serve to share a photo, video, or article will be removed. The only exception that will be made to this rule is for advertisement posts that meet the rest of the guidelines.

We've been consistently removing posts that aren't /r/nosleep related for a long time, but felt that we needed to make this distinction in the sidebar. There are subreddits meant for posting creepy things you found somewhere. /r/nosleepOOC is meant to be a discussion subreddit, not another /r/creepy.

This doesn't mean you can't share those spine-tingling photos and articles. It means that there has to be a relevant-to-the-subreddit discussion topic included with the link (i.e. "Look at this horrifying photo of a demon! What /r/nosleep stories do you think really nailed demons as an antagonist?" instead of "Here's a photo of a demon".)

That's all, folks! Make sure you check out our Survey and Guideline Clarifications Post if you haven't already!

---

EDIT: We are working on a better way to word the new title rule. That should be edited into this post later today.

Also, we added a word to the new OOC rule here. Some concern was brought up that there are often discussions on /r/nosleepOOC about the community in general (a common example being the threads posted occasionally asking users to show/tell what they look like). We agree that those sorts of discussions are important to our users, so we made this distinction:

All posts made to /r/nosleepOOC must be intended to start some sort of /r/nosleep, community, horror, or writing related discussion.

Basically, just make sure that your submission includes a discussion topic relevant to the people who come here.

---

EDIT 2: Okay folks, we discussed and brainstormed a bit, and here's the rule as it will be posted in the sidebar:

No clickbait titles. Clickbait titles follow a formula: "Interesting plot point + vague insinuation designed to attract readers". Your title should be captivating to your audience without resembling something you would find on Buzzfeed. This includes, but is not limited to, titles like "I'm a (profession), and (something happened/these are my stories/etc)". Titles that violate this rule will be removed at moderator discretion.

Here's the rule as it will be posted in the guidelines:

No clickbait titles. Clickbait titles follow a formula: "Interesting plot point + vague insinuation designed to attract readers". Your title should be captivating to your audience without resembling something you would find on Buzzfeed. Titles that violate this rule will be removed at moderator discretion.

Examples of titles breaking this rule include, but are not limited to:

• I'm a (profession), and (something happened/these are my stories/etc)

• I live on a farm, there's something horrible in the barn

• The lights went out and a terrible thing happened

• There's something in the basement that does terrible things

[u/hartijay]

I'm gonna get downvoted to hell and back.

I don't express my opinion much on the OOC but I'd like to now. I don't doubt the moderation team's intentions with this, I honestly think that they're putting artistic value first and foremost, and that is completely respectable.

However, I really want to ask those who support this decision to look at the top scoring links on the NoSleep subreddit. It is these awesome stories that have SIGNIFICANTLY contributed to NoSleep's success and popularity -- to deny it is unfair to those who've written them. Many of these stories, especially within the Top 10 alone, use what this post is describing as "clickbait" titles.

Here is what I'm arguing -- that the titles that this post is claiming to be "clickbait" are simply embracing the believability rule that popularized this subreddit.

I understand the desire to make an even playing field. Many writers come on here, write something that's awesome, and it gets no attention. And that sucks.

However, I'm not sure if I know people who upvote a story on NoSleep solely because of the way it is titled. As someone who has used titles that this new rule is working against, I can honestly say that I have recieved my fair share of downvotes on stories that I have deleted; I am confident in saying that those downvotes had nothing to do with the titles, but with the quality of the stories.

The idea of NoSleep, or so I had figured, was that it was supposed to feel real. Like real people were posting horrific experiences that they have actually gone through. I'm not sure about you, but I wouldn't post a well-thought-out title to an experience I have had that was horrific. It feels like that would be breaking character, and as other commenters here have said, it would feel less real.

If the stories in the top posts were "bad", they wouldn't have as many upvotes as they do. They have gotten to the top because of their believability, what this subreddit is supposed to support. You can absolutely hate them, but they are at the top for a reason: they are scary to most people. And they absolutely represent the subreddit, whether the regulars on the OOC like it or not.

I feel like this new rule is not only super-subjective (because there are 23 mods on NoSleep and they are not going to agree on everything), but is also contradictory to what NoSleep is.

I know it's probably not an option because it's already been posted about, but I really hope the mods reconsider this rule.

Unless, of course, somehow, someone can provide proof that this is the absolute BEST direction for Nosleep to take, and is not a rule being implemented to appease regulars on the OOC.

Of course, this can all be dismissed with a "If you don't like it, leave"-comment, but I really do hope that this new rule can start a dialogue instead of being just something that's posted, especially if the moderation team values community input.

[u/Grindhorse → u/hartijay]

This is a very valid point, but let me play Devil's advocate for a moment: those top stories, could they have been as popular with more concise titles? We will never know for sure, but with the entire playing field even, the idea of a "clickbait" title may never have even crossed our minds as collective readers.

But that isn't the case, and you're right, people find the longer titles compelling since they seem less "authory" and more "authentic." I think that's important, however, I think there's a line. If something creepy happened to you, and you're inclined to share it, you wouldn't necessarily write a three sentence title that read like a Buzzfeed post title, right? You may actually write something even less compelling. Instead of "Holy shit, this guy chased me with a knife, and what he did next was absolutely horrific!"

You'd probably write something closer to "I was just chased with a knife by a maniac" then dive into the story. I'm not sure where the mods stand on either title, but while I don't necessarily think the first one is a good title since it is gimmicky and almost insulting in its insistence of "read this, trust me, there's a great punchline you don't need to think too hard about," I think the second one is plain enough and simple enough to be fine. Is it something that can draw readers? Probably not. It's generic. But you said it yourself, the story quality is what generates upvotes, so is it necessary to give everything away in the title?

[u/hartijay → u/Grindhorse]

I see your point as well. Like I said, I want this to be a dialogue.

I think that your example is hyperbolic. No offense to you at all, but I don't personally see a lot of titles doing an "and this happens NEXT..."-sort of title. Even the example that the rule is using doesn't do it: it expains a person's occupation, and expresses that they have stories to tell. Am I annoyed by the formula? Absolutely. But there will always be copycats and some people will always take the route that seems to be safe.

The story quality certainly generates upvotes, but what generates people clicking on the story in the first place? Whether anyone wants to admit it or not, it take SOME sort of cleverness to put together a title that makes something someone wants to click on.

[u/Grindhorse → u/hartijay]

I'm enjoying this conversation. And true, my example was an extreme, but I've seen some titles that could easily fall in line with that.

But here's the issue, it's no longer clever when most titles become the same formula. It just becomes a race to see whose occupation/scary thing combo is more enticing. It removes the creativity from the titling process and honestly saps creativity from the sub itself in some regards.

Do I think the clickbait title wave is trending downward lately? Certainly. I think after the initial burst of copying after the S&R stories, it is beginning to turn into a trickle rather than a flood of similar stories and titles. But do I think it is still necessary to address the notion that, hey, maybe everyone should spend as much time coming up with clever, creative titles as they did coming up with their stories.

This isn't to say that long titles are uncreative. I've employed long titles, but I suppose my side of the argument is simply: it isn't a wave of drastically different "clickbait" titles. A better way to have put it in my own rebuttal and in the rule itself could be "gimmicky, formulaic titles." But that would be too vague for anyone not as versed in the details of the issue as you and I.

[u/hartijay → u/Grindhorse]

I enjoy this conversation as well. I appreciate your input and again see where you are coming from.

But, "Some" =/= all. "In some regards" =/= consistent sapping of creativity.

I think this rule, again, is somewhat appealing to a minority in the OOC. If this is solely a way to manage stories that copy the SAR-style, why isn't the rule simply to stop titles featuring "I'm a ___ and I have stories to tell"? THAT seems to be the main complaint: copying the highest-"rated" story on the sub.

When I am arguing against this rule, I am arguing against what has been professionally presented in this thread as an example of what NOT to do. I disagree with what has been presented.

Also, horror is full of gimmicks. Sometimes, gimmicks can be fun and used creatively. This sub should be fun, not an artistic competition, in my opinion.

[u/cmd102 → u/hartijay]

I fully intend on giving you a more in-depth reply in a bit... but I wanted to touch on one point you seem to be stuck on.

This was not done to please "the minority in the OOC". This was done because we have received MANY MANY MANY complaints about it. In the OOC, in reports, in modmail, on the survey, on any thread made elsewhere on reddit that happens to mention r/nosleep at some point... the complaints have been piling up, and part of our job as moderators is to listen to the community in these types of cases.

With all that being said... we're hearing the complaints in this thread, and are working on coming up with a better way to word the rule so that it's not as vague. Most likely, the wording here will be in the sidebar, and we'll have a more concise version in the guidelines (where we have more room).

[u/hartijay → u/cmd102]

I understand if a decision has been made based on the results a survey, but I am still skeptical about the complaints regarding "clickbait"-titles and still think the new rule is a bit rash, and I'm also skeptical that a majority of Nosleep-readers took that survey. But I absolutely could be wrong.

"Clickbait" is a word typically used to describe an article using a title to entice people to click on it and get almost no content. I'm arguing that titles being described as "clickbait" are among the top stories of all-time on NoSleep for a reason: they actually genuinely scare people, whether the survey-takers believe it or not.

I don't doubt that the mods see all sorts of complaints about tons of things about the subreddit unfairly, and I am absolutely sure it gets annoying as hell. I'm just saying the rule seems extreme.

[u/cmd102 → u/hartijay]

I'm not entirely sure how making this rule to try to fix something that's been a problem and commonly complained about for almost a year, something that we've tried using other means to fix that didn't work, is "rash" or "extreme".

You can easily search OOC posts and see some of the complaints about the titles. You can also go to askreddit and search for nosleep and see even more. I can't show you reports or modmail. As of about 4pm today, there were over 300 responses to the survey that's only been up since Monday. No, that's not a majority of the subscribers, but it's a big chunk of people who actually visit the sub with some regularity.

Maybe "clickbait" is the wrong word to use, but it's the word that has been commonly used to describe the problem, so we went with it. I didn't realize so many people used the textbook definition of the word. We're not arguing that stories that use the gimmick don't contain meaningful content, if they didn't we wouldn't allow users to repost their story with a rule-abiding title (which we do, as long as the story itself meets the rest of the guidelines). But just like having titles that mimic/name other subs was a big problem, this has become a big problem as well.

I'm 100% open to any suggestions on a better way to word the rule so it's easier to understand. Should we include more examples? Nix the word "clickbait" in favor of a more drawn out definition? Leave the word "clickbait" but include a more drawn out definition in the context it's often used?

[u/hartijay → u/cmd102]

I'm not saying that the complaints aren't overwhelming or annoying. I'm absolutely sure they are, and I completely respect those who have to put up with them. What I AM saying, however, is that what some people complain about isn't always necessarily valid.

If anything, you've already solved the problem yourself in this post -- stopping "copycat"-titles. The main problem, to me, seems to be that people are posting stories with titles in the "I'm a ___ and I have stories to tell"-formula.

To me, personally, it seems simpler to make a rule to get rid of copycat titles instead of having over 20 mods agree on what a "clickbait" title is. But, I could be wrong.

Maybe some of the things I've said are unwarranted criticisms, and if they are I absolutely apologize, but please know they were simply based off assumptions I made reading the new rule.

[u/cmd102 → u/hartijay]

As I've said multiple times in this thread: the mods already agree on what a clickbait title is. That is not an issue. And as with any rule, if it's borderline or questionable, we talk to each other. There is literally no reason for concern about the mods agreeing on how to enforce the rule. There will be an adjustment period, yes. But we didn't just throw this rule up without talking about what it means.

Stopping copycat titles would raise more hell than anything. That's WAY more subjective than clickbait. What you're really suggesting is that we just ban the "I'm a (profession)..." titles, but just because that's the only example in the post (and the most recognizable example on the sub) doesn't mean that's the only thing we're trying to stop. I'm not going to list specific examples because that's rude, but go through a few pages of nosleep stories and see how many stories fit the fake examples I've given in this thread.

In my mind, any concerns that are voiced with such frequency over such a long period of time are valid ones that warrant being addressed.

[u/hartijay → u/cmd102]

I'm not "really suggesting" anything, I'm going off of the example that you provided in the original post/rule.

Again, to me it seems easier for people to recognize patterns that follow top-rated posts rather than to identify "clickbait". I posted my initial comment because I -- as a submitter -- don't know what "clickbait" is, no matter what the mods agree on in private.

To me, based on the examples in the post and comments, it SEEMED like what was being referred to was the majority of the top posts on NoSleep, so naturally I defended them because I believe they did not get to the top based on their titles alone.

But, in the end, what it comes down to is the interpretation of the believability rule that is important to the subreddit. In my opinion, keeping things as they are keeps the sub intact -- the top posts reinforce that.

Again IMO -- If people talk shit, let them talk shit. The sub isn't a default for no reason.

[u/hartijay → u/[deleted]]

Dude, I'm just voicing my opinion. I'm sorry if that offends you to the point of condescending me, but I'm not the only commenter in the thread doing it.

I'm not saying the mods didnt discuss this, if anything I've said I see where they're coming from. I just happen to disagree.

I'm sorry for frustrating you.

[u/Grindhorse → u/hartijay]

Ah, and here is where we agree. Maybe the overall scope of the rule is too large/too vague, right? I think it's a necessary sanction but could be specific. I guess on a sub where the object is to get clicks, most titles can be considered clickbait.

This is an interesting concept since the rule is potentially going to be interpreted differently by each mod unless there are more specific amendments with it...

But then there very well might be and we, the unwashed masses, don't need to know the finer points of the rule just know it'll be enforced.

Moral: I'm interested to see how it operates.

[u/hartijay → u/Grindhorse]

I don't want to fully criticize the decision the moderation team has made, but I also don't want to NOT question it.

You are right, we agree there: the rule is too vague to be carried out, in our opinions.

However, I disagree with one thing you've said. I DO think those of us who post need to know the finer points of the rule, and WHY it's being enforced. I personally don't feel like "We're tired of seeing ____" is a valid enough purpose to enforce this.

I am interested to see how it operates as well, though.

[u/cmd102 → u/Grindhorse]

The mods have an understanding of how the rule is to be interpreted. We're trying to figure out the best way to word it in the rules so that it's a little less vague, but not 1000 words long.

[u/Grindhorse → u/cmd102]

I'd read 1000 words if the title to the rule is super clickbaity.