site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  1mo ago (text post)   3892 thread views

Quality Contributions Report for July 2026

This is the Quality Contributions Roundup. It showcases interesting and well-written comments and posts from the period covered. If you want to get an idea of what this community is about or how we want you to participate, look no further (except the rules maybe--those might be important too).

As a reminder, you can nominate Quality Contributions by hitting the report button and selecting the "Actually A Quality Contribution!" option. Additionally, links to all of the roundups can be found in the wiki of /r/theThread which can be found here. For a list of other great community content, see here.

These are mostly chronologically ordered, but I have in some cases tried to cluster comments by topic so if there is something you are looking for (or trying to avoid), this might be helpful.

Quality Contributions to the Main Motte

@naraburns:

@urquan:

@Amadan:

@Ioper:

Contributions for the week of June 29, 2026

@gattsuru:

@RussianAmericanMormon:

Contributions for the week of July 6, 2026

@birb_cromble:

@Rov_Scam:

@dr_analog:

@FCfromSSC:

Contributions for the week of July 13, 2026

@RenOS:

@JTarrou:

@faceh:

@johnfabian:

@FtttG:

@YoungAchamian:

@gattsuru:

Metamotte

@ZorbaTHut:

@StableOutshoot:

Contributions for the week of July 20, 2026

@urquan:

@georgioz:

@Shakes:

@MartianNight:

@FCfromSSC:

Contributions for the week of July 27, 2026

@FtttG:

@cjet79:

@Shakes:

@FiveHourMarathon:

@gattsuru:

@JeSuisCharlie:

@hanikrummihundursvin:

2
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I presume most people downvoted my psyops post either because I said that Biden legitimately won in 2020, or because I criticised the anti-Zionist movement. I'm curious about the ratio, and also people who downvoted for some other reason.

I came away from that post feeling like you were really failing to model those movements. I channeled that into our resulting conversation, but I could see someone downvoting and moving on instead. That would most likely be driven by feeling attacked/insulted, a common enough response to being accused of lying.

There is also the trans issue. Going as hardline as you did on it in that post - literally using it as an example of obvious absurdity - gets more upvotes than downvotes here, but it does get some downvotes.

(I'm not one of the people who downvoted that post.)

I still have no idea why people downvote here, we aren't reddit, just because the feature exists doesn't mean it should be used.

I downvote when I see the same tired and repeatedly proven wrong arguments trotted out for the 100th time. Especially when they are deployed as thought terminating cliches purposely deployed to sidestep a point that was made.

It's overused, but I don't really see the problem with downvoting uncivil posts.

But people aren't downvoting "uncivil" posts, they are downvoting posts they disagree with.

I rarely downvote, but when I do it is because it is either a personal attack, or an attack on the concept of thought itself.

I downvote uncivil posts, and your initial post seemed to say that downvoting for any reason was senseless, so I felt the need to object.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats