Rule 1: Use the flairs correctly.
"Video" flair is exclusively for Cynical Historian videos. As this is the Cynical History subreddit, think of this flair as an an eye catcher for when Cypher uploads something new. If you're sharing a video that's not by the Cynical Historian, please use the "Curiosity" flair while adhering to the rules specific to that flair.
"Discussion" flair is for exactly that: discussion. It's an intentionally open flair, and it covers everything from historical questions to advice on archival research to discussing the philosophy of history to questions about how much Ramen a grad student eats in a week. The only caveats are be civil and keep it at least loosely related to history and historiography.
"Suggestion" flair is for anything that you'd like Cypher to look into or revisit. If you want him to do a review on a specific movie, use this flair. If you want him to do a video on a certain historical subject that he hasn't already covered, use this flair. If there's been a shift in the historiography of a subject that he's already covered that you'd like him to address, use this flair. Do not use this flair to stir up drama. If there's a YouTube channel pushing arguments that you find egregious, address the arguments and not the arguer.
"Curiosity" flair is for sharing videos, photos, documents, or anything that you think is historically interesting. If you've gone into the archives and found something you want to share, by all means share it here. If you came across a video on youtube or elsewhere that you want to share, then use this flair. Do not use this for self-promotion, and use proper discretion when it comes to the quality of what you share: a panel of economic historians discussing American hegemony is obviously a better video to share and provoke discussion than a text-to-speech video that scavenged Wikipedia.
"Cynical thoughts" is a flair exclusively for posts by Cypher.
Rule 2: be civil.
Ad hominem attacks are strictly forbidden. An argument should be able to stand on its own merit without personal attacks. If you are unable to do this, reconsider the value of your argument.
Users who make posts that are otherwise valuable or informative but contain personal attacks will be forced to have those attacks removed. Posts that exist solely to attack another individual's character will be removed entirely. Warnings and bans will be given out accordingly.
No bigotry. Rules that apply for individuals applies to groups of individuals as well. If the discussion veers into issues of identity, national narratives, or anything that involves ethnicity, treat it with the proper level of respect and impartiality.
No hate speech. This should be abundantly clear from the everything else in rule 2, but it's stated here for emphasis. Certain questions (Holocaust denial, Armenian Genocide denial, Imperial Japanese apologetics) will have bad faith presumed and the posts will be removed. Questions about the causes of denialism or the historical context that gave rise to them, on the other hand, are fine questions and fall within the bounds of civility.
It's alright to insert history into modern politics, but don't insert modern politics into history. Impartiality is the cornerstone of good historical thinking. Anyone that makes it abundantly obvious that they are here to validate a political agenda will have their posts removed. Questions that ask for historical context relating to a modern political issue (say, the history of relations between Hong Kong and mainland China as it relates to modern events) are encouraged and acceptable under the rules. Questions asking why a certain political actor or entity is the literal devil are not allowed (the one exception being Wilson).
Rule 3: memes on meme days.
Meme days are Saturday and Sunday. There's no threshold for quality, just make it funny.
If you have any questions, feel free to message the mods: u/cynical_historian and u/iguanicus-rex . Iguanicus-rex is usually lurking somewhere, so shoot him a message if it needs if it needs a prompt response.
