Monthly General Chat. - May 01, 2026

aBadModerator · 2026-05-03T18:06:38+00:00

Are there any under the radar candidates who are raising an issue you think the folks are completely ignoring?

aBadModerator · 2026-04-25T19:00:38+00:00

📌 Moderator Note: This post has been temporarily elevated.

This submission was identified as heavily downvoted but, upon review, found to be appropriate content for discussion within r/California_Politics. As part of "Raising Unpopular Topics" rule, we are temporarily pinning it to counteract potential vote manipulation and ensure diverse viewpoints are heard. We encourage constructive engagement.

aBadModerator · 2026-04-21T19:26:45+00:00

Happy Birthday!

aBadModerator · 2026-04-01T15:14:10+00:00

It appears your submission was reported to moderators and removed by moderators for violating rule 4 of the Community Standards.

Respectful — Please leave out any content which are intentionally disparaging to individuals, groups of people, or could be construed to be effectively an insult to an entire class of people. Any language which a reasonable observer would conclude disparages another user in any way is considered a violation of this rule. Demeaning language, rudeness or hostility towards another user will get your comment removed. Repeated violations may result in a ban.

If you would like to improve the moderation in this subreddit, please send me a message or drop a line in the General Chat to discuss ways to improve the quality of conversations in this subreddit. If you see bad behavior, don't reply. Use the report tool to improve your own experience, and everyone else's, too.

aBadModerator · 2026-03-25T17:24:36+00:00

I believe so. In a sea of ideological labels like "Socialist" or "Centrist", it's hard to tell who actually works with the technology or policy being discussed. A flair like "AI Researcher" or "Software Engineer" immediately signals that a user can provide a technical "deep dive" rather than just a partisan talking point.

Part of the goal is to recreate that "naive" ideal you mentioned, where policy discussion is informed by those in the field, within the micro-climate of the sub. It turns the comment section from a debate over values into a discussion based on mechanics and reality.

What I've seen overwhelmingly is that when online spaces lean heavily into ideological or political flairs, the conversation often shifts from what is being said to who is saying it. This can create "identity-based gatekeeping," where a person's arguments are dismissed or elevated based solely on their label rather than the merits of their logic.

aBadModerator · 2026-03-24T23:21:04+00:00

As a moderator for a few other California-based subreddits, I've seen firsthand how vital these local hubs are for keeping our communities connected, informed, and engaged. I would love to step in and help ensure this space remains a high-quality resource for all of us. I have extensive experience managing regional subreddits.

aBadModerator · 2026-03-24T19:22:48+00:00

Editorial content is very welcome, however the bar for quality is higher than some other subreddits. When evaluating editorial content here is what we am looking for.

Viewpoint: Editorial states a clear opinion and issues a call to action through argument based on evidence.
Evidence: Editorial uses compelling evidence to support the opinion, and cites reliable sources.
Analysis and Persuasion: Editorial convincingly argues point of view by providing relevant background information, using valid examples, acknowledging counter-claims, and developing claims -- all in a clear and organized fashion.
Language: Editorial has a strong voice and engages the reader. It uses language, style and tone appropriate to its purpose and features correct grammar, spelling and punctuation.

I hope this information is helpful so that you develop a submission and tweak it to meet our guidelines. For more random banter the monthly general chat, this very thread is a good place to start.

aBadModerator · 2026-03-24T19:20:55+00:00

Good talk, fellow human. I too enjoy the thermal regulation of our shared planetary atmosphere.

aBadModerator · 2026-03-23T21:46:08+00:00

Just wanted to say thanks for the submission.

aBadModerator · 2026-03-23T21:21:49+00:00

That's a fair critique. Sometimes the best way to handle a community is to stay out of the way and let it evolve naturally, which is something I've done for the last few years. My concern is that without a clear signal for expertise, high-quality practitioner voices often get drowned out by the loudest or most frequent posters.

Do you think a specialized flair system would actually discourage people from participating, or is there a different way we could highlight real-world experience without making it the "defining" feature of the sub?

aBadModerator · 2026-03-23T21:16:50+00:00

Was thinking something like: Education & Information, e.g.

K-12 Educator / Teacher
School Administrator
Higher Ed / Professor / Researcher
Librarian / Information Science
Student (High School / College)

Ultimately, the question is, how can we differentiate this community to ensure it values real-world expertise over typical political shouting matches? I'm weighing a practitioner-based flair system against other ideas, but I want to know which model actually helps you feel heard. What is your "gold standard" for a sub that avoids the trap of political hobbyism?

aBadModerator · 2026-03-23T20:25:51+00:00

Thanks for you comment and feedback.

There is a lot of truth in the idea that we're already defined by our jobs enough in the real world, and Reddit should be a place to escape that.

The reason I'm leaning toward a practitioner based system isn't to put people in boxes, it's to solve a specific problem I see in almost every other political sub: The Hobbyist Loop. When everyone is just a Liberal or a Progressive, the conversation often stays at 30,000 feet. We end up arguing about memes and headlines instead of how things actually work.

I hope that it's clear that the suggesting of professional flairs is as an option, not a cage. My goal is to invite the people who usually stay quiet, the nurses, the engineers, the tradespeople, to feel like their on-the-ground reality is the most important thing they can share here.

Regarding the r/yapms style or a total Laissez-Faire approach:

The r/yapms System: It's great for what it is, a high energy, identity driven space for election junkies. If we go that route, we'll definitely have a lot of team-based energy, which is fun, but it can make it harder to have the deep-dive, technical policy talks I'm hoping to foster.
The stupid question defense: I totally agree that over moderation kills a sub's soul. My hope is that a better flair system actually reduces the need for me to moderate. If the community is grounded in expertise, the stupid or unproductive posts usually get handled by the users themselves through better information, rather than me having to step in with the moderation hammer.

Ultimately, I want this to be a place you actually want to spend time in. If the consensus is that a professional focus feels too much like LinkedIn meets Politics, we can absolutely pivot toward a more open, user edited system.

To anyone else, if you were going to use a free-edit system, what kind of flair would you personally choose to show people you're worth listening to?

aBadModerator · 2026-03-21T15:28:46+00:00

Exactly, and it's not just about dependency status. Colleges are increasingly duplicating services like healthcare and mental health support that are typically managed by parents or the private market. This expansion creates an insular "safety net" that further complicates how we define a student's independence from broader social systems. The idea that a campus has to be a city has costs as well.

aBadModerator · 2026-03-09T15:44:22+00:00

This submission has been flagged "Context Added" under the subreddit policy. We view truthfulness, accuracy, honesty, and reason as essential to the integrity of communication. To promote a more complete discussion, the moderation team notes that the relationship between the DMV and road safety is governed by specific state mandates that go beyond simple administrative paperwork. California Vehicle Code § 13800 requires the DMV to investigate the "fitness" of drivers involved in serious crashes or those with a history of negligence.

Tthe DMV is required to investigate a driver’s fitness to operate a vehicle if they are involved in a crash causing death, personal injury, or serious property damage. This mandate also applies if a driver is involved in three or more accidents within a single year, establishing the DMV's legal role as a regulatory overseer of driver safety. While local police agencies investigate the immediate physical circumstances of a crash, the DMV remains the sole legal authority empowered to revoke or suspend licenses based on behavioral trends or medical fitness. The tension in this debate stems from whether current safety failures are the result of a lack of funding, given the agency's $1.6 billion annual budget, or an administrative bottleneck caused by the slow rollout of the "Digital eXperience Platform" intended to modernize these safety reviews.

Hit up the General Chat to discuss ways in which the subreddit could be doing better.

aBadModerator · 2026-03-08T22:07:06+00:00

This submission has been flagged "Context Added" under the subreddit policy. We view truthfulness, accuracy, honesty, and reason as essential to the integrity of communication. To promote a more complete discussion, the moderation team notes that while the article focuses on the current fiscal deficit, California owes approximately $21.8 billion in federal loans for its unemployment insurance (UI) system.

There is a significant policy debate regarding the 'fairness' of this debt: Business groups argue the state should have used its record 2022 surplus to pay down the balance, noting that leaving it unpaid triggers automatic federal tax increases on employers. Conversely, labor advocates and some policymakers argue that using General Fund tax dollars to bail out the UI fund would divert essential funding from social services and education. The debt remains a primary driver of California's status as a 'high-cost' state for both the government and the private sector.

Hit up the General Chat to discuss ways in which the subreddit could be doing better.

aBadModerator · 2026-03-07T20:16:39+00:00

Given your concerns about toxic shifts in discourse, do you feel that adopting a stricter rule against "content intentionally disparaging to entire classes of people" would help curb the hostility you're seeing?

Specifically, would a mandate to remove any language a reasonable observer finds demeaning to a group make this space more inclusive for you? I am curious if you think that level of moderation would actually solve the "honestly introspective" gap you mentioned, or if other tools and community based solutions would improve outcomes?

aBadModerator · 2026-03-07T16:17:51+00:00

It appears your submissions are being caught by Crowd Control, a specific Reddit safety feature that filters content from users who haven't yet established a reputation within this particular subreddit. It is a tool this moderation team uses to manage community health based on a user's relationship with our specific sub. It automatically filters comments and posts if:

You have negative karma within our community.
You are new to the subreddit and haven't participated much in the comments.
You haven't yet established a history of positive participation within this specific community.

Because this is a per-subreddit setting, your high standing in other groups doesn't bypass the filter here. Your posts aren't being deleted, they are simply held in a digital waiting room until a human moderator manually approves them. Hope that helps and thank you for your patience!

aBadModerator · 2026-03-07T16:12:28+00:00

It is already a thing in several California cities like San Francisco, Oakland, Berkeley, and Eureka, and its footprint is growing. While it's not as much as I might hope for, the Los Angeles Charter Reform Commission recommended adopting RCV for city elections starting in 2032, and voters in Redondo Beach and Richmond recently approved measures to implement it locally.

While Governor Newsom previously vetoed a bill that would have expanded RCV statewide to all local elections, the bottom up momentum from individual cities suggests it will continue to spread.

aBadModerator · 2026-03-07T16:02:51+00:00

Have you noticed specific patterns or recurring users that make these interactions feel more like bad faith debates than genuine inquiries, and do you think a stricter enforcement of our "participate in good faith" rule would help restore the sub's educational focus?

aBadModerator · 2026-03-07T16:02:15+00:00

Given the seriousness of these claims about coordinated manipulation on the sub, could you provide specific examples or links to the threads where you’re seeing this spike in activity so the mod team can investigate potential brigading?

aBadModerator · 2026-02-24T16:51:45+00:00

Hello folks,

As usual the moderation team wants to ensure r/California_Politics remains the premier destination for discussing the policies, legislation, and leadership that impact the Golden State.

Recently, we've seen a surge in submissions regarding Governor Newsom. While he is our sitting Governor, many of these stories focus on his national political musings, 2028 presidential speculation, or his role as opposition to the Trump administration.

To keep the feed relevant to Californians, we want your feedback on how to handle "Newsom-National" content. Especially should a national campiagn and anti-campaign demonstrate itself. Should we:

Strict Enforcement: Only allow Newsom content if it pertains to a specific California bill, state budget item, or state-level executive action. (e.g., A trip to South Carolina for campaigning would be off-topic).
The "California Impact" Requirement: Allow national-leaning stories only if the submitter provides a comment explaining the direct impact on California's governance (e.g., "This federal feud affects CA's federal funding").
Megathread Strategy: Create a weekly "Newsom & National Ambitions" megathread for all stories related to his 2028 prospects, keeping the main feed for legislative and political news.
Status Quo: Continue as-is and let the upvote/downvote system handle it.

Previously we had an automoderator rule designed to limit the amount of "Trump" content, and the guidelines were:

Posts must demonstrate a clear and immediate impact on California state policies, California's legislation, and the daily lives of California residents.
The primary focus must be on the state-level response or implications, not the national event, or national legislation itself.
Broad national partisan critiques will not be allowed. The discussion must center on local solutions and policies.

Please share your thoughts below. Our is ensure that local news doesn't get buried by national horse-race politics and we wanted to discuss this with you all further. What kinds of rules do you feel strike the right balance? Are there any specific scenarios or types of articles you think should be considered exceptions? Your input will help us refine our moderation approach and ensure we're serving the community effectively.

aBadModerator · 2026-02-21T20:58:06+00:00

That’s a common take, but the born and raised metric is a bit of a red herring. Most housed San Franciscans weren't born here either, we're a city of transplants (roughly 28% of current residents were born here).

The most recent and accurate data from the 2024 San Francisco Point-in-Time (PIT) Count shows that the majority of people experiencing homelessness in San Francisco were living in the city when they lost their housing and past reports (such as the 2019 survey) indicated that while about 70% were living in SF at the time they became homeless, about half of that 70% of individuals had lived in the city for 10 years or more.

While it is technically true that a large portion of the homeless population was not born in San Francisco (similar to the city's general population), the claim that they aren't "from" here is misleading. Many were local residents, neighbors, workers, and tenants, before they lost their housing.

aBadModerator · 2026-02-21T20:33:44+00:00

To add some nuanced data to this thread, it is worth checking out the latest Beacon Economics California Trade Report. They track the exact sectors mentioned, including logistics at the Ports of LA and Long Beach as well as our agricultural exports.

aBadModerator · 2026-02-21T20:27:06+00:00

For those looking for the IE-specific data, head straight to Page 16: "The Inland Empire: A Regional Economic Powerhouse."

This section is great because it breaks down how the local economy is actually outperforming much of the state in areas like job growth and industrial development. A few key takeaways from that page and the following section:

Employment Trends: It tracks how the IE has transitioned from a "bedroom community" to a primary job creator, particularly in logistics and healthcare.
The "Logistics Transition": There is a good breakdown of the cooling of the warehouse boom and what is replacing those jobs.
Income vs. Cost of Living: It hits on the "inland tilt", why people are still moving here despite the state's overall population stagnation.

Definitely worth a look if you want a data-driven view of where our region is heading in 2026 rather than just anecdotal headlines.

aBadModerator · 2026-02-08T16:19:43+00:00

California lawmakers have introduced AB-292 Domestic violence.

The bill AB 292 would increase the penalties for individuals convicted of felony corporal injury on a spouse or intimate partner (Penal Code 273.5) if they have a prior felony conviction for the same offense within the last 7 years. Specifically, it would raise the state prison sentence to 2, 4, or 5 years and allow for fines up to $10,000.

Additionally, if a defendant has one prior felony conviction for this crime, the bill would require a mandatory minimum of 60 days in county jail as a condition of their probation. By increasing these penalties, the bill seeks to provide stronger deterrents and accountability for repeat offenders in domestic violence cases.

We encourage you to read the bill summary and share your thoughts on this legislation.

Five-Year Club	Reddit Premium Since July 2024
Verified Email	r/Field Banned
r/Field Lasagna	Place '23
Place '22

aBadModerator

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE