6
7

[Discussion] Building moderation systems (self.GamerGhazi)

AlmafetaGhazi Beret が 投稿

(Ran this by the mods first, hope it's okay.)

So, a lot of of the discussion lately has focused on moderation. From the abyss of nonexistent moderation like whatever chan is popular today, to the roulette wheel of volunteer moderation like Twitch and Reddit, to the joy of well-moderated safe spaces, to the threat of abusive moderation like Good Old Games. It's a continuum, and there's dragons on both ends.

Moderation, for its own sake, is not an unqualified good thing. But it's too important to building something good: you can't go by with no moderation, and too little moderation can be even worse than too much moderation. Take Reddit today, where the few employees Reddit has can barely make a post getting comments asking about their implicit approval of Reddit's more borderline subs.

Complicating the problem is the fact that you can't just open the doors wide and let anyone moderate. I came to Reddit from a forum where abusive moderation was widespread, and even the default subs seemed patrolled and curated. It wasn't the first time I saw moderation destroy the community that created the site, either.

But that's all observational, reactive. How can you go to proactive? How can you actively build good moderation - and keep your moderation from going over towards either end of the scale?

全 8 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]RobfathahStatue of Limitations 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

Proactive moderation seems like it'd have to start with a set of clearly-expressed rules. You find people willing to enforce those rules who also understand that they might have to expand and/or change over time, and, well, if you're administrating a community you have to keep an eye on the job your moderators are doing. If someone starts stepping out of line, they have to be brought back in or shitcanned just like any other employee who isn't doing their job properly.

Of course, in most cases, moderators operate on a volunteer basis, but it almost seems like in the case of something like reddit (and holy fucking shit does reddit need some admins/moderators with fucking spines) you almost have to have hired help because moderating is easily a full time job -- and that might just be moderating one of the shitholes on the front page.

In a perfect world, volunteer moderation would bring the best of both worlds, but, well, we don't live there, so finding people willing to moderate in a ... moderate fashion are probably gonna have to be paid for their work on communities this big.

[–]SandflapjackDiversity = white genocide 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

Sometimes you just gotta do things that will make a lot of people unhappy. Its how government works. As long as the goal is to protect and serving the users. Even if it means taking something away from them.

[–]Limited_Distractions 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

I think the most proactive things you can do are create a higher standard for discourse and have higher aspirations than your community being really popular.

At a maybe more practical level, another interesting idea is some sort of paywall. It's a way of creating investment in a user account and an incentive to behave. Ultimately, what is the cost of losing your twitter or youtube account if you just use it to yell at people all day?

[–]newl-aScary Trans Sjw Dimorphism Denier Extreme 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

paywall to mod seems like a bad idea tbh idk

[–]GatePlebPlebGate 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

The truth is that the reason a lot of communities don't have good moderation is because it costs money. A lot of money. There was actually a really good example of this today, glassbottommeg was tweeting about just how much Lego Universe spent on moderation to stop people from building cocks, it was a huge overhead.

[–]RubinHakenWess' sein Bier ich trink, dess' sein Lied ich sing 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Abusive moderation like Good Old Games? Can somebody fill me in on that, please?

[–]jordhaYour Daily Reminder That #ComicGate Isn't A Thing. 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

You need mods that are trustworthy that can get the users interested in the blog and willing to get conversations, but lay down the spam/harassment.

It's not a violation of "free speech" so much as getting conversations going. Unfortunately, the last "generation" grew into a "moderator-less" society so when somebody gets banned for being shitty, they get a new account or join a message board where they go "hey I got back"

And in the knee-jerk reaction go "I never cared for their stuff anyway"

[–]_Rolfy_ 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

Rules should be upheld and posts should be on topic. It's what makes subreddits, subreddits and gives other forums and subforums identity. However, when moderators start picking away at comment chains under the banner of 'curation', that's when things get... eh.

I believe that the best way to fight discourse is more discourse. It's why I like /r/AgainstGamerGate a lot. Godwin's law in mind, some threads will eventually evolve into total poo. But pruning away at comments in attempt create some higher standard of discourse is not the role of a moderator in my mind.

I think moderators are best unseen and unheard, with a purely passive approach. The less invested they are, the better they become. But that begs the question, where do they come from then?