• Activity
  • Votes
  • Comments
  • New
  • All activity
  • Showing only topics in ~tildes with the tag "scaling". Back to normal view / Search all groups
    1. Mod tools growing with user 'tools'

      So, new here and looking around but haven't seen this addressed yet (though could be wrong! Happy to be linked if I missed something) One common failure I've seen in online communities of various...

      So, new here and looking around but haven't seen this addressed yet (though could be wrong! Happy to be linked if I missed something)

      One common failure I've seen in online communities of various sorts is that moderation tools don't get grown in parallel with user tools and abilities, rather they lag behind, and are often in the end built by third parties. This is the case with Reddit, but also in a bunch of other areas (e.g. online gaming, admin tools were often built to basically provide functionality that users realised were needed but makers did not).

      I get the impression there are plenty of reddit mods here, so can we discuss what are the key features needed to moderate communities that would be better built in than coming from third party tools (RES, toolbox) . A lot of these aren't needed with 100 users but with a million they become pretty crucial.

      My initial thoughts:

      • Something not dissimilar to the automod
      • Group user tagging (shared tagging visible to all mods, tags can be linked to specific discussions/comments)
      • Ability to reply as a 'tilde' not as an individual
      • Ability to have canned responses/texts (for removals, for replies to user contacts)
      • Some sort of ticket-like system for dealing with user contacts to mods (take inspiration from helpdesk ticket systems)
      • (added) space per tilde for storage (tags, notes, bans, canned text etc) of reasonable size.

      Plenty more to add I am sure but wanted to open the discussion.

      10 votes
    2. On the upcoming trust system

      The trust system is something that I'm looking forward to for several reasons. It allows for community moderation that is "decentralized" to a point. It takes pressure off of the admins to police...

      The trust system is something that I'm looking forward to for several reasons. It allows for community moderation that is "decentralized" to a point. It takes pressure off of the admins to police content. The possibility of being able to ensure that quality content remains the core product of this site. There are also negatives like the possibility of creating a "power user" class that is resented by the rest of the user base or the potential for misuse by those with the power. Along with some more complex issues such as disagreements between trusted users about how to interpret and curate content. These are all things that we as a community should iron out before a larger scale rollout of this system.

      What I wanna talk about today is something a little bit different tho. From my experience with other sites that have achievable user class "upgrades", there will, almost no matter what the precautions put in place, be users that will game the system to rise up through the ranks as quickly as possible. From my point of view, as long as there is a system, written or not, about what needs to be done to achieve the "Trusted" status, there will be users that will do their best to get their as quickly as possible. There are a few ways that this can be looked at:

      • It's fine because while they may not be contributing for the "right" reasons, they are still acting in what is seen as a positive manner in the community.
      • Concern that because they are only working towards the status symbol "Trusted" that they are not going to be acting in the best interests of the website, but in the interests of keeping the status.
      • Wanting to keep this kind of behavior to an absolute minimum because want everything should be as ideal as possible.

      While this discussion is had on a fairly regular basis, the consensus seems to be that it is a necessary evil to endure because it would be both too much work to police/figure out who is acting for the right reasons (even standardizing what the "right reasons" are is hard).

      The way this can be combated by having requirements that would be deemed too much work for most of the people who are just in it for the status and not for the site. The issue with this solution is that it can make it very difficult for those who truly care about the site to maintain the position that allows them to curate and keep the site in the condition that we aim for.

      In the end I think that the deteriorating system will solve at least a portion of these problems because those who are just in it for the status symbol are often likely to quit trying after they are achieve the goal they want. This leads to periods of inactivity, and therefore, decay.

      I wanted to post this to see what the greater community had to think about this.

      20 votes