A moderation bot that collated reports against rules and selected active users to vote on if the rule was broken or not seems like a useful thing to create to me.
Batching these into small groups and assembling a jury to decide if a particular rule was broken by each of the 1-7 reported posts should be a short task for the people involved. As long as the same people don't always end up being selected for the jury the results should be mostly good too.
Ooo these sound really good. Also if there are enough people moderating I think it could be better to allow multiple users to moderate the same content to avoid bias. Like 2/3 or 3/5 users must agree it's a rule violation before an action is taken.
When Reddit started posturing about "democracy", I started thinking about a direct democracy would work for moderation.
In my mind, it's a lot like this - you ask members of the community to moderate a few comments. But you then take their decisions and put through another round with another temp mod.
Only if they corroborate each other do you perform a mod action. Not sure how mod tools handle it (long term obligations stress me out), but I envision you'd have to mark a comment for removal and check off the rule(s) it violates
Similar to your idea, it would turn a responsibility into volunteer work you could do in the moment, and it could ensure that the rules are based on the understanding the community has of them
There's a lot of ways to slice it, and it would need some light statistics, but it's something possible if people are into the idea
Reminds me a bit of Slashdot's meta moderation, back in the day. I used to pick that up maybe once or twice a week, if I had a moment. The user experience was excellent; its benefits to the community were less clear to me, but I put that down to a transparency issue.
Stack exchange has a similar system. My problems with it: how the content reviewers are selected (people reviewing content they don't like creates a lot of reviewer bias, moderators usually only moderate content they have an interest in) and people spend more time "curating" content than creating it.
I hope so. I've already run into other technical hurdles trying to sus our how a secret ballot vote would work in practice that a bot could probably solve. I know very little about coding but may end up having to roll up my sleeves and start to figure it out.
Is this supposed to be for admin reports only, or mod reports? I'd be nervous about community outsiders doing moderation. If its admin only then theres less wiggle room with rules and it is potentially more appeal-able. I still think the potential for crappy calls is pretty high.
I like this idea, but am unsure of implementation.
thanks for using Leebra!
go to feed...
I think this could be a pretty good system, but it would require a far more robust moderation framework than we have right now, as well as a lot of thought. I'm just brainstorming here, but I think at a minimum we would need:
save