SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the a-response-from-the-director-of-project-freelancer dept.
After laying out my longer-term plans for the site two weeks ago, I've sat down, read the feedback, and started looking at writing a response. Under normal circumstances, I generally reply to comments as they're posted, but in this case, a more public and general dialog appears to be necessary. If you haven't read the previous post, I recommend doing so now.
Now, with that introduction out of the way... I have unfortunately been unavailable to write a more detailed response, due to real life issues. So please excuse my only responding to two of the major points brought up. I do wish to have a follow-up to address the remainder, but I can not make a promise as to when that may be.
UI issues
I did a really bad job explaining what I meant here, given this by far was the most commented on item! I'm not planning to beta, or Web 2.0 SoylentNews; what I want to do is clean up the interface, as well as add some dynamic aspects for those who use JavaScript, while, and I stress this, without compromising the functionality of the site as it stands now for the non-JS crowd.
For example, one thing is having the ability to perform an in-line reply; if you've got JavaScript enabled, it should simply create a reply box directly below the comment you're responding to without having to load an entire new page. For non-JS users, it should simply go to the current reply form we're all familiar with. This would help improve usability for the JS using majority while keeping us safely away from the evils of beta. Another example is re-doing the entirety of the preferences panel. As of right now, individual users can customize their site experience quite heavily, but said options are scattered across multiple pages, and are frequently buried in places one might not expect. For instance, if you wanted "Funny" comments to show higher than others, how many folks can really find that part of the UI without difficulty?
What I want to do here is a massive pipe-cleaning of our interface so that the site is easy-to-use, while not adding flashy or unnecessary chrome. While we might someday give the site a larger face-lift, it will be done with the feedback of the community, and with plenty of notice (and with every effort to preserve the old interface made for those who simply do not wish to change). For the immediate future though, everyone should expect to see the slow, but steady improvements we've been making since day 1.
Quality of Discussion
A large part of the comments focused on the issues with the moderation system. For those of you here since April, you might remember a discussion on reworking the mod system and know this has been something of a long-term goal that we simply haven't gotten to. One major problem is doing it is something of an all-or-nothing, and we can't have individual users opt-in/opt-out of a new system. That being said, this is something we do need to do relatively soon; we (the staff) have already seen issues with abusive moderation, and have fired off warning emails. As of right now, we haven't banned anyone from moderation, mostly on account we can't (the old moderation ban system was tied into metamod, which remains hosed), and that it also opens a real slippery slope.
Many folks complained that on the other site quite a few people reported that they were apparently blacklisted from moderation. Furthermore, a lot of the time, what is or isn't acceptable can be an extremely relative thing. The fact is, the moment the staff intervene on anything that isn't flat-out abuse, we create a precedent that is better left avoided. The correct method here is to tie the entire system to metamod (M2), and that as long as a user does a semi-decent job of moderation (i.e., 75-80% of mods get ACKed), they keep getting mod points, while those who moderate poorly or abuse the system don't.
The downside of this system though is that M2 is basically work with very little reward, at least as it is currently implemented. My current thoughts here involve reworking karma, as well as perhaps allowing badges and ranking, to hopefully provide benefits for some of the more tedious aspects of peer review.
(Score: 2) by paulej72 on Wednesday October 01 2014, @07:09PM
I have been thinking of changing that for a while now. The current time out is 8 hours, and I think it should be 24 at least. I could change the # of points to 5 at the same time, so the number of potential moderators per day would be similar.
Anyone have an objection?
Team Leader for SN Development
(Score: 2) by SlimmPickens on Wednesday October 01 2014, @08:34PM
I have a few times spent almost zero mod points just because I don't have time. I would prefer 24...48 hrs. Maybe half of your mods expire more quickly than the other half.
Perhaps users with good karma could get an additional 1 point per day.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Wednesday October 01 2014, @08:53PM
Expiration after $karma x 30 minutes (60 for paying people, or clock resets when used)
Or
After 12 hours of not using them, Lose one point per $karma x 15 minutes.
(Score: 2) by fliptop on Wednesday October 01 2014, @08:59PM
I wouldn't do that, the last 2 times I've had mod points I haven't used them because there was not sufficient time and I didn't see any worthwhile comments in the brief time I had available to read them. I think extending the available time to use mod points would be a better solution, 24 hours at the least.
Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Wednesday October 01 2014, @09:18PM
I see mod points as a privilege when I get them, not something I have to treasure and try to keep in reserve.
New idea: give me n points, valid until n x Karma comments are posted on SN. Slow day, fast day? it self regulates.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday October 01 2014, @10:48PM
Until, in a slow news day, you get into the dilemma: should I post (and increase the number of comments but harm my modpoints stash) or should I hang on my modpoints (and make the slow day worse).
Maybe: transferable modpoints?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Wednesday October 01 2014, @10:52PM
Hey, someone else is making the code, I can easily suggest that your points lifespan goes up a post for every post you make. Or maybe two, to thank you for posting. Or minus 5 if you get downmodded because you're just spamming posts to save your precious "modpoint stash"...
(Score: 2) by MrNemesis on Wednesday October 01 2014, @10:07PM
Heartily agree - I think there's some time zone dilation that may have not been considered here. I get awarded mod points not long before power down the computer before I go to bed and they've expired about twenty minutes before breakfast. Basically I only get to mod when I'm working late or suffering from insomnia, neither of which are conducive to healthy moderating.
I've been awarded a lot of mod points and I've seen a lot of discussions with great posts that remain untouched by mods - I don't think this is an uncommon problem. I would think a bare minimum of 24hrs and probably think about 48 and I suspect we'd be seeing an awful lot more and better moderation.
"To paraphrase Nietzsche, I have looked into the abyss and been sick in it."
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @10:34PM
I get awarded mod points not long before[...]I go to bed and they've expired about twenty minutes before breakfast
When I saw the post by paulej72 mentioning *8 hours*, the first thing that struck me is *Someone could sleep right through his chance to mod*.
Allotting mod points according to a temporal histogram of posting history would make sense.
Already been done somewhere? Using FOSS?
Too complex to implement easily?
-- gewg_ (whose karma always remains at zero)
(Score: 2) by Open4D on Friday October 03 2014, @09:37AM
Yes, the idea of mod point expiry is that people are less able hoard them and use them in a topic they feel strongly about.
As with other people, I sometimes feel that mod points come at just the wrong time. But that could easily be selective memory. (Lady Luck is never on my side!) Or maybe Gewg's suggestion [soylentnews.org] is worth considering?
I do feel we would benefit from a bit more moderation taking place. But my preferred solution for that is simply to have more people getting mod points at any one time, each still with the existing 8 hour timeout.
Then all that remains is to work on the psychology of the issue. Remind people that it doesn't matter if you don't use your mod points. They are not wasted. The electrons get recycled!