SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 13 submissions in the queue.
SoylentNews
*cough*
Ok, I meant to have an open forum about moderation *way* before this point. I did read the various feedback and comments left on my journal and the last moderation, and have made some changes to the moderation system.
First, mod points now expire after eight hours. I'm willing to extend this to 12 or 16 hours after I'm sure comments will still reach +5 fairly regularly. With luck, we'll get to the point we can extend mod-points to last a full 24 hours which I suspect will end most of the complaining on them vanishing too soon.
Second, I'd like to open the floor to making a more fundamental change to the moderation system. Specifically, allowing people to post AND moderate in the same discussion. We've seen plenty of posts get up to +5, which means 3-4 people gave up their right to post to keep our comments high quality. This was brought up during our last plea for stories, and I wanted to solicit more feedback before unleashing this upon the site.
I've floated the idea on IRC, and it seems there's a fair bit of support for removing the post/moderate split, though we'd need to make some changes to prevent rampant abuse. Here's what was suggested to keep things sane:
Ok, I meant to have an open forum about moderation *way* before this point. I did read the various feedback and comments left on my journal and the last moderation, and have made some changes to the moderation system.
First, mod points now expire after eight hours. I'm willing to extend this to 12 or 16 hours after I'm sure comments will still reach +5 fairly regularly. With luck, we'll get to the point we can extend mod-points to last a full 24 hours which I suspect will end most of the complaining on them vanishing too soon.
Second, I'd like to open the floor to making a more fundamental change to the moderation system. Specifically, allowing people to post AND moderate in the same discussion. We've seen plenty of posts get up to +5, which means 3-4 people gave up their right to post to keep our comments high quality. This was brought up during our last plea for stories, and I wanted to solicit more feedback before unleashing this upon the site.
I've floated the idea on IRC, and it seems there's a fair bit of support for removing the post/moderate split, though we'd need to make some changes to prevent rampant abuse. Here's what was suggested to keep things sane:
- Mod points won't roll back after a post
- Moderators can post in the same discussion (either before or after moderating), but can not moderate replies to their posts.
I've heard various ideas such as limiting it only after mods have expended their points (this will require implementing a cooldown to prevent a user from getting points again too soon). I want to hear your feedback, and I'll roll together something for the next major update of the site. Leave your comments
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Moderation: Discussing !(post^moderate)
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 137 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
An honest tale speeds best being plainly told.
-- William Shakespeare, "Henry VI"
(Score: 1) by VanessaE on Tuesday April 01 2014, @05:53PM
I think the problem isn't so much whether a user has to grind to "level up", but what they get to DO when they get there. At the moment, there isn't really a whole lot to offer on this site (or the other one) because the feature set is kinda fixed to a degree. That said, I can see a few things that might work:
1. Allow editing of posts. Replied-to posts would need a metric assload of karma compared to a post with no replies.
2. Disable that G*d damned lameness filter (if we still use it, which I assume is the case) after a certain karma level is reached. Think crude ASCII-art diagrams where a discussion calls for it (but still limited in width and height).
3. Allow posting of embedded images within a reply (with the ability for any user to configure their account to reduce them to thumbnails, links, or just never show them).
4. If/when this site gets ads, allow them to be disabled for users beyond a certain karma level. The other site does something like this, but I get the impression that it's based more on the amount of time you've been there, rather than how good of a contributor you've been.
5. Everyone's always bitching about lack of Unicode support, and others have said in the past that the reason it's mostly disabled is because of trolls using right-to-left switches, non-breaking spaces, and other methods to disrupt the page layout, and so I guess it's filtered out at posting time. Whitelists are sort of a non-starter given just how big the Unicode space is, so why not just open up clear Unicode access to those who can be trusted not to abuse it?
6. Make it more difficult to mod-down someone whose karma is already sky high. I posted elsewhere that the 2-point-to-mod down idea was good, provided that moderators have enough points to ensure that good posts get adequate coverage, but maybe this should go a little further. Give users a minimum of 15 points; 1 point to mod anything up, as always. 1 to 4 points to mod down, depending on the karma of the person whose post is being modded.
(Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Tuesday April 01 2014, @07:29PM
That may be true on the other site, where every Unicode character not on a very narrow whitelist is filtered out, but from the behaviour seen here, I think it's more of a problem with Slashcode interpreting the UTF8 byte stream differently than the browser encoded it. If using numeric entities, you can post almost unlimited Unicode (directionality markers seem to be filtered out, however).
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.