Difference between revisions of "Extended moderation"

From SoylentNews
Jump to: navigation, search
(Added section: Nonlinear mod)
m (added link back)
 
Line 1: Line 1:
 +
(This is a subpage of [[Moderation|Moderation, you can go back to see other features planned.]])
 +
 
A discussion about some complex "nerdy" variants of the [[Traditional moderation|traditional moderation]], probably not apt for a typical /. style news site.
 
A discussion about some complex "nerdy" variants of the [[Traditional moderation|traditional moderation]], probably not apt for a typical /. style news site.
  

Latest revision as of 19:58, 7 April 2014

(This is a subpage of Moderation, you can go back to see other features planned.)

A discussion about some complex "nerdy" variants of the traditional moderation, probably not apt for a typical /. style news site.

Is it really about "beta"?

It is claimed the reason of migrating out of slashdot is the "beta". But is it really so? Let's try to do some speculations...

"Beta" is said to be made to fit tastes of the younger audience, flowing recently en masse to Slashdot - in fact, stats show, that Slashdot is currently accesses mosltly from... schools. The same audience is, though, often scorned upon by the "low uids" as the reason of progressively "destroying the old Slashdot". Now, we could conclude, that the deeper reason for both beta and discussion quality are really kids. But it seems, it is still not so simple.

Let us consider an example. So, (i) a bunch of teenagers mods ups some old joke, as things like that still amuse and educate them. Now, a low uid hates that. But, despite that, (ii) the younger and the older Slashdot might still share some common interests - be it some comment insightfull for all, so a single site might make sense. How to agree that? Would some special sort of moderation be able to please both of the discussed groups?

Attach your proposals below.

A local moderation

The moderation and metamoderation work globally now - it is one of the factors which decide, how many mod points a user gets. What about making it also local? A moderating or metamoderating user would express his/her preferences in this way. An example: it turns out, the user X likes comments of "low uids", but dislikes comments frequently moderated by teenagers? So the system increases that user's "experience", what translates to mods of experienced users being somewhat more visible by this particular user, as opposed to mods of the school crowd. In other words, there would not be a single score, seen by all -- a user by moderating would tune, or bias the scoring according to his/her needs. Meanwhile, a kid might still admire, and mod up with "novice points", old jokes, but also high-quality school-grade educational comments.

This might be made even more complex -- a dynamic cluster analysis might find out by itself groups of users with common tastes, and somewhat tune the scoring to their likes. And, if the said kid writes a quality comment, modded up by experienced users, it would in turn move the kid a bit in the direction of a cluster of "low uids".

Surely, a careful tuning of the system might be needed. To alleviate that a bit and to make the local moderation opt-in, every user might be given a choice of his/her sweet spot between a "flat" and an "adaptable" scoring.


Nonlinear moderation

Hand out more points but make the relationship between score and points exponential.