Difference between revisions of "Moderation"

From SoylentNews
Jump to: navigation, search
(A local metamoderation)
 
(47 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
== Synopsis ==
+
{{archival}}
In the old days, when Slashdot was a new place in the tubes, its demographics was much more homogeneous than it is now. Is in effect the Slashdot's moderation/metamoderation system, despite its superiority when compared to other sites, becoming more and more flawed? If/how to enhace it?
+
What kind of moderation system? How it would handle communities of different size and homogenity? Discuss.
  
We invite anyone to discuss.
+
* Mostly [[Traditional moderation|traditional /. moderation]], with tweaks, though.
 +
* [[Extended moderation|Complex variants]] for very "nerdy" sities.
  
== 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
+
(This is a subpage of [[FeatureList|Feature list, you can go back to see other features planned.]])
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 tired joke, or a "captain obvious", 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 metamoderation ==
 
The metamoderation works globally now - it is one of the factors which decide, how many mod points a user gets. What about making it '''also''' local? A 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 metamoderating would tune, or bias the scoring according to his/her needs. In the meanwhile, a kid might still admire Captains Obviouses and tired jokes.
 
 
 
This might be made even more complex -- a dynamic cluster analysis[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/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, every user might be given a choice of his/her sweet spot between a "flat" and an "adaptable" scoring.
 

Latest revision as of 21:01, 21 September 2016

Obsolete Page
This page is obsolete and only retained for archival purposes.

What kind of moderation system? How it would handle communities of different size and homogenity? Discuss.


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