Feature request: Self-moderated Threads

[wk057]

As I mentioned here and elsewhere, I am a moderator at a forum that has the self moderation feature enabled. It is a forum with substantially more post volume than this forum, and many thousands more users. Again, I'm not tying my identities back to that forum from here, but suffice it to say it wouldn't be hard to find. It has many heated threads, some with thousands of posts spanning many months. Lots of controversial topics. Lots of contributions from many contributors. Self moderation has been a huge success. The naysayers (generally people who abuse the goodwill of others on the forum anyway) protested loudly when it was implemented several years ago. There were some bumps, but basically if a thread said it was self moderated at the top you were at the thread starter's discretion for post deletion. No explanation required. If that didn't work for you then you just didn't post there. Simple as that. If a person continues to post the same/similar replies to a self moderated thread that are getting deleted, the OP can report them and that person gets banned from the thread (or from the forum after multiple infractions).

Before, threads would diverge into chaos, moderators would have trouble sorting things out and good threads would die from the noise. But self-moderation had the effect of basically scaring off the people who would have cluttered up the thread in the first place, which is a very positive thing. No sense in them posting nonsense if the OP can delete it at will.

It also has to be a powerful tool. An OP with a self-moderated thread need not answer to anyone on why they deleted a post. It's a self-moderated thread and can be handled as the OP sees fit. For example, there are quite a few of these threads where the OP deletes ALL posts in the thread to keep it as a single poster journal of a sort. Most OPs of these threads list their personal moderation rules in the first post, or their signature if they use the feature often.

Basically, you can't allow self moderation then get mad when a user utilizes the feature, otherwise it would be useless if a self-moderator had to worry about some punishment or whatever for "misuse" of the feature. The feature has to be plainly defined as giving the thread starter the power to delete posts within the thread for any reason they see fit, otherwise it's useless.

Overall, self moderation has been a huge success there.

For clarification, all threads that are self moderated there are marked as such with a banner at the top of each page and at the reply box warning the poster that their post can be deleted by the thread creator. Also, the thread creator can only delete posts, not edit them, obviously. Additionally, an automatic note is sent to anyone who's post is deleted stating the user that deleted it and any given reason why.

I don't see how this could be difficult to implement here on the technical side. Literally just a per-thread flag that gives the starter the power to delete posts in that thread.

Anyway, back to work for me.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

Sounds good.

 

[Krugerrand]

I think arguments presented two years ago against the idea still stand as logical.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

I think arguments presented two years ago against the idea still stand as logical.

IMO I don't think the problem is that the arguments against this idea aren't logical. Certainly there are many logical arguments against this policy idea. The thing is, there are many logical arguments against pretty much, well, anything.

I can see the downsides, but I think giving it a go - even in a limited setting - a trial, if you will, would be useful. After a while we'd see how it works in this setting. Most social experiments are experiments first and later they become permanent policy... or not, if they fail.

And I say this with full knowledge that there is a contigent of people loving the idea of moderating myself far away from their threads. So be it, it would be democratical when everyone has the same chance to attract people to their threads as well as keep the threads on their preferred track...

There could be one test area where this could be attempted, for example. The idea presented by @tomas that every member could have one such thread is not a bad alternative either IMO.

 

[wk057]

I think arguments presented two years ago against the idea still stand as logical.

I glanced back over this thread, and I don't see any arguments against this in particular that stand up to even the slightest bit of scrutiny. Most of it was just a lot of hand waving about "censorship" and the like from what I can tell, which, ironically, isn't quite on-topic at all. This isn't about censorship, it's about keeping noise out of threads and being able to maintain productive discussions.

I would definitely have more incentive to actually start threads here again with useful content if this were a thing here. Even if I never had to use the feature, it'd be great to have at the ready to clean house in my threads if they veered off into the deep end of the noise pool.

 

[hobbes]

I think this is something that should be tested.

Another way to do this which I´d like better would be more crowd based - add buttons for "off topic" and "personal attack", and if enough (relative to page impressions) users click it, post will be auto-moved. One might even do it in a way that each user could turn this filtering on or off depending on personal preference. Question is if the forum software supports something like that.

 

[BigD0g]

Nothing to lose from a test, and everything to gain. If it does sent work you can always revert it back, and the ability to remove the signal to noise ratio would be lovely. Theoretically we are all adults and would self police as needed.

 

[T34ME]

Theoretically we are all adults and would self police as needed.

Too often, theory and reality are mutually exclusive, but I wouldn't mind testing your theory.........it might be fun deleting a moderator's post!

 

[JRP3]

I'm for it. If you don't like it, don't follow that thread. Simple.

 

[jelloslug]

I'm all for it. These days, people will say or do anything to get a rise out of someone else.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

I glanced back over this thread, and I don't see any arguments against this in particular that stand up to even the slightest bit of scrutiny. Most of it was just a lot of hand waving about "censorship" and the like from what I can tell, which, ironically, isn't quite on-topic at all. This isn't about censorship, it's about keeping noise out of threads and being able to maintain productive discussions.

I would definitely have more incentive to actually start threads here again with useful content if this were a thing here. Even if I never had to use the feature, it'd be great to have at the ready to clean house in my threads if they veered off into the deep end of the noise pool.

If the thread creator is deciding what's noise and what isn't noise, then it means that it's ego-filtered content. That's what blogs are for.

At most, there could be partial filtering, where a post would be marked and filtered in a way that would be visibly hidden-but-showable like ignored posts.
- The site moderators would then be able to monitor the filtered content and split, move or delete it as appropriate.
- The site moderators would also be able to spot inappropriate filtering and warn users or remove their filtering rights
- Anybody here or particularly anyone coming to a thread from a web search would easily be able to see that there are filtered comments and read them if they wish.

 

[bonnie]

I glanced back over this thread, and I don't see any arguments against this in particular that stand up to even the slightest bit of scrutiny. Most of it was just a lot of hand waving about "censorship" and the like from what I can tell, which, ironically, isn't quite on-topic at all. This isn't about censorship, it's about keeping noise out of threads and being able to maintain productive discussions.

I would definitely have more incentive to actually start threads here again with useful content if this were a thing here. Even if I never had to use the feature, it'd be great to have at the ready to clean house in my threads if they veered off into the deep end of the noise pool.

IIRC, you shut down your unmoderated technical discussion forum after it devolved into a gossip session about people here on this forum (and yes, I saw the comments about me & others after I was sent a link...).

How do you feel that would be avoided here?

 

[alcibiades]

I think this is a great idea. The incessant trolling (both of the concern sort and not) and baiting of people in "controversial" threads would wane considerably.

 

[Gerardf]

I very much support the idea as well.

I do not see how it CAN be a problem, as it is thread specific thus it can only add to the forum.

 

[jaguar36]

IIRC, you shut down your unmoderated technical discussion forum after it devolved into a gossip session about people here on this forum (and yes, I saw the comments about me & others after I was sent a link...).

How do you feel that would be avoided here?

I don't see how what happened on another forum that you apparently had a problem with has to do with the current topic.

Self moderated threads would still be under the overall forum moderators control, just another level of moderation. Sounds like a great way to lighten the load on the mods to me!

 

[bonnie]

I don't see how what happened on another forum that you apparently had a problem with has to do with the current topic.

Self moderated threads would still be under the overall forum moderators control, just another level of moderation. Sounds like a great way to lighten the load on the mods to me!

The *other forum* was created by people here unhappy with moderation. And since it was run exactly how it be proposed here, I think it's a fair question to ask how it would be different here.

If you scroll back, you'll see I'm supporting the idea.

 

[wk057]

IIRC, you shut down your unmoderated technical discussion forum after it devolved into a gossip session about people here on this forum (and yes, I saw the comments about me & others after I was sent a link...).

How do you feel that would be avoided here?

I don't see how what happened on another forum that you apparently had a problem with has to do with the current topic.

Self moderated threads would still be under the overall forum moderators control, just another level of moderation. Sounds like a great way to lighten the load on the mods to me!

The *other forum* was created by people here unhappy with moderation. And since it was run exactly how it be proposed here, I think it's a fair question to ask how it would be different here.

If you scroll back, you'll see I'm supporting the idea.

@bonnie - Actually, I had no issue with the gossip in the off-topic section. People are entitled to their opinions and were welcome to post them if they like, in the proper section. The technical threads were fine and didn't have anything off topic. Unfortunately, I didn't (still don't) have time to maintain the forum and wasn't going to go out of my way to take on yet another project. I'm also not sure where the idea it was unmoderated came from, either. But, anyway, very off-topic here.

That short lived little forum has nothing to do with this particular feature request. (I actually never even got around to implementing it there.) I think you've missed something. Since perhaps you (and maybe others) are missing the point here entirely, I'll try to clarify.

Self-moderated threads are not only moderated by the thread starter, they're moderated normally by forum staff AND in a limited fashion by the thread starter. That's all. The thread starter simply gets the ability to delete posts in a self moderated thread. It doesn't give them the ability to edit others' posts. It doesn't mean the thread can operate outside of forum rules.

Basically a self moderated thread creator can use their deletion ability to enforce their own set of rules in addition to the forum rules. Literally if a thread is made with the self-moderation option the only thing that changes is that the thread starter can delete posts in that thread. Nothing more. That's a far stretch from "unmoderated."

So there isn't anything similar to my short lived forum here as part of this request. If I were proposing an unmoderated section, that'd be different, but I'm calling for more moderation here (staff + thread starters), not less.

Hope this helps.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

The *other forum* was created by people here unhappy with moderation.

The short-lived forum also did not exist because some were unhappy about the moderation here - the some were banned or in-moderation here, meaning severe participation limitations. So it started out of necessity, so I don't personally think there is any kind of big drive against moderation on TMC, at all, as long as the moderation is, well, moderate... These days, I think on TMC it is much improved in this regard, and I for one have expressed happiness about that several times.

@wk057 is asking for the additional option for active "thread keepers" to moderate their own threads, say when they have a thread for their personal project. Sounds fair to me. It is more about a housekeeping function what @wk057 is asking, more so than about policing the threads...

 

[bonnie]

@bonnie - Actually, I had no issue with the gossip in the off-topic section. People are entitled to their opinions and were welcome to post them if they like, in the proper section. The technical threads were fine and didn't have anything off topic. Unfortunately, I didn't (still don't) have time to maintain the forum and wasn't going to go out of my way to take on yet another project. I'm also not sure where the idea it was unmoderated came from, either. But, anyway, very off-topic here.

That short lived little forum has nothing to do with this particular feature request. (I actually never even got around to implementing it there.) I think you've missed something. Since perhaps you (and maybe others) are missing the point here entirely, I'll try to clarify.

Self-moderated threads are not only moderated by the thread starter, they're moderated normally by forum staff AND in a limited fashion by the thread starter. That's all. The thread starter simply gets the ability to delete posts in a self moderated thread. It doesn't give them the ability to edit others' posts. It doesn't mean the thread can operate outside of forum rules.

Basically a self moderated thread creator can use their deletion ability to enforce their own set of rules in addition to the forum rules. Literally if a thread is made with the self-moderation option the only thing that changes is that the thread starter can delete posts in that thread. Nothing more. That's a far stretch from "unmoderated."

So there isn't anything similar to my short lived forum here as part of this request. If I were proposing an unmoderated section, that'd be different, but I'm calling for more moderation here (staff + thread starters), not less.

Hope this helps.

Fair enough, thanks for the thoughtful reply.

I did have an issue with the gossiping about people who weren't present, but probably because I was one of the topics under discussion. Some of it was hurtful, especially towards a particular forum member. People didn't know they were being trashed until someone started sending links out to the people under discussion. Taking potshots at people who weren't present seemed a bit wrong. But again, perhaps I'm biased because I was part of that group being targeted by a couple of people.

I bring that up in response to others who have said things like we're all adults and capable of behaving. Because it didn't appear that was the case. But as you point out, self-moderated threads would have MORE moderation, not less. So I'm parking the worry.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

@bonnie Everyone was welcome to comment on @wk057's short-lived forum, it was not closed or limited by moderation in any way, so nothing was happening behind anyone's backs.

The forum started out of necessity at the time. @wk057's short-lived forum started because several people were shut out from having conversations on TMC as even PMs were limited. AFAIK, all would have preferred to keep the conversation on TMC.

Many people felt hurt during that period and I am glad TMC is doing so well these days in comparison. I wish you didn't make it sound so one-sided, though.

Anyway, my point is, @wk057 has a history of using moderation possibilities fairly as shown by his short-lived forum. I say this in support of this self-moderation idea. I doubt he would misuse it in any way.