The current state of moderation across various online communities, especially on platforms like Reddit, has been a topic of much debate and dissatisfaction. Users have voiced concerns over issues such as moderator rudeness, abuse, bias, and a failure to adhere to their own guidelines. Moreover, many communities suffer from a lack of active moderation, as moderators often disengage due to the overwhelming demands of what essentially amounts to an unpaid, full-time job. This has led to a reliance on automated moderation tools and restrictions on user actions, which can stifle community engagement and growth.
In light of these challenges, it's time to explore alternative models of community moderation that can distribute responsibilities more equitably among users, reduce moderator burnout, and improve overall community health. One promising approach is the implementation of a trust level system, similar to that used by Discourse. Such a system rewards users for positive contributions and active participation by gradually increasing their privileges and responsibilities within the community. This not only incentivizes constructive behavior but also allows for a more organic and scalable form of moderation.
Key features of a trust level system include:
- Sandboxing New Users: Initially limiting the actions new users can take to prevent accidental harm to themselves or the community.
- Gradual Privilege Escalation: Allowing users to earn more rights over time, such as the ability to post pictures, edit wikis, or moderate discussions, based on their contributions and behavior.
- Federated Reputation: Considering the integration of federated reputation systems, where users can carry over their trust levels from one community to another, encouraging cross-community engagement and trust.
Implementing a trust level system could significantly alleviate the current strains on moderators and create a more welcoming and self-sustaining community environment. It encourages users to be more active and responsible members of their communities, knowing that their efforts will be recognized and rewarded. Moreover, it reduces the reliance on a small group of moderators, distributing moderation tasks across a wider base of engaged and trusted users.
For communities within the Fediverse, adopting a trust level system could mark a significant step forward in how we think about and manage online interactions. It offers a path toward more democratic and self-regulating communities, where moderation is not a burden shouldered by the few but a shared responsibility of the many.
As we continue to navigate the complexities of online community management, it's clear that innovative approaches like trust level systems could hold the key to creating more inclusive, respectful, and engaging spaces for everyone.
Got me thinking about the prompts that YouTube, TikTok, & Fortnite randomly give users.
Could help us understand how users feel about accounts overall or about reported comments/posts. Obviously can’t just do surveys for every comment though, they have to be somewhat rare.
alt-text: all 3 screenshots are similar; final is a prompt showing:
Getting quizzed about unimportant stuff is the most annoying trend. Anything like that needs an "I don't want to give feedback" option at a minimum and an easy way to opt out of future feedback requests.
Yes I see the cancel button, but it isn't the same as "I don't want to give feedback" or "This is not important enough for me to care".
Good point.
Can imagine the surveys being opt-in. Folks who do opt in will know they’re doing a service to the community.
BTW: when you see a survey from a big tech company, you can expect it’s used to influence your algorithm - I wonder if it has more impact on your experience than others’
The constant nagging about donations is another. My doctor's office is in a health care organization that wants a survey after every single visit is another. Just constant nagging everything I spend money, and I know they don't actually use the feedback for anything except punishing employees. There is no point to give feedback when it won't be used to actually improve anything.
Now there is one organization I work with that does have 3rd party surveys that I know for a fact actually uses the feedback correctly. I jump at the chance to do those, and give it honestly and with comments!
I already give feedback here through upvotes and downvotes and user comments. Something about the UI might be something I would give feedback on, but things like moderation I would assume will either be ignored if it doesn't reinforce existing practices or used negatively based on past experience.
That's basically the upvote/downvote button.