As some people know, I’ve spent a fair bit of time studying economist Kenneth Arrow whose work on endogenous growth theory and information economics influenced a lot of my thinking on the eco…
One thing I think is interesting is how tildes.net is planning to handle moderation.
Basically - they give you broad powers initially, and take them away from you if you show yourself you can’t be trusted. So if you report a user and it’s a bad-faith report, they can ding you. If you keep making bad-faith reports, then over time you lose the ability to create reports at all.
By contrast - if you repeatedly prove to make good reports, and your reports are usually actioned upon, you become “trusted” over time and your reports may cause content to be removed as soon as you report it. (And of course - if a moderator restores a post that you got removed, that counts as a ding against you.)
Over time, trusted users get hand-picked to become moderators. This has the ability to create “power users”, of course, but a moderator that acts in bad faith can become less trusted over time and potentially loses their privileges. The thought is that the risk of power users is less than the detriment of an unmoderated community.
They’ve talked about that for years yet they’ve also slowly become more and more rationalist and Deimos has withdrawn from interacting with the website more and more over time. Their ethos is part of where my thoughts come from, but until they actually decide to take that seriously (or even fight the slowly encroaching rationalism which pushed the minority voice off their website), I can’t in good conscience put any stock into their website.
One thing I think is interesting is how tildes.net is planning to handle moderation.
(unfortunately) we’re actually very familiar with how tildes wants/wanted to do things! most of our original core are, you could say, disenchanted members with the site who didn’t like the direction it was going generally, and wished the trust system would actually be worked on (to my knowledge it’s still entirely conceptual, which is how it was 3 years ago when i was using the site).
It still seems conceptual, yeah. AFAIK it isn’t implemented over there yet.
I just noticed it when I was reading up on the site after it got recommended to me on Reddit. I like the concept of the place, but my turn-off is that they don’t allow cute cat pictures or memes. Most of my Reddit day is spent looking at cute cats and sending memes to my fiance.
@EnglishMobster@Gaywallet I think this is a way you could take that would actually work, seeing as more trusted people essentially have more power. And as long as the people in power don’t radically change their opinions there would be very little potential for abuse. Especially if moderator-actions for example had to go through review, meaning that if a moderator decides to do something another moderator has to sign off on it.
@EnglishMobster@Gaywallet Some years back I was moderating GMod-communities and we had a similar power structure. You would initially publicly (in a forum) apply for a moderation role, where everyone could comment on the prior experiences they have had with you and if the resonance is good you would become a Trial-Moderator, where you would be coached by a senior-member of staff. If you did well, you would be promoted to higher roles, to eventually teach new staff yourself.
One thing I think is interesting is how tildes.net is planning to handle moderation.
Basically - they give you broad powers initially, and take them away from you if you show yourself you can’t be trusted. So if you report a user and it’s a bad-faith report, they can ding you. If you keep making bad-faith reports, then over time you lose the ability to create reports at all.
By contrast - if you repeatedly prove to make good reports, and your reports are usually actioned upon, you become “trusted” over time and your reports may cause content to be removed as soon as you report it. (And of course - if a moderator restores a post that you got removed, that counts as a ding against you.)
Over time, trusted users get hand-picked to become moderators. This has the ability to create “power users”, of course, but a moderator that acts in bad faith can become less trusted over time and potentially loses their privileges. The thought is that the risk of power users is less than the detriment of an unmoderated community.
They’ve talked about that for years yet they’ve also slowly become more and more rationalist and Deimos has withdrawn from interacting with the website more and more over time. Their ethos is part of where my thoughts come from, but until they actually decide to take that seriously (or even fight the slowly encroaching rationalism which pushed the minority voice off their website), I can’t in good conscience put any stock into their website.
(unfortunately) we’re actually very familiar with how tildes wants/wanted to do things! most of our original core are, you could say, disenchanted members with the site who didn’t like the direction it was going generally, and wished the trust system would actually be worked on (to my knowledge it’s still entirely conceptual, which is how it was 3 years ago when i was using the site).
It still seems conceptual, yeah. AFAIK it isn’t implemented over there yet.
I just noticed it when I was reading up on the site after it got recommended to me on Reddit. I like the concept of the place, but my turn-off is that they don’t allow cute cat pictures or memes. Most of my Reddit day is spent looking at cute cats and sending memes to my fiance.
@EnglishMobster @Gaywallet I think this is a way you could take that would actually work, seeing as more trusted people essentially have more power. And as long as the people in power don’t radically change their opinions there would be very little potential for abuse. Especially if moderator-actions for example had to go through review, meaning that if a moderator decides to do something another moderator has to sign off on it.
@EnglishMobster @Gaywallet Some years back I was moderating GMod-communities and we had a similar power structure. You would initially publicly (in a forum) apply for a moderation role, where everyone could comment on the prior experiences they have had with you and if the resonance is good you would become a Trial-Moderator, where you would be coached by a senior-member of staff. If you did well, you would be promoted to higher roles, to eventually teach new staff yourself.