1. Great way for people in poverty to contribute to the server (BONUS: at some point you could assign badges on the person’s profile for for how many things they’ve moderated).

  2. Have a captcha at the start of each “session” of moderating 10-20 posts to help prevent people spamming support for abusive content. After 10-20 posts you do another captcha. This number could be modifiable based on community size.

  3. Require some kind of consensus of volunteer moderators regarding each piece of content being moderated. Best two of three or three of five or whatever. This number could also possibly be modifiable based on community size.

  4. Make it simple by showing the rule the content was reported for violating. Each moderation report would be per community rule and the prompt would say “This was reported for X does this content contain X?” to keep things simple and (with a blurb about the specific rule) to keep things simple for the volunteer.

  5. Editing to add: would also help to differentiate between server-wide rule violations and community-specific violations. People who are active members of a community should be favored for judging community-specific rule violations. Overall server rule violations could be judged by anyone, so nazi shit or gore or whatever can get removed promptly. Community-specific violations would wait a couple hours (or more or less! This could be a setting you can change according to your server or community size!) to let all online community members get their vote in and possibly hit the requisite yea vs nay threshold before server-wide volunteers get to have a say.

  6. Like somebody else said, maybe have a system for flagging somebody who’s ALWAYS in the 1/3, 2/5 for review to let people double check if they’re a troll vs just trying to stick up for a genuine minority viewpoint?

  • Waves@sh.itjust.works
    8·
    1 year ago

    When Reddit started posturing about “democracy”, I started thinking about a direct democracy would work for moderation.

    In my mind, it’s a lot like this - you ask members of the community to moderate a few comments. But you then take their decisions and put through another round with another temp mod.

    Only if they corroborate each other do you perform a mod action. Not sure how mod tools handle it (long term obligations stress me out), but I envision you’d have to mark a comment for removal and check off the rule(s) it violates

    Similar to your idea, it would turn a responsibility into volunteer work you could do in the moment, and it could ensure that the rules are based on the understanding the community has of them

    There’s a lot of ways to slice it, and it would need some light statistics, but it’s something possible if people are into the idea