Listology Moderation - Real World Cases
So far I think the Listology approach to moderation has been a success. I've only had to delete a couple things, and they've been obvious (i.e. "[INSERT BAND HERE] rocks. you suck."). So here's a couple I was thinking about deleting, but I thought I'd get feedback to make sure I'm not being too stringent. The first is in response to a post in which a male Listologist comments on a TV show:
"dude thats a gay show for women"
The second is crass (spoilerized for the easily offended) in a presumed attempt at humor:
So the question is, if you were running the show, would you delete or let stand either of these?
I may post more questions as these kinds of posts come up and I try to fine-tune what's permissible on this site.
(Here are the current Listology etiquette guidelines, if they will help inform your decision. They can of course be changed, but I think they've worked okay so far.)
Delete them just for the unimaginative use of the word "dude".
Seriously. The 2nd one should definitely go. There's no need for that.
Obviously the first one's not as bad as the 2nd. It's borderline to me. Could go one war or the other. I'll have to think about it a more.
The first one's borderline, the second crosses the line, in my opinion.
I vote 'em both gone, but the first one isn't in the same category as the second.
First one's OK, but the second has to go. Everyone is going to draw their own lines when it comes to censorship, so maybe you could come up with the expanded version of George Carlin's "Seven Dirty Words". Maybe 36 or so ;)
I think I would just stick both (possibly just the last one) in a special "content" tag that would work like the spoiler tag. I believe you did this before with a tasteless joke.
The first is borderline. It is offensive to many and (probably) rather thoughtlessly off-the-cuff yet still on-topic (commenting on a show mentioned, although I really don't know the context). If I felt it was truly intentionally hateful or posted off-topic just for the sake of ticking folks off, I would be more disturbed, but as it is, I really don't think it was more than just a quick response that rubs many of our morals the wrong way.
If that make me bad, well, at least I'm bad for the sake of freedom of expression... :)
Shalom, y'all!
L. Bangs
How does everybody else feel about this suggestion (letting the first stand, treating the second the same way I treated the first post on this list)? I'd be particularly curious to hear again from the folks that wanted me to nuke one of both of these posts (which was my initial impulse as well). Is this an acceptable solution short of deleting them outright? I do hesitate to delete outright, even when a post REALLY rubs me the wrong way personally.
Bear in mind that I certainly respect the "the second should definitely go" position. After all, if Ms. Kidman were a Listologist, I wouldn't hesitate. It's abusive to her, if no one in our immediate community. But I would like to hear thoughts about the intermediate solution, even if it's just "I stand by my call to delete the second one."
I don't stand by my call to delete. Obfuscation is better.
I think "blanking" out is a great alternative to deleting outright.
I second (or third or fourth, whatever it is) the tag idea.
Jim, if Listology had a moderating system like Slashdot where the community basically self-moderates through doling out points to the members it would be cool if we could moderate postings as G-Rated, PG-Rated, PG-13 Rated, R-Rated and NC-17 Rated. Heck you could even do that if the community wasn't self-moderated.
You could have a tag like "spoilers" which blanks out anything moderated as R-Rated or above then people would have to highlight to read.
To take it an possibly Orwellian step further you could only display certain comments for people based on their birthdate. So if a 13 year-old happened to join the web site, Listology would only display comments (and or threads) that are rated PG-13 and below. Of course you might have G-rated comments in response to R-Rated comments and it would look weird not being able to view the root comment.
Nevertheless given that one of our main themes is movies G-Rated thru X-Rated comment flagging would be awesome.
I like the lettering, and I've always been impressed by the Slashdot moderation system, but I really hope I never have to implement it! It'd be a pretty complex task. Part of the reason they need it is because it really is a free-for-all over there, and I don't think they delete *anything*. I'm hoping, since I don't play quite so loose, Listology won't be overrun in the same way, and thus require such a technically sophisticated response. At the moment, I just don't have time to tackle that kind of programming task here. I'll keep it in the back of my mind though, and thanks for the idea!
I'm thinking you're probably looking at the least amount of work for yourself in the long run. (Who isn't?) Pardon my complete ignorance for programming, but could a system be put in place where some type of "Panic" button is added on each new post. If more than one member hits that button the post would be temporarily deleted or highlighted over in black at least until you have time to examine it at your leisure.
This would allow you the freedom of NOT moderating for extended amounts of time while still giving Listology the power to almost immediately censor itself, (something I think the membership is definitely capable of doing.)
The only thing you might want to think about is how many hits on that so-called "panic button" you would want before the post gets censored. You could set up some type of probationary period with an apology to the membership from the offender replacing immediate membership removal. Or whatever you please.
Just throwing around ideas.
Great idea! I've been stewing over a variation of that because eventually I'm going to do something rash like take a vacation and I'd hate to have those posts pending moderation sitting in limbo while I'm gone. I currently have the moderation set up so I can appoint other moderators, so that would work too, but it would be nice to have a system that is completely community-regulated.
The only catch with such a system is that an offensive post might get responses before it's flagged by the community and then deleted, so I'd probably have to delete the responses as well as the offensive post, and I'd have to figure out the best way to handle that. That is a mere implementation detail though.
Oh, I like the term "panic button," I hadn't articulated it that well when I was mulling it over. :-)
Hey, DrJimmy, I really like this idea. I don't know if it's actually something that would be easy for Jim to add to the site, but it seems like a really fair way to deal with the issue, and it seems like it would almost have to be less work for you in the long run, Jim.
This is definitely under serious consideration. One drawback that has occurred to me is the potential for abuse. Like if somebody just wants to be a dick they could sign up under several aliases and then start sending 100s of posts back for review. So then I'm back in the position of assigning privileges to folks to determine if they're even *allowed to push the panic button, and the system continues to need my intervention. That's not a deal-breaker, but I definitely have to think about it some more.
You could keep a record on which members have pushed the panic button the most, (an ID for possible overuse, abuse or over-sensitivity). You could also keep a record of the people who have had it activated on their input the most, (an ID for those most prone to abusing the etiquette guidelines.)
Both systems of accounting would provide you with the information you need to stop abuse at either end. If you made the record available to membership eyes, it might even give us a better idea of how to respond to an individual or discussion, (not that 98% of us don't already know how to properly do that.)
Still juggling ideas!
Yeah, it would definitely have to be something like that. Good thinking! I'll keep stewing on this one for the next iteration of the moderation system (although at the moment the current system is manageable). Keep those ideas coming!
I've mainly abstained from this discussion, but now I am a bit confused. I do like the "panic button" idea. However, don't we already have a "report an abusive post" link that pretty much does just that? Maybe I'm wrong (I've never reported any abusive posts), but how does that link differ from what you're considering implementing now?
When we're considering now would automate the flagging and hiding of the offensive post. So if enough people push the panic button, the post gets obscured until I can review it (or it just gets nuked). The current link just sends me an e-mail so I can deal with it. Basically, (I think) it's an attempt to make the community entirely self-regulated so I don't have to do even the small amount of moderating or refereeing I do now. But the topic is pretty much entirely academic at this time.
It's good mental exercise, but I think we're spending WAY to much time on this censor topic. Do we really get that many posts to warrant this much discussion? I know I'm the one keeping it alive, but I personally haven't seen a negative post worth eliminating since the "temporary and blunder stupid post" problem when I first became a member here. And that was months ago.
It's your baby, Jim. Surprise us all with a complete and total changeover. THEN take your vacation. ;) I'll leave it alone now. I wish I gave a damn about the Academy Awards. lol
Well, the Academy Awards aren't important, but they're fun! ;)
I wish you did too, we could use another opinion to shake things up.
It may be too much time on this topic, but I didn't want you to think I was ignoring you. :-) Just kidding. Actually, I think it's been quite valuable. While the current "probation period" of moderation is working fine in terms of my workload and catching a couple bad posts, if Listology continues to grow the moderation problem may require a different solution, and we'll already be a step ahead of the game for having had this conversation.
The complete and total changeover is on indefinite hold since my trial balloon sank so mightily. Changes this winter will be incremental. I actually have a vacation planned for this summer, so I'll try and squeeze something radical in before then. :-)
Hey, thanks for all the thoughts on this topic! These discussions are always helpful for me.
Well, i happened into this discussion. And the funny thing is - Both of these "Real World Cases" the remarks made - were made in discussions that i had started. Yes - the individual that wrote them I guess the moderator wants to remain nameless - was talking to me or about my topics.
Too Funny. The remarks didnt bother me at all.
My Vote ---- Freedom of expression - that is why we live in the US of A. People can say and write what they want - if you dont like it - dont read it...or stop reading any further if it bothers you.
the one discusion Poll was "Worst Movie of all time" - the joke here is that I dont give you a choice - there is only one choice Moulon Rouge (the worst movie of all time - IMHO)
Oh well, that is all. thanks for reading.