Subject:
|
Re: Language Choices and LUGNET
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.suggestions
|
Date:
|
Thu, 27 Jan 2005 01:42:14 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
4723 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.suggestions, Tim Courtney wrote:
| |
In lugnet.admin.suggestions, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
| |
In lugnet.admin.suggestions, Calum Tsang wrote:
| |
I would like to suggest a “down-light” option. Enough downlights could
moderate a post into oblivion. Then you would truly have a representation
of the “community” opinion on something.
|
Seems worthy of exploration. The downside is that an important but unpopular
message might get downchecked pretty badly.
|
That could be overcome by a mechanism where admins can block a message from
being downchecked.
|
That defies the purpose, Tim. That’s still saying an admin, a person chosen for
ambiguous reasons, should have power. Those reasons could be for being a
loudmouth, for being the guy who happened to be there, the guy who other admins
felt was closest to their own beliefs, or fits their ideals for another admin.
The idea with a collaborative filtering system is that people GAIN power as they
post and as they contribute. Then the power is used to moderate posts, any or
all of them. Everyone moderates. And if something is downchecked severely,
that’s what the social network wants. There’s no “editorializing”.
Calum
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Language Choices and LUGNET
|
| (...) True but it seems that (although I admit I have little experience with collaborative filtering systems) revenge and retribution would be much easier to pull off. For example, I dislike someone so in revenge I get 20 of my friends to downcheck (...) (20 years ago, 27-Jan-05, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
38 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
