Subject:
|
Re: Language Choices and LUGNET
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.suggestions
|
Date:
|
Thu, 27 Jan 2005 13:19:59 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
4616 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.suggestions, Calum Tsang wrote:
| |
In lugnet.admin.suggestions, C. L. GunningCook wrote:
| |
It would also be nice to be able to retract your own “high/spot -light” as
well. For example, I know of one time, when I *wanted* to spotlight a moc, I
gapped out (it happens often) and unintentionally spotlighted my comments to
said moc instead.
|
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.
|
You assume that the membership is representative of the community.(?)
| |
I’ve been thinking about such a system all week, just because my thesis
advisor told me to write up some project proposals:
Web Forum Moderation via Social Networks
Moderation of online chat forums is a tricky task, usually based around a
select few administrators entrusted with the community good. Elected
officials or just benevolent dictators, these administrators must walk the
line between censorship and damage control when faced with “trolls” and
“spammers”.
|
You forget that this is the friendliest place on the internet! ;)
| |
Once in a while, an online community is attacked by sociopaths
looking to discredit or ruin a forum with spurious or offensive posts.
This project would develop a prototype system on a mainstream web board
implementation which would establish ratings and rankings for users based on
historical data, such as posting count and length of membership; then allow
them to moderate down posts on their own. A global threshold would be
established for all users at which posts disappear, given enough votes, a
post can be eliminated forever with group consensus.
--
That said, uninformed people voting doesn’t seem to work very well: A large
proportion of Americans voted Bush in again. Ugh. But even then, it’s what
the group wanted, ignorant or not.
|
Hmm. Perhaps Kerry should be “eliminated forever”. ;)
Scott A
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Language Choices and LUGNET
|
| (...) Yes. You need to put some skin in the game, somewhere. Sure, you could allow "registered" users to downlight, but personally, I'd leave it to members, people who care enough to put the smallest of donations in. Calum (19 years ago, 27-Jan-05, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
| | | Re: Language Choices and LUGNET
|
| (...) Far worse than that-- "members who vote". Most members don't bother. The highest rated thread I've ever seen got all of, what? 20-something votes? Highest I can find on a cursory search is: 22 spotlights, 3 highlights: (URL) spotlights, 0 (...) (19 years ago, 27-Jan-05, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Language Choices and LUGNET
|
| (...) 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. I've been thinking about such a system all week, just (...) (19 years ago, 26-Jan-05, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
|
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
|
|
|
|
