cross-posted from: https://discuss.online/post/5772572

The current state of moderation across various online communities, especially on platforms like Reddit, has been a topic of much debate and dissatisfaction. Users have voiced concerns over issues such as moderator rudeness, abuse, bias, and a failure to adhere to their own guidelines. Moreover, many communities suffer from a lack of active moderation, as moderators often disengage due to the overwhelming demands of what essentially amounts to an unpaid, full-time job. This has led to a reliance on automated moderation tools and restrictions on user actions, which can stifle community engagement and growth.

In light of these challenges, it’s time to explore alternative models of community moderation that can distribute responsibilities more equitably among users, reduce moderator burnout, and improve overall community health. One promising approach is the implementation of a trust level system, similar to that used by Discourse. Such a system rewards users for positive contributions and active participation by gradually increasing their privileges and responsibilities within the community. This not only incentivizes constructive behavior but also allows for a more organic and scalable form of moderation.

Key features of a trust level system include:

  • Sandboxing New Users: Initially limiting the actions new users can take to prevent accidental harm to themselves or the community.
  • Gradual Privilege Escalation: Allowing users to earn more rights over time, such as the ability to post pictures, edit wikis, or moderate discussions, based on their contributions and behavior.
  • Federated Reputation: Considering the integration of federated reputation systems, where users can carry over their trust levels from one community to another, encouraging cross-community engagement and trust.

Implementing a trust level system could significantly alleviate the current strains on moderators and create a more welcoming and self-sustaining community environment. It encourages users to be more active and responsible members of their communities, knowing that their efforts will be recognized and rewarded. Moreover, it reduces the reliance on a small group of moderators, distributing moderation tasks across a wider base of engaged and trusted users.

For communities within the Fediverse, adopting a trust level system could mark a significant step forward in how we think about and manage online interactions. It offers a path toward more democratic and self-regulating communities, where moderation is not a burden shouldered by the few but a shared responsibility of the many.

As we continue to navigate the complexities of online community management, it’s clear that innovative approaches like trust level systems could hold the key to creating more inclusive, respectful, and engaging spaces for everyone.

Related

  • j4k3@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Lemmy is relatively small. Even the most active communities do not have many issues. It is well within the ability of a single admin to monitor mods, or really to handle all flags even on places like .world. I’m the lead mod of 3d printing on dot world. It is one of the larger communities here. Over moderation doesn’t seem to be a problem to me. Indeed, as I laid out in 3d printing, I believe in invisible moderation. I play referee if one is needed, but it is not “my community.” I take no ownership. I’m just the user that is willing to set myself aside and do whatever needs to be done.

    We are back at a stage where we need more users as much as possible. That means putting as few impediments in their way as possible and encouraging as many as possible to participate regularly.

    • Candelestine@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      With all due respect, a 3d printing community is going to draw extremely low levels of bullshit.

      Other communities are seeing quite a bit of tomfoolery already. Personally, I do not think attracting all internet denizens equally is a sound strategy for healthy long term growth.

        • Candelestine@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          That’s kinda funny. It’s still a barrier to entry though, as a niche, technical hobby. It’s going to get less crap than, say, a news community, which does not require monetary investment and some genuine interest to engage in.

          • RobotToaster@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            10 months ago

            I’m only half joking.

            The Lemmy.world admins already censored at least one entire 3d printing community from their server, (fosscad) because it was about open source firearms.

            • Candelestine@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              10 months ago

              Ah. That’s too bad, I think that’s a worthwhile topic. His hardware is in the Netherlands if I remember right though, so everything has to comply with EU and Dutch law. Or, gone it goes, by necessity. That would need to be hosted on a different server.

    • sbv
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      Mods on other communities have complained that they’re getting posts with images of CSAM or dead bodies.

      Lemmy definitely needs a good new user experience, but tooling to address problems mods are suffering seems worthwhile.

      Having said that, I don’t see anything in this proposal that would directly address those issues.