Idea for a new type of platform. A tagging based system.

submitted by theoracle from self.SaidIt

So bit of back story I have a had an idea for quite a while and have recently started expressing it. Here's some links if you want to get into my thinking more.

https://saidit.net/s/SaidIt/comments/52rx/attention_magnora7_my_ideasolution/ https://saidit.net/s/SaidIt/comments/54cp/can_we_make_moderation_optional_can_we_have/ https://saidit.net/s/SaidIt/comments/5aia/can_we_have_an_option_preferably_in_the_side_menu/ https://ruqqus.com/post/tiz/optional-moderation https://ruqqus.com/post/umf/not-all-censorship-is-bad

So the point of this post is on those subjects but specifically a discussion with user https://ruqqus.com/@1010011010 . The comments on tagging I think start here https://ruqqus.com/post/tiz/optional-moderation/252w.

To summarize my understanding of this is it abandons the traditional sub and moderation model. What happens instead is when a post is made you can attach tags. Things like what subject it is or maybe it is nsfw etc. Other users can then also attach tags to it, they could also be more subject tags, or moderation actions like to hide or collapse etc. You could attach comments as tags with tags also on the comments.

What this allows you to do on the client or reader side is to specify filters. You could for example select certain subjects to make a sub. You could select certain users to use their moderation actions. Say users would advertise that they target spam, you select them and away goes the spam... maybe you have tags that are good on the pyramid of debate and it highlights them or for ones that are bad for the pyramid it collapses them. There is infinite possibilities. You could select groups of users and only get the votes from them as vote are also tags.... You could disable all downvotes.... It's endless. The system allows you to completely customize how you want to experience a platform. Total freedom of choice combined with total freedom of speech.

I really think this is the future. The question is who is going to make it happen?

Thanks

all 17 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]zyxzevn 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

How would you add the elements that I added in Investigating the Truth.

The elements are:

  1. Logical consistency. (no logical fallacies)

  2. Scientific method
    +Check for p-hacking and other manipulations +Check for groupthink

  3. Crime investigation.

  4. Bias (including your own)

  5. Unknowns

  6. Working towards a Solution

[–]theoracle[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

So you as a user you would have to moderate for them. You could form a group that moderates on them and advertise yourselves as that. A reader could select say the group "Investigating the truth", things would then be moderated based on that group. The ways things are moderated could be quite complicated, hiding things, collapsing, highlighting posts or maybe parts of text, special comments, maybe even edits... you could have group based voting. All actions are individual based so all members of the group can be audited and someone could if they wanted deselect individuals from the group, or make a new group etc.

The point is the ways in which things are customizable are truly massive. The platform would be able to support the function of any existing platform, so no one would want for another. The advantage is although users may choose to segregate, all opposing community opinions would be just a click away and so it is quite likely many people would end up reading the opposing views they have been hidden from and new consensuses would hopefully form. I think this will bring more unity in society and not the closed off boxes it seems it could create.

[–]zyxzevn 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Indeed did I show the most complex system of organizing a forum, just added it to give new ideas.
Some of these can be regulated with tags and links, but not that much.
My idea was more a replacement for wikipedia.
I think that it is a way to motivate people to research the topics better and focus on evidence and arguments.

[–]theoracle[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Well I think it depends to the degree the system allows you to organize based on tags or links. At some point obviously it will get too hard to code or run, so simpler will likely be more possible.

A well formed group of moderators will go a long long way to getting what you want though. I see this as the only way something like the Pyramid of debate is going to work. For on a platform like reddit you would probably need thousands of moderators and they would need to be ultra heavy. There is just so many low effort, low quality, bait like posts that occur. Already you can see the pyramid is breaking everywhere here and there is no way the couple of admins could keep up even if there was reports which I doubt there is.

I see that moderation should be more organic and much less authoritarian. The platform should seek technical solutions over human ones as much as possible and that means not relying on things like admins. Notabug seems to have no admins and yet it works, imagine if some of the features in spaces where implemented as it could be a very different platform with many personalities.

[–]zyxzevn 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Here is MIT's deliberation, which is far too complex.
But it has some of the features that I mentioned.
Introduction to the MIT Deliberatorium
The example is stupid, but maybe you can look through it.

The technique is argument mapping:
1) Issue/problem.
2) Idea /solution.
3) argument for or against.

I think that these could be tags.

I would extend the system to:

1) Issue/problem.
+ Scope of problem.

2) Idea/ solution.
+ Scope of solution.

3) arguments+evidence
- a) Logical consistency / logical fallacy
- b) evidence / science
- c) Crime/ faked / hoax / cover-up?
- d) Bias / P-hacking / group-think

4) Unknowns / unverified alternatives / open questions.

[–]theoracle[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

So I watched the video thanks. This is an interesting idea for presenting data. I know I have on old forums had to wade through 100's and 100's of comments in threads to extract the useful info. The vote system is meant to help with that but it doesn't always. In some instances good ideas can get downvoted because of the ignorant masses...

To implement your system it requires moderation, which presents the problem of who is your moderator? And for that I think optional moderation is the best solution. You could have tags which are specifically around your concept, and then the platform could have an option to organize based on those tags. You would also likely have a group to moderate on it too.

There is however an alternative solution which I have used. That is you read though an entire post and extract all the relevant info, add or modify as you see fit, and then make a new post, and in that way the idea progresses and is refined. You will see with my post history on this post's idea that is what I have already done....

On a side note I actually had an idea for another site or platform with was solely about distilling all the truths of human knowledge. It would basically try to find and verify every possible piece of knowledge humans have about anything. All the way from things in academia like about physics and chemistry etc to things in trades like techniques of woodworking or how to do various things. We have representations of these everywhere in schools or on youtube, but I want it distilled so you have the best representation of them.

[–]zyxzevn 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That knowledge database seems like a great plan. But it is a hard problem to solve.
Maybe the ideas that I listed can help.

[–]zyxzevn 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

The "pyramid of debate" can be shortened to: "Don't be a dick"

And I have no problem of mods removing people that act like it.

[–]theoracle[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Yes it is something like that though a little more complicated. The problem with mods is when they themselves become the dicks... and then sometimes people being dicks is fun...

[–]zyxzevn 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I also had the idea of having different layers of a discussion,
where you have the totally uncensored space-dick-layer,
and a layer with some small trolls and over-emotional reactions,
the chat-layer, and a layer with actual arguments.

[–]theoracle[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That is what this tag system will be!

I posted the most basic implementation of something like this here https://saidit.net/s/SaidIt/comments/5aia/can_we_have_an_option_preferably_in_the_side_menu/

Which is you have options for no moderation, moderation but only collapse comments/posts, moderation with them hidden. The default I think should be collapsed.

With such a system given you are not technically deleting anyone, then you can go heavier on the moderation. Go and target any dick posts for example.

Me personally I am usually fine with people being dicks as I have been on the net for long enough. Walls of spam aren't great but maybe admins can still delete those. I would most likely choose to have no moderation like I know many will. I think people will switch moderation modes as they feel like. If a mod is being a dick and hiding some things it will get darn obvious with all the collapsed posts/comments. You will likely see the situation grow out of hand for the mod quickly as more people bring to light his misdeeds and turn off moderation.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

One drawback of this "subs are tags" idea is that it's harder for a sub to develop a unique personality/community because these are now gone, I think: sub rules, custom CSS, user flairs, and automoderator config.

[–]theoracle[S] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

One drawback of this "subs are tags" idea is that it's harder for a sub to develop a unique personality/community because these are now gone, I think: sub rules, custom CSS, user flairs, and automoderator config.

So the unique personality would form around the moderators. Automoderators would have to be bots people setup, though I am thinking that making the system bot resistant would be wise... Custom css could still be done, you could have something like notabug spaces or pages people can make. Sub rules come down to who is your moderator. This is the whole point, you as a reader can choose the rules. It takes most of the power away from mods because they can be just deselected or switched out. I can understand current mods won't like this system because many are power tripping aholes, but making people little dictators over our speech and what we can see is totally antithetical to our society it is beyond a joke.

I mean seriously over on reddit and like you basically have little Kim Jong-uns, Saddam Husseins and now quite literally Xi Jingping who bought the place running it and running over anyone they don't like or merely don't agree with... it's fucked beyond belief.

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

idk, this is kinda how tumblr worked/works, isn't it? people post to tags. (and people have conflict over tag use). It seems like community and personality managed to develop over there

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

yep, it's not a deal breaker just something to consider. I think NotABug does it both ways, they have topics/tags that can be part of a space/sub.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I think NotABug does it both ways, they have topics/tags that can be part of a space/sub.

yeah, but in that model, unlike the tumblr/twitter model, you have to crosspost if you want to put your post in more than one topic

[–]theoracle[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think likely there should be limits on one user adding subject tags to a post, maybe 2 or 3. The point of other users adding tags is it allows ideas to spread but also maybe more appropriate subject tags to accumulate.

The good thing about the tag based subs is it will prevent repeat instances of the same sub like we have now, as there will be no reason to split communities over mod issues because they are gone.