PROBLEM: Pyramid-dragging comments don't get removed.

submitted by hydr0lyze from self.SaidIt

I've noticed that when I report a comment for dragging down the pyramid, it never actually gets removed, but rather gets a report sent to some purgatory only the mods can see. Is there a solution to this?

all 14 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]LarrySwinger2 9 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

Is it that big of an issue? When I report someone, I don't expect anything to be done about the comment. I just hope the mods will take not and only take action against repeat offenders. Overmoderation can create for a very unpleasant environment as well.

[–]Edvin 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I think there is quite a large amount of people here who simply see free speech as a means to use racial slurs. I love seeing all the different opinions here and I think the two different upvotes is a very interesting system but when many users are just going around and only writing single word comments that are racial slurs they bring the whole site down. Who is going to want to keep participating in comments when instead of meaningful discussion happening it's just edgy 14 year olds and racists insulting people. It is only hurting the site in my opinion. If someone wants to express an opinion that might be racist or unpopular that is completely fine, my issue is with the people who do nothing productive and only throw slurs and racial epithets.

[–]OffAndSphere 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

reminds me of when i thought spamming "iweuq9mwquewquwmq98M()E*W)q978rqw9m8g7egmqwe8g9meqw98kdwq9021uhu32179fhr09t23hiogewokpher;krhe0j" and shit like that on the internet was comedy gold

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

Optional moderation solves this.

[–]theoracle 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

The problem with enforcing something like the pyramid is it requires heavy moderation which in turn requires a lot more moderators. Moderation and especially heavy moderation upsets many. As well moderators are only people and people make mistakes. This is why all moderation should be optional, with the reader having the ultimate say in what is moderated.

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

Y'know, "optional moderation" sounds a lot like adding downvotes back. If a decent majority—let's say 95%+—just decides to trust all moderators to filter their content for them, there's not much that people with controversial opinions can do about it. Kinda like how a lot of Redditors just sort by top because they want to see witty, concise comments, giving those comments more chances at getting upvoted because the focus is piled on them. They don't really have anything against controversial opinions, but they just don't want to see them.

You know, I'm getting an existential crisis over optional moderation, as stupid as that sounds. It sounds so ingenious, but it essentially reduces forums down to a platform where you can choose what content you get to see. It feels uncannily similar not being able to protest right up in someone's face, despite the fact that I don't even know what you look like.

That being said, optional moderation still has its merits. Yes, even though you've been commenting about optional moderation on basically every post. You know longer have to take lots of classes in web design or pore hours over YouTube tutorials to create an alternative online platform where you don't have to deal with other people's rules. Also, it seems like there could be factions of moderators assigned to one specific annoyance, like removing the downright infuriating "go back to Reddit" one-liners that keep popping up on posts talking about carefully increasing moderation in areas to reduce content like the "go back to Reddit" one-liners.

I want your feedback about what I said about optional moderation, still. You've gotten really good at getting your point across; when I read your first post about optional moderation, I had absolutely no idea what you were trying to suggest.

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

Thanks for the reply. You raise quite a few points and I will try to address them all. So first I want to say is nothing can be certain until it is tried. So in that regard we won't fully or even actually know the results of optional moderation until it is implemented. Saying that we can look at some examples, Slashdot is one where you can filter based on post score. I always found that system worked well on Slashdot though it is very basic, but maybe simple things are all that is needed? Having said simple I would say Slashdot failed ,if you bring that point, because competitors like dig then reddit offered far more, so more can be better.

So Yes optional moderation "could" and likely would mean an option for downvotes, but it still depends on the platform making the choice to offer it.

You bring up the point what if the majority chooses to say all use certain moderators? Well how is that different to now that everyone is forced to use only one lot of moderators? On this point I will also raise the possibility that people will factionalize into using different mods, like left or right biased mods. To which I will say we now already have different platforms for these people.... This further marginalizes and I would say radicalizes people because they need to know and jump to the other platform if they want opposing opinions, and if they engage they are just going to be banned or deleted. Having a platform or federation of platforms that can have coexisting "safe spaces", already reduces the barrier of having to jump platform for those other opposing opinions. Then if the platform makes it very easy, likely though a button or list in the side bar to change your moderation, then those opposing opinions are literally just one click away. Humans are too curious not to click and engage occasionally. When this happens some very interesting things will happen I am certain. When you reduce barriers and build bridges, you get less division not more. I am going to get a bit out there but this could not only solve the issues of freespeech and much division on the net but it could also drastically reduce division in society. My main concern though is freedom is needed for progress, with the rise of authoritarianism, progress will reduce. We see attacks on freedom from either sides of the authoritarians, left and right. Please carefully look that Americas successes where founded in freedom. More freedom more choice is the successful action. That is why I think that this optional moderation is the correct path.

So I apologize if I am getting spammy with my comments. It's I see people recognize there is a lot of problems with platforms, it's why we are here. I see that there is a myriad of solutions that are thought up about how to handle these problems. magnora7 and d3rr have made saidit as one potential solution. Here you have some rules and an idea around a pyramid of debate, both which are hardly enforced ,and even if they were would not sit well and are not sitting well with many. Over on Ruqqus you have a different system gaining more traction. Then on Voat you have another system and group that has evolved. And we all know reddit. I don't think anyone is happy or entirely happy with any of these platforms. I know on the new platforms they have complaints like this thread and many others, ruqqus has for example already proven it is not freespeech... Yes there is speech that is not great or some people detest. What I think is worse is silencing people. You must protect all speech or you will slide. The solution to speech you don't like is YOU not reading it, and the best solution for that is optional moderation. You or anyone else shouldn't get to make that choice for someone else unless they want you to, that is why it should be optional.

My first post on this was just thinking out loud really and my last is where the idea has progressed to which interestingly developed on ruqqus. That is a tagging based system https://saidit.net/s/SaidIt/comments/5dcx/idea_for_a_new_type_of_platform_a_tagging_based/ . So with that or some other systems you could moderate for many things. If you or a group decided to target a certain type of post, then that is what would be moderated. I personally hate much of the low effort karma whoring reddit posts, to me they are almost shitposts masquerading as something nice...

If this idea is to go anywhere it needs support, it also needs to evolve into it's best possible version. This is why I am posting and engaging. I think the developer go1dfish at Notabug is probably the most aligned to get this done. D3rr seems quite keen. What would be great is these guys and more can align to create something along these lines. I am not a coder but can and have, and am considering getting involved but I think for now advocating for this is probably the best use of the limited time I have for it.

So If I missed something hit me back with more.

Idea on this

Kinda like how a lot of Redditors just sort by top because they want to see witty, concise comments, giving those comments more chances at getting upvoted because the focus is piled on them. They don't really have anything against controversial opinions, but they just don't want to see them.

What about a bump tag? It would when attached to a post or comment would throw it temporarily to the top? Maybe each user id can only use it once to stop abuse and of course you as a reader could choose to turn this on or off for you!

[–]rdh2121 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

While I definitely agree that moderation on low-pyramid comments is not as strict as it could be, I'm torn on how much stricter to get, since it's better to err on the side of allowing low-pyramid comments to stay than removing comments higher on the pyramid.

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

I think this is an extremely valid point, what do you think should be done about people who post only slurs and racial epithets? I think perhaps some form of auto moderation might help because if people want to be racist they should at least have to express an opinion, instead of just throwing a single word or two word comment that drags the entire site down.

[–]rdh2121 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That sounds perfectly reasonable to me.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

SOLUTION: Go back to your censored safe space

[–]Zednix 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

If you want things to be censored, go back to Reddit where that thinking belongs

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

There is plenty of censorship going on here

[–]m68k 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's not suppose to get removed.