use the following search parameters to narrow your results:
e.g. subreddit:pics site:imgur.com dog
subreddit:pics site:imgur.com dog
advanced search: by author, sub...
~4 users here now
Ask the community of saidit a question!
What should the limits be on sub moderators?
submitted 4 years ago * by magnora7 from self.AskSaidIt
view the rest of the comments →
[–]sawboss 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun - 4 years ago (20 children)
I like Hoppean Snake memes.
If you want a site-wide rule, take biased human judgement out of it. Just disable site-wide the ability for moderators to delete comments. That way:
[–]magnora7[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun - 4 years ago (18 children)
Some of them were funny, I agree.
But mods should be able to delete some stuff, or else the mods are pointless. And I don't want to have to moderate literally everything on the site by myself.
[–]sawboss 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun - 4 years ago (17 children)
I don't want to have to moderate literally everything on the site by myself
Right. So you don't want a site-wide rule which requires you to work harder. I don't blame you. Which way requires you to work less?
[–]magnora7[S] 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun - 4 years ago (16 children)
No the real options are:
let this site get taken over by echo chambers like reddit
regulate mod actions a little more tightly, and review reports about it
The first is obviously easier, but we're doing the second because it is the best thing for saidit.
[–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - 4 years ago (1 child)
Adjust or reject as you see fit:
Create: /s/SaidItConflicts
Create: link [deleted] to the mod-log for review
Create: "report moderation" button
"Report moderation" button does 3 things:
1) Creates a new text post in /s/SaidItConflicts by /u/reporter (censored or witness)
2) Message notifies /u/reportee (moderator)
3) Text post includes includes links to the [deleted] location within context, the mod-log location, a triple dash, and maybe the [deleted] content.
Anyone who cares can surf that sub for all the open public drama they want.
Flair may help mark the status on the "cases". User flair may also be good indicators.
[–]magnora7[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun - 4 years ago (0 children)
A "report bad moderation" report option might not be a bad idea
[–]sawboss 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 4 years ago (13 children)
Based on this, I assume you won't mind if I create s/ImpeachTrump and make 100 posts per day.
[–]magnora7[S] 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun - 4 years ago (12 children)
Based on what you wrote you wanted before, that also would be allowed, so I don't get your point
[–]sawboss 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - 4 years ago (11 children)
Your concern seems to be that one sub, ruled by a tyrannical moderator, will take over the site by flooding the front page. If the concern is the creation of a site-wide monoculture via echochamer effects, I agree that can be a serious problem. So rate limit per sub and per user, by imposing two site-wide rules.
In this way, the rules require no biased human intervention and the rules are applied fairly to all subs and users.
[–]magnora7[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun - 4 years ago (9 children)
If the concern is the creation of a site-wide monoculture via echochamer effects, I agree that can be a serious problem
Yes that is the concern exactly.
Not a bad idea, we've thought of post limits before, it's an interesting idea for sure. But that still doesn't resolve the fact the mod deleted my comments because they disagreed with him. That's the problem that brought up this whole situation. Your ideas, good though they are, don't address this censorship-based mod behavior
[–]sawboss 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - 4 years ago (8 children)
But that still doesn't resolve the fact the mod deleted my comments because they disagreed with him.
I haven't seen your posts, but I'll err on the side of free expression and say IMHO your comments should not have been deleted. On the other hand, I can't help thinking that maybe you are just butthurt at having your comments moderated.
[–]magnora7[S] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun - 4 years ago* (4 children)
Well assuming I did get indeed get censored for no reason other than to censor my opinion, what's your solution?
[–]happysmash27 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun - 4 years ago (2 children)
I was wondering why /u/Magnora7's comments were being removed, while mine were not, so I decided to look at them. Removing https://saidit.net/s/Libertarianism/comments/lgq/for_a_libertarian_altright/11od seems fairly understandable, but removing https://saidit.net/s/Libertarianism/comments/lbk/leftist_doublespeak_translator/11gx, not so much.
[–]JasonCarswell 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun - 4 years ago (0 children)
That's not a solution. If anything there will be 30 AnCap subs not 3+ as there are now.
Further, if MidnightJoe uses up the allotment on the graveyard shift the rest of the day is fucked.
Sure you could complicate the rule more and make it per person but it still has many more flaws.
[–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 4 years ago (0 children)
Yesterday we discussed having the [deleted] link to the already transparent mod-log where it was deleted for anyone curious to see what it said.
view the rest of the comments →
[–]sawboss 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun - (20 children)
[–]magnora7[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun - (18 children)
[–]sawboss 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun - (17 children)
[–]magnora7[S] 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun - (16 children)
[–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - (1 child)
[–]magnora7[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun - (0 children)
[–]sawboss 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (13 children)
[–]magnora7[S] 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun - (12 children)
[–]sawboss 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - (11 children)
[–]magnora7[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun - (9 children)
[–]sawboss 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - (8 children)
[–]magnora7[S] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun - (4 children)
[–]happysmash27 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun - (2 children)
[–]JasonCarswell 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun - (0 children)
[–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (0 children)