you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]sawboss 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (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:

  • everyone's freeze peaches are protected
  • I don't have to trust a moderator removed my comment "in good faith"
  • I don't have to trust that you reversed a moderator action "in good faith"

[–]magnora7[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (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 - 2 fun -  (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?

  • allow mods to moderate as they see fit
  • you review every mod action

[–]magnora7[S] 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (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 - 1 fun -  (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 - 1 fun -  (0 children)

A "report bad moderation" report option might not be a bad idea

[–]sawboss 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (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 - 2 fun -  (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 - 1 fun -  (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.

  • each sub is limited to N posts per day
  • each user is limited to M posts per day

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 - 1 fun -  (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 - 1 fun -  (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 - 1 fun -  (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 - 1 fun -  (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 - 1 fun -  (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 - 1 fun -  (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.