What should the limits be on sub moderators?

submitted by magnora7 from (self.AskSaidIt)

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

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

I'm all for letting people present, discuss, and debate their ideas about conflicts in the /s/SaidItConflicts where they need resolutions.

After all is said and done, or maybe before that, the tribunal will decide. The tribunal would be magnora7, d3rr, and public opinion. Being a voting forum anyone who cares to weigh in on the drama can cast their vote when asked. I suspect it's unlikely that M7D3 would disagree on too much, and I also don't expect the public opinion to ever be tied on two or more viewpoint options. I hate the tyranny of the mob and democracy sometimes but this isn't that exactly and should likely be more about rationality, reason, and the pyramid. All the sock puppets in the world can't defeat the pyramid.

If SaidIt gets too big there might need to be limits on who can debate, and while some people will thrive on the circle jerk of endless drama, we don't want to consume all of M7D3's time. Who know's, maybe they will have to invent a form and make it like real city hall.

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

I think the categorization of comments based on the pyramid is practical. There could be votes just like the insightful/funny. The op of comment and other users can select the button which represents the correct stage in the pyramid. A user should be allowed to select only one option from the list of stages, whichever is accurate/closest. This way, we can easily seperate comments from low quality to relevant ones.

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

Sounds over complicated but maybe if SaidIt numbers reach Reddit numbers we might need something like this.