Dev.SN ♥ developers
Sections
Dev.SN
As the to-do list of tasks continues to be whittled bit by bit towards launch, one large item remains: distribution of moderation points. While I wish I could reuse the existing Slash code, the fact is that this code is completely inappropriate for a site smaller than Slashdot. So, I've been working with a couple of users in chat to rework the underlying math so that mod point distribution actually works in a reasonable way. If you're interested in the potential algorithm behind this, read on. Be warned, it is a bit dry and technical.The current thoughts are that slash should enforce that a specific number of mod points must ALWAYS be in circulation, and in the hands of our potential moderators. Without going into too much detail, we're running off the assumption that the total number of moderations applied in an article should approximately equal the number of comments. To account for inactive users and for the constant flow of new articles/comments, twice as many mod points will be distributed.
Have I lost you yet? To reiterate, two mod points must exist for every comment in active articles. As far as problems go, having too many mod points in circulation is far preferable too little. If you don't understand why, I recommend trying to find +5 posts on other slash sites like Slashdot Japan or BarraPunto.
Here's an example:
Assuming that we have two articles with approximately 200 comments each, that means we need to have 800 points in circulation. However, if we stuck with the old Slashdot method of 5 points to a user, we'd end up needing to have 80 people read an article and not comment on it. Obviously, that's not going to work, and as we have more articles/comments, that number will only increase.
Instead, we'll limit the number of moderators to approximately 30% of active accounts who haven't moderated relatively recently. In this context, active means that you have logged in within the last 5 days. The process_moderators script will calculate how many mod points are currently in circulation, how many need to be in circulation, and how many, if any, it needs to add to the pool. It then looks at the list of eligible moderators, selects 30% of them, and hands them out. To prevent moderation fatigue, we'll cap the maximum number of points a user can receive, and by the same logic, also set a minimum. I don't know about you, but I'd be a little annoyed if I found I had gotten a whopping 1 whole mod point.
This should allow a relatively fluid system, and I hope, allow us to have something very similar to the moderation system we've all grown to love. I'm open to suggestions or even radically different ideas on how to improve this below.
Have I lost you yet? To reiterate, two mod points must exist for every comment in active articles. As far as problems go, having too many mod points in circulation is far preferable too little. If you don't understand why, I recommend trying to find +5 posts on other slash sites like Slashdot Japan or BarraPunto.
Here's an example:
Assuming that we have two articles with approximately 200 comments each, that means we need to have 800 points in circulation. However, if we stuck with the old Slashdot method of 5 points to a user, we'd end up needing to have 80 people read an article and not comment on it. Obviously, that's not going to work, and as we have more articles/comments, that number will only increase.
Instead, we'll limit the number of moderators to approximately 30% of active accounts who haven't moderated relatively recently. In this context, active means that you have logged in within the last 5 days. The process_moderators script will calculate how many mod points are currently in circulation, how many need to be in circulation, and how many, if any, it needs to add to the pool. It then looks at the list of eligible moderators, selects 30% of them, and hands them out. To prevent moderation fatigue, we'll cap the maximum number of points a user can receive, and by the same logic, also set a minimum. I don't know about you, but I'd be a little annoyed if I found I had gotten a whopping 1 whole mod point.
This should allow a relatively fluid system, and I hope, allow us to have something very similar to the moderation system we've all grown to love. I'm open to suggestions or even radically different ideas on how to improve this below.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Reworking Moderation Access
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 1000 moderator points
| 30 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
I'm not a robot like you. I don't like having disks crammed into me... unless they're Oreos, and then only in the mouth.
-- Fry
(Score: 3, Insightful) by caffeine on Monday February 17 2014, @07:01PM
I'm sure am not the only one who finds it annoying on slashdot when people hijack an early comment to get a position high on the page and take the thread in a completely different direction. Valid comments that get posted directly in reply to the article get lost by members hijacking threads above them.
I'd like to see a change to the moderation system on Soylent News to help address this before it becomes an issue here as well. Perhaps a hijack moderation, if a reply post is considered to be unrelated to the parent. If a post gets enough hijack ratings, it is hidden and all it children suffer the same fate.
I think a change like this would let us stop this behaviour and make a clear point of distinction with slashdot.
(Score: 1) by LowID on Tuesday February 18 2014, @03:26PM
A hijacked thread souks not be hidden, but simply re-parented at the base depth level. It may have an interesting conversation after all, and up votes should show it-just not high in the threads order.
(Score: 1) by LowID on Tuesday February 18 2014, @03:31PM
s/souks/should.
Dammed text prediction.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by caffeine on Tuesday February 18 2014, @05:07PM
I can see the benefit in keeping the good points but think allowing a hijacked message to be moved would not discourage the behaviour enough. I'd imagine people would quickly work out to post new discussions in the right spot.
IMO, this has been building on slashdot for years and is to the point where people who make good points relating to the article being discussed are pushed off the first page by later replies hijacking earlier threads. I think this behaviour is part of the downwards spiral of slashdot. People with valid points are becoming less likely to comment on the actual article drowned out by attention seekers.
(Score: 1) by SpallsHurgenson on Tuesday February 18 2014, @10:34PM
Amusingly, such a system would have prevented the "fuckBeta" posts that resulted in the creation of SoylentNews.org.
Some discussions are worth having even if they are only tangentially related to the topic at hand. What you are suggesting sounds like an attempt to censor portions of the discussion.
If people don't like the direction others are taking the comments, they can mod it down. If enough people don't like it, it gets put below the default threshhold and most readers won't see it and that direction of discourse will die, but it will still be available to people who want to continue the argument.
(Score: 1) by caffeine on Wednesday February 19 2014, @02:13AM
I'm not trying to censor any topics. As far as I am concerned people should be free to make any comment they wish. Just do it in a new thread if it is not really related to a current thread. The fuck beta comments often seemed to be the starting point of a highly positioned thread so would have shown anyway.
My issue is with people pretending to reply to an early comment as a method of getting their comment listed high in the threaded display in order to get noticed. I'd just like the moderation system adapted to help discourage people hijacking a thread purely for position. I think the off topic mod is not really suitable for this.
Of course, discussions tend to wander and deciding what is a hijack and what is just a diversion will not always be easy.
(Score: 1) by evilviper on Wednesday February 19 2014, @04:23AM
Simple solution then... Change the default sorting to show readers the NEWEST comments FIRST. In the mean time, just use the "Off Topic" mod as intended.
Do YOU see ALL home-page stories?
dev.soylentnews.org/search.pl?tid=1
github.com/SoylentNews/slashcode/issues/78
(Score: 1) by evilviper on Wednesday February 19 2014, @04:19AM
A good comment is a good comment. If the story sucks, or there's a tangentially related topic that's notable, it can be a better discussion than the topic.
Anybody that has anything productive to say, on-topic, will still say it. Those going off on a tangent will stay in their own little thread, and will only be modded-up if they have something insightful/informative/interesting to say. I don't see the harm, and I've never been upset that part of a discussion went off the topic the subby/editor wanted it to go.
Do YOU see ALL home-page stories?
dev.soylentnews.org/search.pl?tid=1
github.com/SoylentNews/slashcode/issues/78
(Score: 1) by akinliat on Wednesday February 19 2014, @03:28PM
Agreed.
The whole idea of off-topic always seemed a bit absurd to me. I mean, do we really need to be told what we can or can't discuss? I can't remember the last (long) conversation I've had with any friend that hasn't wandered all over the place, and it's one of the things I prized about /.
(Score: 1) by caffeine on Wednesday February 19 2014, @06:17PM
>A good comment is a good comment. If the story sucks, or there's a tangentially related topic that's notable, it can be a better discussion than the topic.
I agree.
My issue is not with the comments being off topic, it is with the practice of placing them as a reply to an earlier discussion purely for page position. IMO, it is akin to pushing in in front of a queue. This is the reason why I think the off-topic moderation is not useful for this issue.
I'd like the comments to be either related to the parent comment, or started as a new comment thread to the top level. This will make it easier to read and I think encourage more and better comments.
(Score: 1) by rcamera on Thursday February 20 2014, @03:20PM
not only will they be off in their own little (or enormous) thread, but they may be modded as "Off Topic". if someone doesn't want to read through off-topic modded posts, they are completely able to weigh off-topic as very negative on their own.
i've gone through and spent 5 "Off Topic" points in a day on a single off-topic thread. some of it was funny as hell, as i recall, but off-topic anyway.
ot; i read at -1.
/* buck feta */
(Score: 2) by daffmeister on Thursday February 20 2014, @06:24AM
Wouldn't that just be "Offtopic"?
(Score: 1) by caffeine on Thursday February 20 2014, @06:59AM
I think off-topic relates to the comment as compared to the actual article. I'm talking more about how the comment is related to its parent.
In this thread people have rightly pointed out that the wandering of discussions is a good thing. Off-topic seems more a tool to stop wandering rather than the behaviour of hijacking an early comment to get an early position.
For me, I see a fairly structured threaded discussion as far superior to flat, time based discussions like youtube etc. Perhaps I am just getting old, but to me slashdot was moving slowly towards youtube and reddit. I just hope SN can do a better job of fighting this trend and these early days are a great time to discuss these issues.
(Score: 1) by marcello_dl on Friday February 21 2014, @10:14AM
If you want to discourage hijacking, maybe making sub posts less visible than root posts would balance the fact that discussions are mostly followed depth first. Just make the subposts only a click/tap away.
(Score: 1) by jmoschner on Tuesday March 04 2014, @02:14AM
Maybe instead of a hijack rating, simply (or not so simply) make On-topic and Off-Topic seperate from the normal mod system and allow any logged in user to mark a comment as on or off topic without using mod points and while still able to comment in a thread.
This way mods don't have to waste points on marking posts off topic and if a person makes an off-topic comment it won't ruin their karma.
Then people can choose weather or not to show posts labeled off topic. It may even allow full threads of off topic discussion that are hidden to all but those who wish to see/participate in them.