This would just burnout moderators on a highly active communities. My preference is not have these tools work after-the-fact, after-the-post but simply tell the would-be poster that their post has hit a keyword block. But basic stuff like mandating all posts be link posts or text posts (depending on the communities focus) or instantly removing duplicate posts seem pretty necessary for many communities if the fediverse expands in population.
Account didn’t get enough updoots from strangers prior to posting? Goodbye post.
Now this one, I admit is a tough one - as it can be harsh to new users. But it’s simply based on trying to deal with spam posters. As the Fediverse grows, the high-trust public nature of downvoting, public post histories and public mod-logs should negate people wanting this.
It’s a risk I’d rather take, than letting automation make this another reddit where all the big communities are managed by algorithms.
A human could see a post was only 49/50 words and apply their judgement to know that this post is acceptable because the quality of what was said was more important than the quantity.
A human could see the word trumpcard was in fact not about Trump.
If the price to pay to be moderated by humans and not algorithms is that obscenely large communities can’t exist, than we should be pushing for human sized communities.
It’s a risk I’d rather take, than letting automation make this another reddit where all the big communities are managed by algorithms.
That’s not fair on other people. It’s also just not viable. I doubt almost any moderators would support not doing this.
Moreover, there already exist self-hosted bots that already autoremove content on the Fediverse. It is already happening de facto.
A human could see a post was only 49/50 words and apply their judgement to know that this post is acceptable because the quality of what was said was more important than the quantity.
I wasn’t specifically talking about that kind of automodding. I’m not sure if that is needed, except maybe in specific long-form debate/discussion communities. I don’t think that level of automodding is a priority, to be sure.
A human could see the word trumpcard was in fact not about Trump.
Yes, there could be false positives. I’m sure that if a community did have a “Trump” filter they could specify it only to notice “Trump” when posted as a single word.
But I was also more thinking about autoremoving slur posts and comments here.
If the price to pay to be moderated by humans and not algorithms is that obscenely large communities can’t exist, than we should be pushing for human sized communities.
A community would not even need to be obscenely large in order to not become a moderating chore without some level of automod functionality.
Automatically removing comments without human oversight and for mundane things.
Randomly triggered a hidden keyword? Goodbye post.
Only wrote 49 words instead of 50? Goodbye post.
Account didn’t get enough updoots from strangers prior to posting? Goodbye post.
Call me old fashioned, but I would rather a human at the helm of such decisions not an algorithm.
This would just burnout moderators on a highly active communities. My preference is not have these tools work after-the-fact, after-the-post but simply tell the would-be poster that their post has hit a keyword block. But basic stuff like mandating all posts be link posts or text posts (depending on the communities focus) or instantly removing duplicate posts seem pretty necessary for many communities if the fediverse expands in population.
Now this one, I admit is a tough one - as it can be harsh to new users. But it’s simply based on trying to deal with spam posters. As the Fediverse grows, the high-trust public nature of downvoting, public post histories and public mod-logs should negate people wanting this.
It’s a risk I’d rather take, than letting automation make this another reddit where all the big communities are managed by algorithms.
A human could see a post was only 49/50 words and apply their judgement to know that this post is acceptable because the quality of what was said was more important than the quantity.
A human could see the word trumpcard was in fact not about Trump.
If the price to pay to be moderated by humans and not algorithms is that obscenely large communities can’t exist, than we should be pushing for human sized communities.
That’s not fair on other people. It’s also just not viable. I doubt almost any moderators would support not doing this.
Moreover, there already exist self-hosted bots that already autoremove content on the Fediverse. It is already happening de facto.
I wasn’t specifically talking about that kind of automodding. I’m not sure if that is needed, except maybe in specific long-form debate/discussion communities. I don’t think that level of automodding is a priority, to be sure.
Yes, there could be false positives. I’m sure that if a community did have a “Trump” filter they could specify it only to notice “Trump” when posted as a single word.
But I was also more thinking about autoremoving slur posts and comments here.
A community would not even need to be obscenely large in order to not become a moderating chore without some level of automod functionality.
Welp, the fourth one can’t happen. Posts or comments by users won’t be stored in the database, so you can’t calculate “karma” for users.
The others are left to the community mods’ implementations.