← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Okiereddust
Thread ID: 5186 | Posts: 13 | Started: 2003-02-24
2003-02-24 07:19 | User Profile
All:
We are considering the implementation of a Meta Moderation feature. This feature will allow for rating of the raters and will be similar in implementation to that used by Slashdot.org. If we implement this feature, it will probably be implemented first at a moderator level and then released for use by the LF membership.
This feature will allow us to begin to weed out those individuals that are eligible for Post Moderation Privileges, but really have no understanding of the objective of Post Moderation. IOW, they use the Post Moderation Points assigned to them to mod up or down, based on how they feel about the poster behind the post or about the ideas presented in the post.
Let me reiterate that the mere fact that one disagrees with an idea presented in a post, does not give one a free pass to downrate a post. If an idea is presented in a polite, or even slightly inflammatory manner, and the author has made a good effor to support the idea, then there is no reason at all to downrate the post from whatever point level it posted at.
In addition, let me point out that Post Rating Privileges are just that, a privilege. People are assigned Post Rating Privileges based on their ability to present the best possible picture of a post's quality to those who decide to take advantage of the Post Rating System via the use of their Viewing Threshold.
Individuals who receive Post Rating Privileges via assigned moderator points, are in essence being given the opportunity to help advance the goals and objectives of LibertyForum. Post Moderators do this by providing their best objective view of a post's quality based, not on personal biases, but rather on a strong commitment to the principle that a clash of ideas is the best way for individuals to arrive at a fully informed position on any issue.
Although I use the term "objective," I am quite aware that the content of some posts is not clear cut and thus require a "jugment call" from the individual rating the post. Which lead us to the sad reality that some individuals simply lack good judgment when it comes to rating a post. It is for this reason that I am starting this thread.
The purpose of this thread is to provide a set of guidelines and examples to help individuals with assigned rating points to use them in the manner that will best serve LibertyForum. This is a good point at which to point out that those who do not wish to participate as Post Moderators, have the option of not participating in the Post Moderation system simply by choosing "No" under the question "Are you willing to rate other user's posts?" in their Basic Personal Profile.
Those that opt to participate in the Post Rating System, are making a statement that they wish to help LibertyForum achieve its goals by volunteering their time and best judgment in the application of the moderation points assigned to them. This also means that said volunteers agree to abide by the guidelines presented in this thread.
The guidelines presented below are intended to remove as much ambiguity as possible from the rating system. I will begin by making a simple list, and will continue to edit and refine the list as comments are posted to this thread.
In addition to this thread, we will soon present a revised set of rating descriptors, which should considerably tighten up the reasons for which posts are modded up or down.
Finally, the guidelines we discuss here, are the guidelines that will be applied when post ratings are reversed (i.e. when the moderators disagree with a rating). If we see ratings where a rating is not in line with a post's content, that rating is usually reversed. As we refine our software, these reversals will soon begin to have an effect on the ability of the Post Mod to rate additional posts. One or two reversed ratings will not generally have an effect, but the more ratings that are reversed, the more likely a Post Mod's rating privileges are to be curtailed. It stands to reason that, if a Post Mod is not applying his/her rating points in what we consider to be a fair manner, that this individual is probably not the best person to help LibertyForum.
This post will probably change without notice, since I am posting my unedited thoughts after a late night of Server/database maintenance :)
[url=http://www.libertyforum.org/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=ll_chat&Number=460532&page=&view=&sb=&o=?=1&vc=1&t=-1]Post Rating Seminar[/url]
(Okiereddust) Check here for some background
[url=http://www.libertyforum.org/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=features&Number=333497&Search=true&Forum=All_Forums&Words=ratings%20System&Match=And&Searchpage=4&Limit=100&Old=1year&Main=333497#Post333497]Is The Rating System More Trouble Than Its Worth?[/url]
2003-02-24 16:22 | User Profile
Interesting, Okie. I don't have the slightest clue how LF's 'karma' ranking system works, so in practical terms what does this mean and will it have any effect on us?
2003-02-24 17:10 | User Profile
Texas Dissident,
Sounds like "democracy" in action to me. :D Arator did something similar to this on his board. All it did was make a mess of things.
2003-02-24 18:41 | User Profile
I just recently got moderation priveleges at Liberty Forum, so I have learned how the system works.
Posts can be rated from -1 to 5. Ratings are automatically assigned according the poster's fame points. (I have 7 fame points and my posts are rated 1.) Moderators can uprate or downrate posts, which increases or decreases the poster's fame. Since viewers can block posts below a certain rating (and most do), posters with low fame become largely invisible.
I do not understand how moderation priveleges are awarded, except that it has something to do with the member's participation, and it is done automatically.
The system works surprisingly well. Most members at the -1 level thoroughly deserve it. The system can be abused, however, and John Deere is making changes to detect these abuses.
I don't see it having any effect on this forum.
2003-02-24 18:45 | User Profile
Originally posted by Sertorius@Feb 24 2003, 11:10 ** Arator did something similar to this on his board. All it did was make a mess of things. **
Yes, some of us well-remember the disaster that Arator's ezboard became and to this day try to keep in mind the lessons learned from that exercise.
I don't know. I certainly wish Mr. Deere nothing but the best, but I think the 'karma' thing mainly serves to generate a tremendous amount of controversy, discussion and wasted energy arguing internal politics, grudges and such. But who knows? Maybe it will help to focus their intent. Since it is a libertarian board, I realize that what Mr. Deere is trying to accomplish differs from us. But like I said, I wish him nothing but the best and continued success.
2003-02-24 18:51 | User Profile
Maybe the finetuning in accordance with the ewish prompting by the Free Republic types who swarm there will satisfy the zionists. They will stop tinkering when the ews quit complaining.
2003-02-24 19:48 | User Profile
Yes, some of us well-remember the disaster that Arator's ezboard became and to this day try to keep in mind the lessons learned from that exercise.
Nor surprisingly, Arator is one of the agitators over on LF complaining about the status quo.
2003-02-24 20:06 | User Profile
Originally posted by Centinel@Feb 24 2003, 13:48 ** Nor surprisingly, Arator is one of the agitators over on LF complaining about the status quo. **
In the aftermath of the failed Freeper Reunion board, Arator spent quite a bit of time promoting the Liberty Forum only to become disillusioned when a sizable contingent of anti-Zionist posters became active there. There was also some kind of moderator brouhaha if I recall, but I don't know all the ins and outs of that.
2003-02-24 20:18 | User Profile
Please provide a link for this "Liberty Forum".
I must have missed it.
2003-02-24 20:28 | User Profile
Originally posted by Ed Toner@Feb 24 2003, 14:18 **Please provide a link for this "Liberty Forum".
I must have missed it.**
[url=http://www.libertyforum.org/dosearch.php?Cat=&Forum=All_Forums&Words=&Match=Entire+Phrase&Old=1day&Limit=25]http://www.libertyforum.org/dosearch.php?C...d=1day&Limit=25[/url]
Deere's aracial so I was anticipating this. Some of the brighter posters over there should start their own forums. Call it the "Brushfire Strategy", i.e., every time the tribe puts out one brush fire, start several more. We still might lose in the end, but we'll drive 'em nuts in the meantime.
2003-02-24 21:04 | User Profile
Originally posted by Recluse@Feb 24 2003, 13:28 Deere's aracial so I was anticipating this. Some of the brighter posters over there should start their own forums. Call it the "Brushfire Strategy", i.e., every time the tribe puts out one brush fire, start several more. We still might lose in the end, but we'll drive 'em nuts in the mean time.
Deere is apparently looking at the ways to maintain his "no banning" policy while exerting some control on the content by the usage of post rating. The current implementation of the system is the second iteration. The first one existed for a very short time and was temporary.
The rating system doesn't work the way Deere would like ("wrong" people get high ratings) and now he wants to take away rating priveleges from some posters.
Jews complain that they are a minority and don't have the raw muscle to win the rating war. Their complaints are bogus because the ones that get downrated deserve it, and there are some Jew posters who have a high rating because they don't engage in the same pattern of behavior and are polite.
What's interesting is how many Jew posters there are at any given forum relative to the number of other posters, except those forums where they haven't yet intimidated the management into censorship and special treatment of "special" people. One would think they can just come over from other censorious forums and overwhelm other posters with their sheer number. But that's not how they operate.
2003-02-25 04:52 | User Profile
Originally posted by madrussian@Feb 24 2003, 21:04 The rating system doesn't work the way Deere would like ("wrong" people get high ratings) and now he wants to take away rating priveleges from some posters.
I don't see how you could say such a thing. After all, you've got a fame of 47. [url=http://www.libertyforum.org/showprofile.php?Cat=&User=madrussian&page=1&what=showmembers]MadRussian LF Profile[/url]. Why don't you just reassure John Deere that everything is fine, and the Zhids aren't after you after all. ;)
Jews complain that they are a minority and don't have the raw muscle to win the rating war. Their complaints are bogus because the ones that get downrated deserve it, and there are some Jew posters who have a high rating because they don't engage in the same pattern of behavior and are polite.
They're probably the "self-hating" ones.
What's interesting is how many Jew posters there are at any given forum relative to the number of other posters, except those forums where they haven't yet intimidated the management into censorship and special treatment of "special" people. One would think they can just come over from other censorious forums and overwhelm other posters with their sheer number. But that's not how they operate.
Yup. They prefer to whine about their "persecuted minority, even though they could probably win in a fair fight. But a fair fight seems to be the last thing they're after. Clearly they're looking to pressure Liberty Forum into making some major concessions.
I wonder however if John Deere really wants to go this route. Clearly, if he starts to intervene directly, he will open himself up to much more pressure and nitpicking. Right now at least he can pretty much enjoy the results of his hands-off policy by using it as a basis for not having to watch the board like a KGB political kommissar, a la Jim Robinson and the Merry FR Kommissars.
2003-02-25 12:16 | User Profile
War Without End is pretty good.
[url=http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/index.php]http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/index.php[/url]