4 ms·
StackExchange’s moderators have a huge bias issue against newcomers to the field (some can say it is justified) and sometimes, (though I have only personally no
by anshumankmr 5y ago
StackExchange’s moderators have a huge bias issue against newcomers to the field (some can say it is justified) and sometimes, (though I have only personally noticed this), there is a huge bias against those who can’t speak English well. I have noticed at times, people with high rep make rude remarks as they misunderstand what the original author had to say.
For me, I take time to edit questions with poor grammar and help people solve their problems from time to time.
- notatoad 5y agoi think that's the point that the parent is trying to make: the only sites that have "figured out" moderation have erred almost ridiculously on the side of rejecting a ton of content, often in biased ways. the sites that do this generally seem better for it, even if it's not really fair. moderation that works well is generally not very nice. content moderation that isn't somewhat cruel doesn't work very well.
- esyir 5y agoSounds a bit like the interviewing problem, eh? Maintaining a quality bar fundamentally seems to involve a high false negative rate.
- notatoad 5y agoSort of, except the difference in scale is important. there's a lot fewer candidates in interviewing, so each false negative is more significant. The false negatives in the content moderation process are essentially irrelevant to anybody other than the person being moderated because there's enough other content being generated, so there's very little downside to being overzeaous in content moderating. at anything other than the very largest companies, being overzealous in rejecting interviewees will severely limit your talent pool.