3 ms·

My favorite solution requires a bit of tech work but is very viable. Users can subscribe to a subreddit, but also to specific moderators. If you don't like how

My favorite solution requires a bit of tech work but is very viable. Users can subscribe to a subreddit, but also to specific moderators. If you don't like how someone moderates, unsubscribe to their moderation, and their changes and actions get removed from your feed. Simple. This ties back into how "freedom to listen" is way more important than "freedom of speech" Though freedom of speech is a prerequisite for freedom to listen. If person X wants to say something and person Y wants to read it, moderator Z shouldnt be allowed to interfere. But you still need moderation or the webpage gets filled with spam and crap. So the solution is simple, if you don't like a moderator, unsubscribe from them and it's done. Or if you see something you don't want to see, click a button to block it, then you get a popup with a list of moderators who have already moderated it, and the user gets an option to subscribe to them after looking at their mod history.

bhaak 3y ago
> My favorite solution requires a bit of tech work but is very viable. Users can subscribe to a subreddit, but also to specific moderators. If you don't like how someone moderates, unsubscribe to their moderation, and their changes and actions get removed from your feed. Simple. And then you will find out that most users don't configure their apps. They will complain loudly though. Users also don't know how mods moderate. They would have to see what gets moderated otherwise they can't make informed decisions. > Or if you see something you don't want to see, click a button to block it, then you get a popup with a list of moderators who have already moderated it, and the user gets an option to subscribe to them after looking at their mod history. Opt-in is too cumbersome for most users. Most users don't configure their apps (again). That's why good defaults are important. You can't solve social issues with technology. Technology might help but only so much.
- LightHugger 3y ago
  your suggestion isn't a problem, you can have defaults based on popularity and then the defaults get controlled by what most of the users who do configure their stuff choose. Don't make the mistake of thinking a mod is above people and needs to tell users what they are allowed to see. I included in my suggestion that you can see what gets moderated, obviously. Any website with non-public moderation logs tends towards horrible abuse of moderation powers.
  - bhaak 3y ago
    > Don't make the mistake of thinking a mod is above people and needs to tell users what they are allowed to see. They are not above people but they are the ones curating the content in the subreddit. If people don't like that, they can vote with their feet and leave. I've seen this play out several times. Communities leaving and building new subreddits, sometimes overtaking the previous one, sometimes not. > I included in my suggestion that you can see what gets moderated, obviously. Any website with non-public moderation logs tends towards horrible abuse of moderation powers. Why should that make a difference? Most mod stuff is boring mundane stuff. Finding the juicy stuff is not that easy. And even if you have unfair mods, you can't remove them even if you can prove that they are abusing their power. Reddit mods with seniority have power over those with lesser seniority. Changing that to say democratic votes from all mods to oust another mod only leads to more politics and drama. You can't prevent drama.
    - LightHugger 3y ago
      I'm not sure what you're talking about. Am i replying to an AI? I clearly addressed these things, i did not suggest democratic votes, i had a very specific suggestion that solves all the problems you're talking about.

bhaak 3y ago

> My favorite solution requires a bit of tech work but is very viable. Users can subscribe to a subreddit, but also to specific moderators. If you don't like how someone moderates, unsubscribe to their moderation, and their changes and actions get removed from your feed. Simple. And then you will find out that most users don't configure their apps. They will complain loudly though. Users also don't know how mods moderate. They would have to see what gets moderated otherwise they can't make informed decisions. > Or if you see something you don't want to see, click a button to block it, then you get a popup with a list of moderators who have already moderated it, and the user gets an option to subscribe to them after looking at their mod history. Opt-in is too cumbersome for most users. Most users don't configure their apps (again). That's why good defaults are important. You can't solve social issues with technology. Technology might help but only so much.

LightHugger 3y ago
your suggestion isn't a problem, you can have defaults based on popularity and then the defaults get controlled by what most of the users who do configure their stuff choose. Don't make the mistake of thinking a mod is above people and needs to tell users what they are allowed to see. I included in my suggestion that you can see what gets moderated, obviously. Any website with non-public moderation logs tends towards horrible abuse of moderation powers.
- bhaak 3y ago
  > Don't make the mistake of thinking a mod is above people and needs to tell users what they are allowed to see. They are not above people but they are the ones curating the content in the subreddit. If people don't like that, they can vote with their feet and leave. I've seen this play out several times. Communities leaving and building new subreddits, sometimes overtaking the previous one, sometimes not. > I included in my suggestion that you can see what gets moderated, obviously. Any website with non-public moderation logs tends towards horrible abuse of moderation powers. Why should that make a difference? Most mod stuff is boring mundane stuff. Finding the juicy stuff is not that easy. And even if you have unfair mods, you can't remove them even if you can prove that they are abusing their power. Reddit mods with seniority have power over those with lesser seniority. Changing that to say democratic votes from all mods to oust another mod only leads to more politics and drama. You can't prevent drama.
  - LightHugger 3y ago
    I'm not sure what you're talking about. Am i replying to an AI? I clearly addressed these things, i did not suggest democratic votes, i had a very specific suggestion that solves all the problems you're talking about.