4 ms·

Reddit moderation is generally terrible as for larger traffic areas require full time moderators, and as a result of them being non-paid, you can end up with pe

by afreak 13y ago

Reddit moderation is generally terrible as for larger traffic areas require full time moderators, and as a result of them being non-paid, you can end up with people running the show who otherwise wouldn't get hired to do so. Luck of the draw and early adoption are really key to being a mod in r/news or elsewhere. This also leads to abuses that exist likely due to their inability to exert such control elsewhere. Part of the reason why I like HN's moderation is you do not know who is generally doing the moderation work--same goes for places like 4chan if I might say. This prevents the sort of power tripping you will see on Reddit because there isn't a way to prove your worth. While I find some of the content posted here is not to my liking, I rarely have anything if at all to say about how the site is administered. Now whether or not this is censorship is subjective. To say that Reddit is engaging in censorship in this case is a bit erroneous as these moderators are not employees. You can still post these stories elsewhere without consequence.

sroerick 13y ago
I don't think that anyone got censored here, and I'm a big Greenwald supporter. I think reddit needs to reform their moderator system immediately. Whether it's issues like this one, or the /r/standupshots fiasco, content is simply too controlled to be useful. It's very similar to what happened with digg. Control of the medium became less democratic and more centralized. This time, it's in the hands of moderators rather than very powerful users. The problem is the same. I'd like to see reddit eliminate the default subs and allow subs there by way of voting. As it is, it's too easy for a moderator to control a sub, and no easy way to get rid of them. Subreddits are amazing, don't get me wrong. They're just subject to becoming less useful as they get bigger. Ironically, the subreddits I really like are usually the ones with very strict moderation. Reddit needs to find a way to bridge the gap between the users who unsubscribe from all the default subs and the users who never log in. I'd like to see a reddit clone that used dogecoin for up votes and featured both increased mod power and increased transparency.
- mahranch 13y ago
  "content is simply too controlled to be useful." Really? I believe the opposite is true. I think reddit needs more moderation. I wish mods wouldn't be as afraid to lay down the ban-hammer. I think the mods of /r/News were justified in their approach, and that these censorship stories coming out about reddit are due to an ignorance of how reddit works. The mods are fighting a battle against the lowest common denominator and losing. The beauty of reddit is that anyone can create their own subreddit and mod it however they see fit. If you want an easy going subreddit with mods that are hands-off, you're free to create one or subscribe to one. If a mod wants to rule their domain with an iron fist, their free to do that too. More importantly, the users are free to subscribe to any subreddit they wish. Users can literally vote with their feet and have done so on more than one occasion. Your proposed overhaul would change that dynamic. It's a dynamic which has helped reddit get to the level it's at now. People like to believe the collapse of digg contributed to reddit's success, but the fact is, (according to google trends), reddit had already surpassed Digg long before the big collapse.
  - sroerick 13y ago
    I agree with you. I think the most useful subreddits by far are heavily moderated subreddits like /r/AskHistorians or /r/Standup. I think the subreddit idea is brilliant. If reddit is going to survive, it will need to increase transparency for mods, and decrease the emphasis on the default subreddits. The problem is not that there's too much moderation, the problem is that the default subreddits have such a wide audience because so many users never bother to subscribe to anything else. If a reddit competitor offered the democracy of subreddits without the gatekeepers of the default subreddits I would switch in a second. If my memory serves, there were quite a few controversies that led to a bunch of people coming to reddit from Digg. There were quite a few influxes of Digg refugees. redditors complained about quality drops every time. This is before subreddits, of course. The challenge, I think, is combining democracy with with some kind of editorial function. I think what it comes down to is what happens when you click the comments button. Edit: Hey, I just found this and felt it was appropriate. http://www.laughspin.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/nathananderson.png http://www.laughspin.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/nathan...
- afreak 13y ago
  I personally don't believe it is censorship either. The biggest problem Reddit has is how the moderator structure works. I can go and create a new sub-Reddit, automatically becoming the main moderator as a result. You can then assign moderators below you who then in turn can add moderators who are below themselves and so on. The problem is if one of the moderators disappears and then reappears later on and then removes any other mods they can, it stirs up drama. /r/atheism for as bad as it is, had this happen when someone attempted to "clean" it up. I stopped posting in one sub-Reddit local to where I live because of the same idiocy. Personally I'd like to see moderation in the way they have it now removed in favour of the Slashdot method where a post with a large number of downvotes is reviewed by those with good-standing in that sub-Reddit but with the username and other details removed. This will allow for some level of sanity within the imperfections that Reddit provides.
diogenescynic 13y ago
>Reddit moderation is generally terrible as for larger traffic areas require full time moderators, and as a result of them being non-paid, you can end up with people running the show who otherwise wouldn't get hired to do so. Luck of the draw and early adoption are really key to being a mod in r/news or elsewhere. This also leads to abuses that exist likely due to their inability to exert such control elsewhere. >Part of the reason why I like HN's moderation is you do not know who is generally doing the moderation work--same goes for places like 4chan if I might say. This prevents the sort of power tripping you will see on Reddit because there isn't a way to prove your worth. While I find some of the content posted here is not to my liking, I rarely have anything if at all to say about how the site is administered. As someone who spends a lot of time on reddit, I totally agree. There are a few moderators who mod over hundreds of subreddits. There is too much room for gatekeeping and censorship. You see a lot of selective enforcement of the 'rules' and abuse of power.
dragonwriter 13y ago
> Now whether or not this is censorship is subjective. No, its absolutely censorship. Whether or not this is the kind of censorship that is undesirable is subjective, as is any other evaluation of desirability.
fourstar 13y ago
So what do you propose? I run a large subreddit and it's hard to find worthwhile moderations and keep the submissions fresh/useful as it grows even larger.
- afreak 13y ago
  As I had said in another comment: > Personally I'd like to see moderation in the way they have it now removed in favour of the Slashdot method where a post with a large number of downvotes is reviewed by those with good-standing in that sub-Reddit but with the username and other details removed. This will allow for some level of sanity within the imperfections that Reddit provides. Make moderation blind and make it so we don't know who the moderators are; this prevents power-tripping.
  - fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
    What? That's crazy. That makes it easy for interested parties (marketers, gov't agents, etc.) to hide amongst real moderators, or in other words makes it more difficult to detect the source of spurious moderation.
    - afreak 13y ago
      If it's done at random and only given to those who participate in discussion and get responses and good karma, then manipulation becomes far more difficult. Unless the marketers, government agents, or other unwanted parties are involved in the same capacity as everyone else, then you shouldn't have to worry about spurious moderation. The only caveat to this is that it encourages a further echo chamber effect, but then again you're already engaging in one by participating in a forum anyhow.

by afreak 13y ago

sroerick 13y ago

I don't think that anyone got censored here, and I'm a big Greenwald supporter. I think reddit needs to reform their moderator system immediately. Whether it's issues like this one, or the /r/standupshots fiasco, content is simply too controlled to be useful. It's very similar to what happened with digg. Control of the medium became less democratic and more centralized. This time, it's in the hands of moderators rather than very powerful users. The problem is the same. I'd like to see reddit eliminate the default subs and allow subs there by way of voting. As it is, it's too easy for a moderator to control a sub, and no easy way to get rid of them. Subreddits are amazing, don't get me wrong. They're just subject to becoming less useful as they get bigger. Ironically, the subreddits I really like are usually the ones with very strict moderation. Reddit needs to find a way to bridge the gap between the users who unsubscribe from all the default subs and the users who never log in. I'd like to see a reddit clone that used dogecoin for up votes and featured both increased mod power and increased transparency.

mahranch 13y ago
"content is simply too controlled to be useful." Really? I believe the opposite is true. I think reddit needs more moderation. I wish mods wouldn't be as afraid to lay down the ban-hammer. I think the mods of /r/News were justified in their approach, and that these censorship stories coming out about reddit are due to an ignorance of how reddit works. The mods are fighting a battle against the lowest common denominator and losing. The beauty of reddit is that anyone can create their own subreddit and mod it however they see fit. If you want an easy going subreddit with mods that are hands-off, you're free to create one or subscribe to one. If a mod wants to rule their domain with an iron fist, their free to do that too. More importantly, the users are free to subscribe to any subreddit they wish. Users can literally vote with their feet and have done so on more than one occasion. Your proposed overhaul would change that dynamic. It's a dynamic which has helped reddit get to the level it's at now. People like to believe the collapse of digg contributed to reddit's success, but the fact is, (according to google trends), reddit had already surpassed Digg long before the big collapse.
- sroerick 13y ago
  I agree with you. I think the most useful subreddits by far are heavily moderated subreddits like /r/AskHistorians or /r/Standup. I think the subreddit idea is brilliant. If reddit is going to survive, it will need to increase transparency for mods, and decrease the emphasis on the default subreddits. The problem is not that there's too much moderation, the problem is that the default subreddits have such a wide audience because so many users never bother to subscribe to anything else. If a reddit competitor offered the democracy of subreddits without the gatekeepers of the default subreddits I would switch in a second. If my memory serves, there were quite a few controversies that led to a bunch of people coming to reddit from Digg. There were quite a few influxes of Digg refugees. redditors complained about quality drops every time. This is before subreddits, of course. The challenge, I think, is combining democracy with with some kind of editorial function. I think what it comes down to is what happens when you click the comments button. Edit: Hey, I just found this and felt it was appropriate. http://www.laughspin.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/nathananderson.png http://www.laughspin.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/nathan...
afreak 13y ago
I personally don't believe it is censorship either. The biggest problem Reddit has is how the moderator structure works. I can go and create a new sub-Reddit, automatically becoming the main moderator as a result. You can then assign moderators below you who then in turn can add moderators who are below themselves and so on. The problem is if one of the moderators disappears and then reappears later on and then removes any other mods they can, it stirs up drama. /r/atheism for as bad as it is, had this happen when someone attempted to "clean" it up. I stopped posting in one sub-Reddit local to where I live because of the same idiocy. Personally I'd like to see moderation in the way they have it now removed in favour of the Slashdot method where a post with a large number of downvotes is reviewed by those with good-standing in that sub-Reddit but with the username and other details removed. This will allow for some level of sanity within the imperfections that Reddit provides.

diogenescynic 13y ago

>Reddit moderation is generally terrible as for larger traffic areas require full time moderators, and as a result of them being non-paid, you can end up with people running the show who otherwise wouldn't get hired to do so. Luck of the draw and early adoption are really key to being a mod in r/news or elsewhere. This also leads to abuses that exist likely due to their inability to exert such control elsewhere. >Part of the reason why I like HN's moderation is you do not know who is generally doing the moderation work--same goes for places like 4chan if I might say. This prevents the sort of power tripping you will see on Reddit because there isn't a way to prove your worth. While I find some of the content posted here is not to my liking, I rarely have anything if at all to say about how the site is administered. As someone who spends a lot of time on reddit, I totally agree. There are a few moderators who mod over hundreds of subreddits. There is too much room for gatekeeping and censorship. You see a lot of selective enforcement of the 'rules' and abuse of power.

dragonwriter 13y ago

> Now whether or not this is censorship is subjective. No, its absolutely censorship. Whether or not this is the kind of censorship that is undesirable is subjective, as is any other evaluation of desirability.

fourstar 13y ago

So what do you propose? I run a large subreddit and it's hard to find worthwhile moderations and keep the submissions fresh/useful as it grows even larger.

afreak 13y ago
As I had said in another comment: > Personally I'd like to see moderation in the way they have it now removed in favour of the Slashdot method where a post with a large number of downvotes is reviewed by those with good-standing in that sub-Reddit but with the username and other details removed. This will allow for some level of sanity within the imperfections that Reddit provides. Make moderation blind and make it so we don't know who the moderators are; this prevents power-tripping.
- fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
  What? That's crazy. That makes it easy for interested parties (marketers, gov't agents, etc.) to hide amongst real moderators, or in other words makes it more difficult to detect the source of spurious moderation.
  - afreak 13y ago
    If it's done at random and only given to those who participate in discussion and get responses and good karma, then manipulation becomes far more difficult. Unless the marketers, government agents, or other unwanted parties are involved in the same capacity as everyone else, then you shouldn't have to worry about spurious moderation. The only caveat to this is that it encourages a further echo chamber effect, but then again you're already engaging in one by participating in a forum anyhow.