this post was submitted on 29 Oct 2023
-8 points (41.7% liked)

Ask Lemmy

26260 readers
1224 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected]. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

I am an anarchist, so the idea of the community doing all the work, creating content, and then mods basically ruling over them as a reward, just doesn't sit right with me.

We the users should collectively be in control of all our social media, economically and with regards of controling what goes on, on there.

All social media get's its value from the users i.e. the network effect. However the users are subjected to a hierachical place where individuals in power act as tyrants.

We create the value we should be in charge.

Fellow Lemmings how can we create social media were the users are king/queen?

post Scriptum: just having a voting mechanism, might be gamed by unsavory charcters or groups to game such a system, unless voting requires your clear name id, which comes with other issues of course.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

From what I’ve seen in your replies, you seem to agree:

  • Bad actors can easily ruin a community
  • It’s very easy for bad actors to game popularity-based systems like downvoting posts to remove them or upvoting posts to protect them
  • Bad actors can brigade communities to make it seem like active members support values different than what the majority actually held before the brigade

You’re dancing around the solution but refuse to admit it: you need a group of trusted users who have a longitudinal relationship with the community. This group of users can follow the community’s leanings over a long period of time, keep the discussion true to the community’s original vision, and easily identify bad actors. You need moderators.

It seems you’d be in favor of more laissez-faire moderation, but there’s still no better solution than moderation. Even if AI got good enough to do the job as well as a human, you’d still need a leader (the community creator or mods) to program the parameters of that AI. The truth is that your anarchist belief system simply doesn’t work as well in practice as it does in theory, and the only viable solution involves having someone in charge.

[–] BigBlackCockroach 1 points 10 months ago (2 children)

We have to assume that the majority of users will not be disruptive unless driven by the environment. Otherwise we might as well stop right there.

Assuming that it follows that such moderation without any individual in power might still be implemented by reflecting the community will through some mechanism. So voting doesn't work as long as everybody can create a million bot accounts. Maybe there is a way to prevent that. Same with other approaches. I wouldn't be surprised if somebody can come up with a technical solution for this.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago

Traditionally, this is done by IP, but IP spoofing is a thing.

However, choosing not to allow duplicate or bot accounts is itself an administrative decision. It’s simply preemptive moderation.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

We have to assume that the majority of users will not be disruptive

That's a reasonable assumption, however it only takes a very small number of "bad actors" to do a disproportionately large amount of damage.

[–] BigBlackCockroach 1 points 10 months ago

But the same assumption also means that one can rely on the majority of the users to be pro-social. Thus one can lean on this majority of angels to do the moderating.