/kbin meta

4 readers

1 users here now

Magazine dedicated to discussions about the kbin itself. Provide feedback, ask questions, suggest improvements, and engage in conversations related to the platform organization, policies, features, and community dynamics. ---- * Roadmap 2023 * m/kbinDevlog * m/kbinDesign

founded 1 year ago

Moderate by lottery? (kbin.social)

submitted 1 year ago by Sam_uk@kbin.social to c/kbinMeta@kbin.social

15 comments fedilink hide all child comments

So this is a half formed idea that might be horrible, I thought I'd throw it out there for critique.

We have a problem on Kbin.social and probably other instances of under staffed moderation & admin teams.
Some large magazines have a single moderator
This will soon lead to *bad-shit appearing here
We will likely get de-federated at some point

A random selection of peers is good enough for juries. So how about we apply it here?

Every ~100th new user is made a site wide Admin (cannot delete only unpublish content, it remains visible in the backend to other mods)

Every ~100th new Magazine subscriber is similarly made a mod of that space.

A few would go powertripping, many would be inactive, but I think it might build the mod/admin team in a reasonable way.

We have to build the processes for powertripping/inactive admins anyway, so in a sense it's not extra work.

You'd build in some randomness, so the system was harder to game, it wouldn't literally be the 100th person. It might be the 80th, or 110th, but averaging out at ~100

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Sam_uk@kbin.social 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

@0x yet this is how we make decisions to put people in prison in the UK or US.

[–] fr0g@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Not really. The real life thing is carefully guided process with serious obligations in which the professionally trained and educated judge is still the main arbiter. The jury is segmented to a very specific part of the process with a clear protocol for a reason.

What you're asking for is giving every Xth rando a police badge because law enforcement is understaffed.

[–] Sam_uk@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

@fr0g Yes essentially that. I don't know for sure that we'd end up with worse law enforcement using that method.

@0x

[–] 0x@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

For the sake of the argument, let's say that you did. How is one system being bad in any way relevant when you're trying to make up a better system? If anything use it as a way to see what not to do.