| |
Drobe's comment moderation system |
| |
This is a long thread. Click here to view the threaded list. |
| |
|
Ian Hawkins (g0tai) |
Message #45496, posted by g0tai at 16:59, 11/8/2003, in reply to message #45385 |
Member
Posts: 82
|
> Moderation helps people who want quality content and dicussion on drobe.co.uk.
But only in the first 30 comments.,
Yes. 30 comments is a good amount to provide peoples views to the article. when you get towards 30 then people start to drift off topic, or engage in debate about feature X, or part Y of X. This then rolls over into the forums which is the best place for long discussions about certain topics. Also, people have more freedom with their posts in the forums. |
| |
 [ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Ian Hawkins (g0tai) |
Message #45497, posted by g0tai at 17:02, 11/8/2003, in reply to message #45429 |
Member
Posts: 82
|
Admittly, the plan was for people to vote only on comments that really mattered, but people enjoy voting on every comment so fair enough.
I like it when people moderate every comment, and it is also good for the moderation system. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
ninjah |
Message #45499, posted by ninj at 19:04, 11/8/2003, in reply to message #45429 |
Member
Posts: 288
|
There's no details on at what point the comment vanishes, or a way to see the current score. The comment 'vanishes' when enough people vote for it as a Bad comment. And you shouldn't need to see the comment's score as it might influence your voting.
Actually, that's not strictly compatible with the idea of letting you set your threshold, because people will have no idea at what level to set their threshold if they can't see at what level comments are at currently.
Anyway, it looks good as it is. I like being able to see hidden ('moderated') comments so I can (in theory) add my vote to suggest they be rescued if I think they've been unfairly hidden, though of course if I do that too often I'll get marked as a bad'un.
It's a shame that drobe isn't threaded, since it's possible to end up replying to a comment which later gets hidden. But hopefully the volume of hidden comments will be low, and they'll only apply to the sort of comments that aren't worth replying to anyway. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Tim Firmager |
Message #45595, posted by Timothy609 at 16:46, 14/8/2003, in reply to message #45499 |
Member
Posts: 42
|
There's no details on at what point the comment vanishes, or a way to see the current score. The comment 'vanishes' when enough people vote for it as a Bad comment. And you shouldn't need to see the comment's score as it might influence your voting.
Actually, that's not strictly compatible with the idea of letting you set your threshold, because people will have no idea at what level to set their threshold if they can't see at what level comments are at currently.
Anyway, it looks good as it is. I like being able to see hidden ('moderated') comments so I can (in theory) add my vote to suggest they be rescued if I think they've been unfairly hidden, though of course if I do that too often I'll get marked as a bad'un.
It's a shame that drobe isn't threaded, since it's possible to end up replying to a comment which later gets hidden. But hopefully the volume of hidden comments will be low, and they'll only apply to the sort of comments that aren't worth replying to anyway.
Yes e hopes so to!  |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Ian Hawkins (g0tai) |
Message #45632, posted by g0tai at 14:10, 15/8/2003, in reply to message #45499 |
Member
Posts: 82
|
add my vote to suggest they be rescued if I think they've been unfairly hidden That is irrelevant. You should only be moderating comments based on their content and relevance to the article only. To moderate a comment up or down for any other reason is wrong.
though of course if I do that too often I'll get marked as a bad'un.
The system decides if you do or not automatically. Remoderating comments up or down does not mean you WILL be penalised for it, it's down to a lot of math. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
ninjah |
Message #45760, posted by ninj at 18:53, 20/8/2003, in reply to message #45632 |
Member
Posts: 288
|
add my vote to suggest they be rescued if I think they've been unfairly hidden That is irrelevant. You should only be moderating comments based on their content and relevance to the article only. To moderate a comment up or down for any other reason is wrong.
Well, of course! I'm not proposing that I would moderate hidden comments up if I didn't think they were good! |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Simon Willcocks |
Message #46373, posted by Stoppers at 12:14, 10/9/2003, in reply to message #45313 |
Member
Posts: 302
|
The whole idea seems a bit negative, to me; "Your foolish comment is not worthy of this website!".
It's less likely to alienate people if you approach it from the other direction and have comments normally going into an associated forum and allow people to vote for especially good postings to be added to the article's comments section. Sort by number of responses or newest first and stupid comments will simply fade away down the list.
Simon |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
John D |
Message #46382, posted by john at 18:22, 10/9/2003, in reply to message #46373 |
Member
Posts: 261
|
Good plan, it'd be good for getting rid of posts with no content, but comments like "I agree" are getting lost. Even if it was just changed so people were only encouraged to moderate down irrelevent postings it would be useful, or maybe just a setting for "no content" and another for "boring", and people could disallow whichever they want in their settings?
A good idea, I hope :) |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Ian Hawkins (g0tai) |
Message #46484, posted by g0tai at 11:41, 16/9/2003, in reply to message #46382 |
Member
Posts: 82
|
Even if it was just changed so people were only encouraged to moderate down irrelevent postings it would be useful, And why do you think we introduced the moderation system? I'm going to iterate the point *yet*again* - Comments that are irrelevant or abusive will be moderated down.
or maybe just a setting for "no content" Look. check the profile section for your user account on drobe. You have that option. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
James Walkerdine |
Message #46494, posted by walkerdi at 16:53, 16/9/2003, in reply to message #46484 |
Member
Posts: 4
|
Look. check the profile section for your user account on drobe. You have that option. I think you misunderstood what he was suggesting, which was that users could moderate comments to be 'no content' or 'irrelevant' rather than just good, bad, etc. Then in your user profile you could specify that you want all 'no content' messages to be not displayed, or all 'irrelevant' etc, etc
Although it is good idea, I guess the main difficulty would be coming up with a small number of suitable categories.
Saying that the number of moderated comments on drobe seems to have dropped quite a bit over the last couple of weeks |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
John D |
Message #46501, posted by john at 22:37, 16/9/2003, in reply to message #46494 |
Member
Posts: 261
|
Yeah that is what I meant. Don't get me wrong, I do appreciate your work and I'm not trying to knock you down! I thought that "no content" would be the most severe moderation and just about everyone would block that, and the more subjective stuff like "I agree" and off topic stuff would be moderated using a different option on the menu, which would be allowed separately in the profile.
Of course I'm not forgetting that you can go on adding new features forever, and everyone still wants something else added, so if you don't feel like doing so fine, just if you're stuck for a new idea, there be it :) |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
ninjah |
Message #46524, posted by ninj at 17:59, 17/9/2003, in reply to message #46501 |
Member
Posts: 288
|
I'm not convinced. What if one person votes a comment 'uninteresting', one votes it 'no content' and one votes it 'irrelevant', which state does it become overall? And if someone then votes it 'funny', does that cancel out 'uninteresting', or 'no content'. A comment would still probably be 'irrelevant'. Should people have the option to view all relevant postings, unless they're funny?
I like the drobe system for its simplicity. Try to extend it ad hoc and we'll only end up with Slashdot, encouraging people to try to work around its convoluted ruleset and attracting trolling, maybe. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Mark Scholes |
Message #46530, posted by mavhc at 18:50, 17/9/2003, in reply to message #46524 |
Member
Posts: 660
|
Try to extend it ad hoc and we'll only end up with Slashdot, encouraging people to try to work around its convoluted ruleset and attracting trolling, maybe. Within the first 30 comments? Slashdot has 100s of comments per article, the %age of crap comments might be the same, but the time taken to skip them is much longer. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
John D |
Message #46541, posted by john at 00:56, 18/9/2003, in reply to message #46524 |
Member
Posts: 261
|
I think you're getting ahead of even me :), I'm only suggesting the current setting, ("Bad") to be used as it is now, plus a more severe setting, "No content" (or "posted in error" or something) which would only be used in cases where the person has posted something e.g. a plank posting, or double posting or whatever. These would be the things that are definitely not needed. The Bad selection would still be used for off topics or whatever. I don't know the implementation specifics now, and I don't propose any for the new system, that's for whaever looks at the code to decide. I don't suggest many different perhaps related subjective measures, like slashdot. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
ninjah |
Message #46544, posted by ninj at 16:28, 18/9/2003, in reply to message #46541 |
Member
Posts: 288
|
Or maybe just give posters the ability to delete there own postings. Or at least, nominate their own postings for deletion if you're concerned about people abusing that power (posting something inflamatory, getting replies then deleting their original troll). |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
| Pages (2): |< <
2
|
