←back to thread

600 points codetrotter | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0.614s | source
Show context
subsubzero ◴[] No.35461974[source]
Congrats Dang, you have done a wonderful job so far and moderate one of the most fantastic online communities out there. I am sure most of the job feels somewhat thankless but I want to let you know I(and many many other users on this site) appreciate your hard work and dedication.
replies(3): >>35462601 #>>35462773 #>>35463700 #
codeddesign ◴[] No.35462773[source]
If by “finest” you mean a Reddit mob mentality for tech, then yes I completely agree with this statement.
replies(6): >>35462836 #>>35463131 #>>35463193 #>>35463875 #>>35464427 #>>35464999 #
dang ◴[] No.35463131[source]
What do you think we could do differently? Serious question.

I don't like the mob thing either but it's how large group dynamics on the internet work (by default). We try to mitigate it where we can but there's not a lot of knowledge about how to do that.

replies(24): >>35463179 #>>35463213 #>>35463257 #>>35463371 #>>35463548 #>>35463713 #>>35463749 #>>35464099 #>>35464410 #>>35464467 #>>35464570 #>>35464688 #>>35464754 #>>35465446 #>>35465523 #>>35465648 #>>35465794 #>>35466615 #>>35466946 #>>35467134 #>>35468675 #>>35469283 #>>35476621 #>>35488228 #
ilsombsotb ◴[] No.35463749[source]
Add “transparency” logging for all users.

From then on, whenever a user takes an action on the site (posting, commenting, voting, flagging, etc.) they are prompted to provide an explanation as to how their action contributes to the community. All actions and their transparency notes are stored in this log.

Make it so that it can be skipped, but where applicable the action is delayed, marked with a sigil, and down-weighted.

replies(3): >>35463943 #>>35464416 #>>35464722 #
1. dang ◴[] No.35463943[source]
Help me understand how this would make things better.
replies(1): >>35467147 #
2. ilsombsotb ◴[] No.35467147[source]
In my perfect world, it would prompt people to reflect on their contributions before actually submitting them.

Ideally this would be a moment to think about whether the contributions meet the guidelines or otherwise move discussion forward.

Edit: to be perfectly clear, I’m asking people to justify their contributions.

replies(1): >>35473319 #
3. dang ◴[] No.35473319[source]
I appreciate the intention but unfortunately I don't think that's realistic. It would just lead to a plethora of extremely low quality "explanations".