일반적인 관리 정책

커뮤니티 구축
1

Hi,

Would like to talk about the effects of various different moderation polices for discourse community sites. I have seen a few different methodologies have significant impacts on the way people communicate at different sites, and it seems very important to consider the advantages and drawbacks of different policies before deciding to implement them.

There are quite a few different options for how to moderate. While I don’t have experience of being a discourse moderator myself, I have some general ideas about policies that may or may not work well in practice.

Challenges for moderators I can see are if community members are upset or in distress about a situation, they may write with a lot of emotionality that isn’t always polite or considerate. They could proclaim statements that are not accurate, exaggerations, or even outright lies. With something like that a moderator may want to just remove those posts and give the member an official warning to cool off before posting anymore.

That may be good for the overall community to maintain a space of calm civic discourse, but can also have the effect of a member feeling like their voice is being disregarded or any number of other responses.

Anyway would be good to read if any moderators here would like to share their experience of what polices have worked well or not so well for them with discourse sites.

Best regards.

2개의 좋아요
Super long line in topic causing page to be sidescrolled (a lot!)
2

Have you had a look at the Discourse Moderation Guide? There are lots of good tips on how to deal with different issues that may arise in your community.

Generally, the rules should be applied equally across everyone so there can’t be any disagreements about unfairness/inconsistency etc. As for the example you mentioned above, it depends on the context of the upset user. Are they frustrated about something but are posting something constructive eg. how something could be improved or are they are just being plain rude?

There are always things that users should be outright suspended for but in most cases if the user seems reasonable, I’d recommend reaching out with a PM or an official warning and try and find out what is wrong. You just have to find what works well for your community. A good place to start is the ToS and FaQ page on your community if you want some ‘policy’ to work off.

8개의 좋아요
3

Hi thanks for response,

Yes have seen that guide, as link to that is sent out in automatic e-mail when a user account is promoted to being a moderator. When I had launched initial trial sites awhile ago saw that, and with few members who joined promoted couple to moderator staff so they could still login when site was in staff-only mode. Didn’t have a need to do much any actual moderation with that, but if new site gets more members will need to be prepared for moderating.

Consistency is important in implementation of moderation policy I agree, if people see favoritism or discrimination in moderator action towards some members as opposed to others that is a clear sign of a site not being a legitimate place of civic discourse.

With the boilerplate Terms of Service and Community Guideline/FAQ page I printed out copies of those and spent a fair amount of time reading through those and making edits to be specific for my own vision of community site. The TOS seems fairly solid for being official legal terms.

For community guidelines the provided template is good, but when I was going through that editing for my site started to seem like may be better to start over with new specific policies for my own vision rather then built from the boilerplate template.

2개의 좋아요
4

This is good article from few years ago: Dealing with Toxicity in Online Communities

This is a challenge of how to be respectful of different opinions but not allow conversation to deteriorate into chaos.

One topic that many people in my home town community can be upset about is housing development projects, which there is a lot of resistance against. People are very attached to small town rural culture but don’t generally seem to want to help with improving housing affordability for the general public, which is a problem.

There can be some good discussions at public community meetings but often some folks can take over a whole meeting if the public officials running those allow that to happen. Some meetings are more official than others and are more professionally moderated with time limits on public comments.

Leadership is important for there to be consistent presence from a community leader and/or moderators. I believe in people having opportunity to speak freely but with accountability.

3개의 좋아요
5

I have some strong suggestions.

You no more than fives rules, and they should be simply stated. For example, these serve me well:

  1. Be Respectful.
  2. No Hate Speech or Bullying.
  3. Keep your content Relevant.
  4. Links, Images, Memes, and Videos.
  5. Don’t waste time.

Five rules because that’s about the most anyone can remember, even the moderators, so keep it simple.
Explanations and interpretations of the rules can be much longer, paragraphs longer, and this text should be linked or readily available where people can find it.

#1 Respect covers a multitude of sins aside from just being nice to other people. Spam is disrespectful, p0rn more so, etc..

#2 is really part of #1, but sometimes you really want to emphasize a certain point.

#3 Content should be obviously relevant. A question, an opinion, a topic for discussion, or a written description of linked content and why they think it is worthwhile. Auto-generated text or text within an image doesn’t count - the OP was to actually write something about it. Moderators should judge relevance by how the OP introduces the content, NOT by judging the content itself. If it isn’t obviously relevant, then moderators are free to approve/remove the content as they see fit. It is the OP’s responsibility to make their content relevant when they create the post.
This rule makes a moderator’s job much easier, because it reduces difficult judgement calls. It’s also very easy to meet this bar for relevance, only minimal effort is required (but Spammers won’t make this effort).

#4 Link to a longer statement of policy about media content, minimally “No Naked Links”. A picture might be worth a thousand words, but most memes are not.

#5 A catch-all for other situations and content. Hard decisions demand too much of your time, so bounce any content that isn’t an easy decision. If some content or comment is not obviously appropriate, then it’s NOT appropriate. In other words, if you can’t quickly decide if something is appropriate or not, it’s not the moderators job to fix it. Send it back to the OP and ask for changes. It’s also useful for rules-lawyers or anyone who’s sole purpose in life is to make more work for the moderators.

I also have a Rule #6, which states, “There is no Rule #6, but now we know you read this far.” I ask “What is Rule #6” in the New Member questions on FB, and the answers are quite revealing. :slight_smile:

I see some FB groups with 10-15 rules and have to laugh. There’s no way to have that many rules and not have them be redundant, or worse, contradictory. Either the author hasn’t really thought it, or they are a control freak, or both.

Consistency is absolutely necessary. Moderators need to communicate with other mods so they know how situations are being handled. Mods should also avoid moderation discussions/arguments they are a part of, so to avoid the appearance of bias. Call in another mods to handle the situation as needed.

5개의 좋아요
6

That is great, lol. Wonder what kind of answers you get for that if someone hasn’t read them and is just guessing, then you know they have lied to you!!

This is good first main statement, I would describe core main value is respect for essential human dignity in communication.

Also important.

2개의 좋아요
7

Usually boring, along the lines of “Be Respectful”, but still you know right away.

Rule #6 is a Monty Python reference, if you didn’t know. :slight_smile:

“Respect” ought to cover this, but for a while FB thought this was important and might shut down groups over accusations of bullying. Not so much now.

2개의 좋아요
8

This was my thinking on having an option even just a TC option to hide options to handle a flag that a mod has initiated or is the target of. To help remove temptation to imho abuse power of a mod.

In my instance for communication I have a category with the idea to help with communication of Flag resolution and to act as a place to discuss moderation. For a successful mod team communication is a key vital component

2개의 좋아요
Can category moderators be prevented from reviewing flags on their own posts?
9

Didn’t know about Monty Python reference.

Bullying is no good. I don’t use FB don’t know what their system is/was for deciding to shut down groups or intervene in response to accusations/reports.

This is confusing not sure what this means. If community members are creating flag reports about a moderator, probably best for those reports to go to other moderators besides the one being reported if it’s possible for the system to do that.

This seems like a good idea. Communication is critical of course to hear/read multiple sides of a situation and consider different perspectives.

10

간단히 말하면, 해당 모더레이터가 플래그의 대상이더라도 어떤 모더레이터든 플래그를 검토할 수 있습니다. 또한 모더레이터는 게시물을 플래그로 표시한 후 자신의 플래그를 검증할 수도 있습니다.

예시 1:

Bob이 모더레이터 A의 게시물을 부적절하다고 플래그를 표시합니다.

모더레이터 A는 검토할 플래그가 있음을 확인합니다. 모더레이터 A는 플래그에 동의하지 않습니다. 플래그가 해결됩니다.

예시 2:

모더레이터 A가 Bob의 게시물을 플래그로 표시합니다.
모더레이터 A는 그 플래그를 검토한 후 이에 동의할 수 있습니다.

개인적으로, 모더레이터 A가 게시물을 플래그로 표시할 경우, 해당 플래그를 검토하고 해제하는 것을 방지하는 옵션이 있어야 한다고 생각합니다.

모더레이터 A의 게시물이 플래그로 표시된 경우에도 해당 플래그를 해제할 수 없어야 합니다.

물론, 자신이 관여한 플래그를 보류하는 일반적인 규칙을 준수할 모더레이터들을 선정해야 합니다. 하지만 유혹은 항상 존재합니다.

이제 간단한 #customization:theme-component를 사용하면, 메시지를 표시하면서 보류 옵션을 제외하고 다른 옵션들을 숨길 수 있습니다. "이 플래그를 검토할 권한이 없습니다."라는 메시지 말입니다. 이는 플러그인을 사용하는 것보다 쉽게 우회될 수 있지만, 개인적으로 신뢰할 수 있는 누군가가 모더레이터 지위를 남용하지 않도록 단순히劝阻(劝止)하는 데에는 충분하다고 생각합니다.

그럼에도 불구하고, 사이트 로그를 검토하여 모더레이터 팀의 행동을 모니터링할 수 있다는 주장도 가능합니다. 이는 여전히 가끔씩 좋은 아이디어일 수 있습니다.

이 아이디어/개념은 사소한 억제 요소를 추가함으로써 유혹을 제거하는 데 도움이 됩니다.

1개의 좋아요
11

그것이 어떻게 작동하는지 그 메커니즘이 명확하지 않습니다. 아마도 이것은 기능 요청으로 처리되는 것이 좋을까요?

1개의 좋아요
12

There are Js calls to get current user. The current user would be compared to the user who flagged the post and the owner of the post that was flagged.

If 2 of the conditions match as true. Then the buttons other than defer post are dry to display none in the review que. With a text banner starting You are not permitted to review this flag

Dan

The Hide topics from blocked/muted users would use a similar logic but compared topic owner user if with current user’s ignore list.

1개의 좋아요
13

OK that is more technical talk which is going off-topic from original vision for this topic.

Was hoping for more philosophical discussion about core moderation methodology. Would say there seems to be two main extremes of polarity for how moderators can operate, from hyper-vigilance to overly stand-offish.

The correct way to practice good moderation would say is to walk the path of mediation which balances the opposing polar charges in equality.

1개의 좋아요
14

Mhh Maybe :thinking:

image
image524×466 56.8 KB

Like you say these are two opposite moderation styles and both have their disadvantages / advantages but moderation isn’t black and white like that. That’s why in communities I’m in, they’ve all found their own moderation style to suit their needs since moderating shouldn’t be a full time policing role :sweat_smile: Like it says in Discourses’ FaQ:

“moderators can be community facilitators, not just janitors or police”.

If moderators are too laid back it could drive your members away for a few reasons such as a lack of policy/ disorganisation and action not being taken on problematic posts because its just ‘not that bad’… leading to toxicity maybe? Just some thoughts.

But by the same token, “hyper vigilance” can make people feel afraid to post which is what you don’t want in a community

4개의 좋아요
15

I like this! It reflects pretty much what we do here.

Can you expand a bit on this one? Are you saying don’t overuse links, images, memes and videos and don’t just post them without an accompanying comment?

This often ends up being the reason we give when we give warnings or suspend users after repeat offences.

4개의 좋아요
16

I’d hazard a guess that it would mean spam/malicious links, inappropriate memes, images etc.

17

Right good response here. I didn’t mean to say moderation is black or white rather is generally somewhere between main opposite extremes hopefully somewhere in the realm of being reasonable.

Main important first step in my opinion is for there to be someone to respond if/when there are flag reports, to review those and speak with the person who made the report to be clear about their reasons for that because it may not always be completely obvious unless moderator is omniscient (all knowing).

Then to take some kind of action in response to a flag report, whether to simply delete a post, issue a warning, silence/suspend user, or attempt some kind of diplomacy. Diplomacy seems like generally good first step if that is possible.

I got one new user recently who is wanting to be a moderator and administrator, but am reluctant to promote them to either of those yet because don’t really know them. Plan to setup category moderation system not sure how to make that work yet so then they can have opportunity to be moderator for just one category first to see how they do with that before would grant full mod or admin power.

If a moderator is an active poster / community member it can set tone for how a lot of conversations go, especially if they are doing a lot of moderating that can be a good thing but can also be disruptive to some conversations being able to go well.

2개의 좋아요
18

@ondrej 님이 정확히 짚으셨네요 …

제 말은, 이러한 콘텐츠에 대해 명시된 정책이 있어야 작성자들이 관리자가 이를 어떻게 처리할지 이해할 수 있다는 것입니다. 핵심 아이디어는 링크를 따르지 않아도 충분한 정보를 제공하도록 게시글을 장려하여, 관리자가 쉽게 판단할 수 있게 하는 것입니다. 이렇게 하면 모든 독자에게 더 유용한 게시글이 되는 추가적인 이점도 있습니다.

왜 그 콘텐츠를 올리는지 설명하는 텍스트 없이(이미지, 링크, 동영상) 콘텐츠를 올리면, 관리자가 그것이 적절한지 판단해야 합니다. 이미지/밈의 의도는 무엇인가요? 링크 뒤의 내용이나 동영상의 내용은 무엇인가요(포르노? 더 나쁜 것??)?
이로 인해 관리자는 시간 소모적인 판단(기사 읽기, 동영상 시청 등)을 하게 되며, 관리자는 일반적으로 다른 일도 있는 자원봉사자입니다.

제가 제안하는 해결책은 모든 게시글에 텍스트를 필수로 요구하는 것입니다. 그리고 관리자는 콘텐츠 자체를 근거로 하는 것이 아니라, 해당 텍스트를 근거로 적절성을 판단합니다. 이는 관리자가 잠재적으로 어려운 주제에 대해 판단을 내릴 필요가 없도록 하며, 콘텐츠가 적절하게 제시되었는지 결정하기만 하면 됩니다.

일부 사진은 천 마디 말보다 낫지만, 대부분의 밈은 쓰레기/스팸입니다. 이미지를 고려하는 대신, 관리자는 OP(게시자)가 그 이미지에 대해 무엇을 썼는지를 고려해야 합니다. OP가 질문을 하거나 토론 주제를 제안하는 등 어떤 시도를 하는가요? OP가 잠재적으로 “좋은” 게시글을 만들려는 시도조차 하지 않는다면, 그것은 종종 단순히 흥미롭지 않습니다.

“맨몸” 링크/동영상(설명 없는 링크/동영상)의 경우, 관리자(그리고 독자들)는 콘텐츠를 보기 위해 링크를 따라가야 하고, 흥미로운지 결정하기 위해 충분히 읽거나 시청해야 합니다. 흥미롭지 않다면, 모든 사람이 시간을 낭비한 것입니다. 링크를 따를지 말지 독자가 정보에 입각한 결정을 내릴 수 있도록, 올리는 콘텐츠의 내용을 충분히 설명하는 것은 OP의 책임이어야 합니다.

링크/동영상에 대한 자동 생성된 설명은 인정되지 않으며, OP가 직접 작성한 것이어야 합니다. 그룹에 관련성이 있는 흥미로운 콘텐츠를 공유하려는 사람들에게 이것은 쉬운 일입니다. 스팸을 보내거나 자신의 유튜브 채널을 홍보하는 사람들은 거의 이런 노력을 하지 않으며, 그냥 링크를 던져두고 떠나기 때문입니다. “맨몸 링크 금지” 규칙은 이러한 상황에서 관리자의 일을 쉽게 만들고, 그룹에게 더 나은 경험을 제공합니다.

참고: 설명이 전혀 없는 명백히 좋은 콘텐츠에 대해서는 예외를 두어야 합니다. 이런 경우는 드물지만, 실제로 발생합니다. 또한 좋은 토론을 촉발하는 “나쁜” 게시글의 예시도 있으며, 관리자는 진행 중인 토론을 고려해야 합니다.

자, 아마도 너무 많이 확장했네요. :wink: 핵심은 이미지/밈/링크/동영상을 관리자가(그리고 다른 독자들이) 활용할 수 있는 추가 텍스트와 함께 제시해야 한다는 것입니다. OP가 좋은 노력을 기울인다면 관리자는 승인해야 합니다. 그렇지 않으면 관리자는 최소한의 시간 낭비로 이를 삭제할 수 있습니다. 중요한 것은 노력이며, 스팸러는 추가적인 노력을 하지 않을 것입니다.

3개의 좋아요
19

Jammy가 커뮤니티 모더레이터였을 때 거의 전지전능했습니다 :star_struck:

커뮤니티 규모가 얼마나 큰지 정확히 모르지만, 제 조언을 드리자면 처음부터 이미 높은 신뢰도를 가진 멤버들 중에서 모더레이터를 선택하는 것이 좋습니다. 모더레이터 팀은 양이 아닌 질이 중요합니다.

여기서 핵심 단어는 '되고 싶어(wanting)'입니다 :triangular_flag:

커뮤니티에 도움을 주고 싶다는 관심을 표현해 주셔서 감사하다고 말씀드리되, 신규 사용자이므로 신뢰할 수 있음을 입증해야 합니다. 일정 기간 활동에 참여하고, 적극적으로 소통하는 등의 기본적인 사항들이죠. 따라서 카테고리 모더레이터 역할을 부여하는 것은 매우 꺼려질 것입니다. 아마 부여하지 않을 것 같습니다.

Meta에서 TL4(Trusted Level 4)이면서 @Team에 속하지 않은 사용자들이 드물다는 점을 주목해 보세요. 이는 다른 모든 사람들이 신뢰할 수 없거나 도움을 주고 싶어 하지 않는다는 뜻은 아닙니다. 하지만 당신의 커뮤니티에서는 (이해가 된다면) 신뢰의 범위를 좁게 유지해야 합니다.

그렇습니다 :white_check_mark:

이 부분을 완전히 이해하지는 못하겠습니다 :sweat_smile: :thinking:

다른 토픽에서 @Tris20이 남긴 훌륭한 의견들을 함께 남겨 드리겠습니다.

9개의 좋아요
20

아마도 현명한 판단인 것 같습니다. 그리고 현재 사이트의 활동량이 여전히 적어 당분간 모더레이션에 대한 도움이 필요하지도 않습니다.

답을 찾고 있는 구체적인 질문이 있다면 최선을 다해 답변해 드리겠습니다.

1개의 좋아요