Ability for users to act as moderators on their own topic

Feature
21

This “Self-Moderation” feature is way to risky. Just use TL4 or Category Moderation. :slight_smile:

1 Like
22

I fail to see how, especially as it would need to be turned on manually and could be restricted to certain trust levels.

23

That’s literally TL4. (They can close, archive, pin, etc.) What I’m trying to say that moderators are supposed to be committed to be active almost daily and interact with users. If your moderators aren’t like this, then your forum has to think about adding more “active users”. In our forum, we have 3 moderators(Including myself), who check the forum daily just in case a user has one of those requests.

24

Except in a time-limited game, it’s basically impossible to guarantee a member of staff is online at all times.

Additionally, TL4 also gives users certain abilities that go beyond the scope of their own posts.

25
  1. Create a group.
  2. Create a category for “category-moderation”
  3. Add that group.
  4. For a limited time, users will be in that group so they can host and handle their own game.
  5. Done
26
  • I want to use a community discussion product to run a game
  • I don’t want to write any plugin code
  • I don’t want to staff my community sufficiently
  • I don’t want to pay for this to change

Sound about right?

2 Likes
27

No, no, no, and yes

But the passive-aggressiveness is appreciated :blush:

28

I have asked our admin to do basically this, thanks! :slight_smile:

29

Then it leaves you to category moderation then. :slight_smile:

30

Changed the last no to yes as I realized I don’t want to pay (as I do not currently have any income, being a student)

I do think more features is financially beneficial for Discourse as compared to less features though, and am therefore comfortable suggesting a few.

31

Yep, gotta love that new feature :slight_smile:

From 12 days ago, right?

32

Yes, I think…

I recommend you invite your admin to this topic so he/she can handle this.

Yes, but some can cause more bad than good.

33

I do entirely agree with that, although in general I find it hard to believe a toggle-able option to give users a bit more self-control would be one of those.

34

This works as a solution then. No harm.

35

I don’t see why having a semi-workable solution should be enough to prevent a request for a more specific featureset?

Obviously that’ll go into decisions about whether they’re implemented by the devs (as, after all, time is money), but I do not see a reason to not also hope this is added so people do not need to be temporarily added to a group of mods for a category, which also still gives them power over more than just their own posts.

So while I am currently working on that, I am simultaneously requesting this feature.

36

This from 11m ago on another site, Chief Delphi (pulled an example from here above as well)

https://www.chiefdelphi.com/t/frc-m8-signups/357645/20?u=orangeandblack5

I wasn’t even thinking about doing anything on CD but I guess I can now

37

Basically you’ve described PMs, which can be sent to groups.

If you want a personal message – start one!

5 Likes
38

More succinctly, this is describing per-topic permissions which would require a massive rearchitecture of Discourse. That’s… not going to happen any time soon, and by any time, I mean in the next few years. If ever.

The closest things to it have already been brought up:

  • Keep all these “game” topics in a specific category and take advantage of our about-to-be-released category specific moderators. This is likely your best bet.

  • Use group PMs which are much conceptually closer to this model and might work OK “enough”.

7 Likes
39

That’s a shame - if you do ever get around to it though :wink:

1 Like
40

Just found myself in a situation needing this as well, would be lovely if this could happen some day.

1 Like