Hi all!
Ever since I got involved in emotional well-being and mental health efforts (ERGs) in BigTech some years ago, I’ve been interested in what might be pretty niche (inter)personal challenges. And more recently, as a moderator in a Discourse forum, I’ve also come across similar questions/thoughts. Let’s call it “episodic unwellness for whatever reason”.
If some John Doe has good days and bad days, and has a habit of embarrassing themselves on bad days and then regretting it on good days, what could a good-day-John do to reduce the embarrassment they might need to suffer at the hands of bad-day-John’s actions?
A moderation team willing to deal with this can go a long way, and might be sufficient for the majority of Discourse’s users… but a moderation team might also say “we just don’t have the resources for this”.
Suppose good-day-John would like to carry as much responsibility as possible for bad-day-John’s actions, he might be interested in setting up a rule like “all posts by John should be (re)approved by John at least 24 hours later”. This, for example, could avoid problems with bad episodes that last less than a day – sampling John’s decisions on two different days could ensure a more grounded or sober good-day-John always has a say before bad-day-John gets to post anything. The cost: all of good-day-John’s postings would be delayed by a day (in this example). Good for first posts in new threads, but for replies to existing threads, badly hindering timely participation in discussions that are lively.
A related idea: giving John the option to designate some friends who are willing to approve his posts. This adds more ACL complexity, but potentially reduces the time-delay problem. (“Friends or moderators or future John could approve posts by John.”) Friends getting involved might be necessary for episodic problems that could last days or weeks.
It could be self-imposed; it could be moderation-team-imposed on users with repeated episodes. How niche would this be? I currently know of only one person who would be interested in self-imposing this kind of thing, but I’m on the lookout for more… ![]()
I’m consequently not sure this is worth the effort, but I nevertheless wanted to put it out there (e.g. in case it’s much easier to implement than I think).