Re: Site Feedback/Questions
I have read several threads about preserving the quality threads vs. over-moderation and decided to pitch an idea. The idea may not be possible, or perhaps it was considered and rejected - but here it is:
Is it possible for each member to select who can and who cannot comment on their thread via their contacts? Perhaps they could not allow ignored posters or allow only friends to comment? It this was possible, much of the 'policing' would be done by the individual members. If this was coupled with some other policies, it could lead to a more civil discussion.
Just to expound, you could also add other requirments to the forum. Theoretically, every elected member has to have 35 or so yes votes to enter the ORG. A yes vote means the new member is added to the friends list of those who vote them in. If ever they drop below 35 votes, they lose the ability to start their own threads in the ORG. In this way, someone elected who then then becomes increasingly rude would have fewer and fewer outlets for their snark. And if they drop below 20 or so friends, perhaps an exclusion from the ORG is warranted.
This idea would create some problems. There would certainly be an adjustment period. Some would also complain about forming cliches or popularity contests. But in spite of this, I believe relying on each individual's judgement will promote much more civil discussion than relying soley on moderators to enforce subjective rules. Wheras, the current system keeps people from breaking rules with obvious, over-the -top criticisms, it does not have penalities for small, repeated rude behavior. There would always be a cost to being rude with the new system. I believe tapping into the group perception would make the forum a better place and save the mods a lot of work.
Just a thought.