Introducing the 24 Hour Removal Reprieve Flair
A lot of people who care about this sub have had many conversations over the past few months about what can be done to make it run smoothly despite the many difficulties we face. We need submission rules to fight the forum-slider shitposts. We have to administer them consistently to avoid censorship. But many users struggle to craft posts that satisfy them, especially while dealing with anger, frustration and resentment toward mods for removing. We need moderator authority decentralized, yet still effective...Last night, many of those conversations gelled in my brain in a new idea, and @think- and I would like to try it. Here's how it will work:
- Instead of immediately removing posts that fail to meet the submission rules, we will flair them with a 24-hour removal warning, and leave a comment requesting an edit about which rule(s) are at issue. The imperfect post will remain on the board for 24 hours, with the flair.
- The flair will alert all other users that the post is in danger of being removed -- so they can help the OP fix it by supplying links, clarifying the PG connection, explaining things with clearer logic or whatever is missing
- At the end of that time, the post will be automatically removed -- unless the OP responds to the mod comment (not a DM or modmail) to let us know he has edited it and wants the flair removed.
- At that point, mods will reevaluate and either remove the flair, request additional edits, or remove the post
- To avoid a spam tsunami of shitposts, users will only be allowed to have two such flaired threads on the board. Continuing to post threads after you've been flaired for removal will cause you to forfeit the 24 Hour Removal Reprieve. The posts will be removed and the user banned for repeated disregard of the subverse submission rules.
Pros: No more crushing instant deletions and laborious copy-paste resubmissions. All users get the opportunity to moderate the subverse content. Moderators get the opportunity to clearly see community sentiment toward the relevance and value of the subject matter.
Cons: Shitposts stay on the board overnight. (Where they can be downvoated soundly, accruing negative SCP and exposing their purveyors to the appreciation of the community. Ahem. Perhaps this is not a negative!).
The beauty of this approach is that it radically shifts the burden to the users themselves.
Right now, the mods are always the bad guys, with heavy pressure from above* if things aren't removed immediately that violate the rules, and heavy pressure from users if things are summarily removed. Our ruleset is somewhat contrary to the freewheeling expression beloved by Voat at large. Your average Old Goat coming in here to contribute something they think we might be interested in, and getting removed for rule-breaking, is usually shocked, and often complains to ProtectVoat. Understandably.
*Also understandably, because of that anti-rule culture clash, @kevdude @Crensch @VictorSteinerDavion must ensure mods aren't abusing the rules. (Hence the downward pressure lest we mods make the rules look bad). Mods get caught in the middle, and so almost no one wants to take their turn playing dog catcher. Mods are stretched thin and make poorer decisions. The beauty of the 24-hour-flair is it involves the whole community and the user in "Removals" by giving everyone the power to prevent them.
So starting immediately, we are going to try this. Please leave your feedback, ideas, etc. here in the comments, and get involved when you see the new flair and try your hand at modding.
Special thanks to @Disappointed for encouraging new ways of doing things.
view the rest of the comments →
bernitdown ago
Tight. So just so I'm clear, what's to stop vote brigading ruining this system?
Vindicator ago
It's not based on votes. Mods will still remove stuff that doesn't meet the guidelines, even if it's been voted up. We've been doing this anyway. But there will now be ample opportunity for people to fix everything but headlines. Those will still have to be removed to be fixed. Not sure how that will work. But this is a start.
Edit: Editing above to include your observation in the Cons. I didn't think of it.
ll0O-O0ll ago
You could edit in a new headline at the top of the submission and then flair the post Edited Title. That way users know that the post has been edited and stayed up, but that the title is not correct.
Vindicator ago
@think- @kevdue @Crensch See parent.
What do you think of this plan? So far, titles are the one wrench in the Removal Reprieve. Think this would pose any problems?
think- ago
Totally agree. I'd really love it if we were able to establish the possibility to edit headlines on Voat, with mod approval.
Two thoughts:
1) Headlines should reflect content, so users can choose what they'd like to read accordingly. To let posts stay, instead of edit and re-post, would make this more difficult, as users would have to look into posts.
2) Shills still would have a feast day when providing clickbaity headlines
3) pro: endless discussion with users, like yesterday, would stop
@kevdude @Crensch: please see parent
Vindicator ago
GREAT IDEA!!!
ll0O-O0ll ago
Thanks