Firstly note, I'm including attachments with red arrows for clarification of below proposal. I'm not saying my attachments precisely correlate to my below text, but it's the same idea.
Proposal:
Seems that for eons, forum software has never been set-up to root-out those unfair authoritarians who tend to rise up the hierarchy and become mods. This has been especially evident on health forums, causing deep frustration. That motivated me to propose a self-moderating option - which enables the OP of any thread (who can be compared to a host with invited guests) to self-moderate his/her own thread. How? By following the precedent set by Amazon, which used to offer a feature in their now-defunct Comments section, that stated:
Do you think this comment adds to discussion? Y/N...
If XX number of members clicked No, it became Invisible.
But the beauty is, that individuals were then asked:
"Do you wish to see it anyway?" - thus Re-visibilizing said comment on their personal computers, if only out of curiosity, to see if the invisiblizing was fair, or if on the other hand, the comment was actually useful or original, and should have remained visible. That's the most equitable way.
Likewise, that feature should be enabled on forum software, to every thread's Original-Poster, so that he/she can self-moderate his/her own threads. After all, if guests leave clothing laying around, their hosts usually ensure they're put back into drawers, so the house remains organized. Given that, should not OP's - also - be enabled to invisibilize "messy-unruly" respondents, no different than hosts invisibilize messy clothing by stuffing them in drawers? Wouldn't that help ensure that the thread remains educationally on-point, and not disorganized?
After all, isn't it better to have zero visible-replies, than loads of time-wasting visible replies?
Of course, there should be checks and balances to discourage Original Posters from irrationally invisiblizing respondents. So for example, if XX number of members "Report this thread's OP for invisiblizing post #13 unfairly", and that's found to be valid by at least two moderators, that can count as a point against the OP, which would accumulate and cause his/her posts to be flagged "This member invisiblized xx number of posts unfairly". The flagging-area can be either subtle-text or GLARING-text, depending on the administrator's choosing.
That way, there's no deleting - ONLY invisiblizing.
That way, there's no banning - ONLY flagging that's either subtle or glaring.
Can forum-software get more fair than that?
Proposal:
Seems that for eons, forum software has never been set-up to root-out those unfair authoritarians who tend to rise up the hierarchy and become mods. This has been especially evident on health forums, causing deep frustration. That motivated me to propose a self-moderating option - which enables the OP of any thread (who can be compared to a host with invited guests) to self-moderate his/her own thread. How? By following the precedent set by Amazon, which used to offer a feature in their now-defunct Comments section, that stated:
Do you think this comment adds to discussion? Y/N...
If XX number of members clicked No, it became Invisible.
But the beauty is, that individuals were then asked:
"Do you wish to see it anyway?" - thus Re-visibilizing said comment on their personal computers, if only out of curiosity, to see if the invisiblizing was fair, or if on the other hand, the comment was actually useful or original, and should have remained visible. That's the most equitable way.
Likewise, that feature should be enabled on forum software, to every thread's Original-Poster, so that he/she can self-moderate his/her own threads. After all, if guests leave clothing laying around, their hosts usually ensure they're put back into drawers, so the house remains organized. Given that, should not OP's - also - be enabled to invisibilize "messy-unruly" respondents, no different than hosts invisibilize messy clothing by stuffing them in drawers? Wouldn't that help ensure that the thread remains educationally on-point, and not disorganized?
After all, isn't it better to have zero visible-replies, than loads of time-wasting visible replies?
Of course, there should be checks and balances to discourage Original Posters from irrationally invisiblizing respondents. So for example, if XX number of members "Report this thread's OP for invisiblizing post #13 unfairly", and that's found to be valid by at least two moderators, that can count as a point against the OP, which would accumulate and cause his/her posts to be flagged "This member invisiblized xx number of posts unfairly". The flagging-area can be either subtle-text or GLARING-text, depending on the administrator's choosing.
That way, there's no deleting - ONLY invisiblizing.
That way, there's no banning - ONLY flagging that's either subtle or glaring.
Can forum-software get more fair than that?
Attachments
Upvote
0
