Member Reputation for Hub/Forum Post Removal

1. 87

   WryLiltposted 13 years ago

   I know there has been a few complaints about the spamming of the forums on weekends lately, with suggestions by hubbers that people from countries such as the UK should be given moderation positions in order to delete these posts fast and efficiently.
   
   I'd like to suggest that instead, some sort of reputation is allotted to members.
   
   If you use yahoo answers and regularly flag low quality or abusive questions and answers, you'll be familiar with this concept.
   
   Basically the system works by members reporting bad content as normal. However the more 'correct' reports a user makes, the higher their reputation grows with the system. This means that a person who, say, correctly reports 98% of the time, can be rewarded by having forum topics put in some form of moderation or removal. Even if they were simply hidden from public view, based on high quality member reporting.
   
   This would mean people would think carefully before reporting at random, and would be rewarded in a way for making a correct report - their reports would be more highly looked upon by the system/hp staff.
   
   I don't know if it would work for hubs but I think it definitely could be a consideration on the forums.

   replyreport
2. 55

   Dame Scribeposted 13 years ago

   Sounds like work n don't we or the HP team have enough? lol. All kidding aside, I think the flagging system we have in place is ok. I think the best thing to happen would be if the topic was auto - removed if it's flagged. Then we don't have to see rows and rows of spam in the forums. They will be sitting in the Mod's 'For Review' bin

   replyreport
3. 71

   relacheposted 13 years ago

   I think Dame Scribe's idea is a more valid solution to the issue. 
   
   I don't understand WryLilt's rationale that site users from the UK are somehow going to be more accurately discriminating than users based in any other country.

   replyreport
   1. 91

      Rochelle Frankposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      I thought she was referring to the time zone difference (rather than skills in discrimination) that might make the posts disappear faster.
      I like dame Scribe's idea, too.

      replyreport
   2. 90

      Susana Sposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Frogdropping and I were having a semi serious joke about having a UK moderator or two. Because of the time difference we often get to see a lot of the spam first, particularly on saturday and sunday mornings. It would be nice to be able to get rid of it rather than having it sit there for hours and potentially provide a benefit to the spammer.
      
      I think a combination of approaches would work best ie: some hubbers having the ability to put spam in the bin for review.

      replyreport
4. 83

   psycheskinnerposted 13 years ago

   Having a moderator for the major time zones would seem like an efficient way to solve the problem.

   replyreport
5. 71

   thisisoliposted 13 years ago

   The problem with having an auto remove if flagged is that it would be incredibly easy to abuse.  We have already seen tactics used by groups of members on this forum to have people banned, they would have a field day with this, and probably both of these systems. 
   
   I think Hubpages could do with a moderator in a different timezone to keep an eye on things, and it probably will happen as the site grows.

   replyreport
6. 72

   livewithrichardposted 13 years ago

   I don't like the idea of having moderators that are not paid staff members of HP.  I think Dame Scribes idea is good for spam posts.  I think too that if a post gets a certain number of flags that it should be rendered another color so others will be alerted not to reply to it.

   replyreport
7. 0

   Website Examinerposted 13 years ago

   I believe that to some degree what WryLilt suggests is already in place. Some spam reports are processed very, very quickly, especially if the post includes a link and is not by a long-standing member. I think that frequent, reliable spam reporters are prioritized by the current system.

   replyreport
   1. 90

      Susana Sposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Since I flag a lot of spam (and I'm sure you do too), I have come to the conclusion that if a certain number of people flag the spam and the profile, it is removed automatically. I don't know how many flags it needs or even if it is true, but I'm pretty sure there is some kind of automated algorithm.

      replyreport
8. 83

   kerrygposted 13 years ago

   I agree with Oli that having an auto-removal system for flags would lend itself too much to abuse, but I also agree that it would be great to have a few moderators in different time zones. The UK and Australia would be good starting points. I'm only two hours ahead of California, but I've noticed the spam problem on weekend mornings too.

   replyreport
9. 78

   frogdroppingposted 13 years ago

   I'd like to think that if ever HP did hand over some moderating capacity to a few hubbers, they'd make a wise choice of hubber in the first place. I doubt very much that some hubbers would ever behave so low as to flag individual posts just because they could or didn't like the OP.
   
   If ever it was adopted, I wouldn't have a problem with the above. I'm with Susana on the UK time zone thing - as in that's probably what WryLilt meant.

   replyreport
10. 87

    WryLiltposted 13 years ago

    I think what I said was misinterpreted - I said this was an idea INSTEAD of having people (in time zones such as the UK) made as moderators.
    
    NO ONE is a moderator - instead each user gains trust through the number of reports they do.
    
    As I said, if you want an idea of what I mean, check out how Yahoo answers does it - if a new member reports it may take 20 reports to remove something. If a member of good standing reports the question/answer will be removed with one or two reports.
    
    And Susanna, I didn't know that, good to hear.

    replyreport