I've got an idea that I think could significantly improve the quality of ET: self moderation.
The concept is simple: whoever originates the thread is given moderation rights for the thread they started.
I think the advantages would far outweight the drawbacks. For example:
1) No more flames. If someone interrupted your thread to insult or belittle you, instead of wasting time and energy responding, you could simply delete their contribution. The number of flames would be drastically reduced since everyone who is anti-troll would gladly delete pointless flame posts.
2) Fewer rabbit trails. It's the unfortunate truth that some posts are lower quality than others and many have little to do with the topic at hand. If the thread originator could clear his own thread of off topic or low quality posts, the threads would be that much more on topic and relevant with less noise and clutter.
3) More willingness to participate. I'm sure that if people were given more control over the thread conversations they started, they would be more interested in posting and pursuing relevant discussions with other posters who have useful input. The quality of discussion would raise for the benefit of all.
4) More incentive to be polite. If you wanted to make a point and you knew that the thread originator could delete your thread at will, there would be less incentive to be a jerk and more incentive to be fair / reasonable.
Drawbacks:
The obvious drawback to letting thread originators delete posts from their threads is the potential for abuse. You could hold a diatribe and not let anyone answer you, or you could delete the posts of anyone who disagrees with you.
I don't think this is a major problem though, because people who started threads to rant and / or deleted any posts that disagreed with them would quickly be found out and labeled. If someone started a hateful thread or a spam campaign etc, they could be reported to a higher level moderator who would delete that thread entirely and put the poster on warning. If someone was in the regular habit of deleting dissenting posts, they would quickly develop a reputation as a blowhard or a crank and their reputation would be their undoing - they would eventually become completely ignored.
Think of it Baron: you could have thousands of moderators policing their own threads and raising the quality of conversation across the board. I don't think this would qualify as censorship at all; it would be more along the lines of controlled conversations with public access. If someone didn't like the way a conversation (thread) was being controlled, they could go start their own, so no one could claim censorship.
Ending flames and keeping threads on topic by letting thread originators moderate in their best interest would be a HUGE improvement for ET in my opinion.
Thoughts?
The concept is simple: whoever originates the thread is given moderation rights for the thread they started.
I think the advantages would far outweight the drawbacks. For example:
1) No more flames. If someone interrupted your thread to insult or belittle you, instead of wasting time and energy responding, you could simply delete their contribution. The number of flames would be drastically reduced since everyone who is anti-troll would gladly delete pointless flame posts.
2) Fewer rabbit trails. It's the unfortunate truth that some posts are lower quality than others and many have little to do with the topic at hand. If the thread originator could clear his own thread of off topic or low quality posts, the threads would be that much more on topic and relevant with less noise and clutter.
3) More willingness to participate. I'm sure that if people were given more control over the thread conversations they started, they would be more interested in posting and pursuing relevant discussions with other posters who have useful input. The quality of discussion would raise for the benefit of all.
4) More incentive to be polite. If you wanted to make a point and you knew that the thread originator could delete your thread at will, there would be less incentive to be a jerk and more incentive to be fair / reasonable.
Drawbacks:
The obvious drawback to letting thread originators delete posts from their threads is the potential for abuse. You could hold a diatribe and not let anyone answer you, or you could delete the posts of anyone who disagrees with you.
I don't think this is a major problem though, because people who started threads to rant and / or deleted any posts that disagreed with them would quickly be found out and labeled. If someone started a hateful thread or a spam campaign etc, they could be reported to a higher level moderator who would delete that thread entirely and put the poster on warning. If someone was in the regular habit of deleting dissenting posts, they would quickly develop a reputation as a blowhard or a crank and their reputation would be their undoing - they would eventually become completely ignored.
Think of it Baron: you could have thousands of moderators policing their own threads and raising the quality of conversation across the board. I don't think this would qualify as censorship at all; it would be more along the lines of controlled conversations with public access. If someone didn't like the way a conversation (thread) was being controlled, they could go start their own, so no one could claim censorship.
Ending flames and keeping threads on topic by letting thread originators moderate in their best interest would be a HUGE improvement for ET in my opinion.
Thoughts?
