Source: was a junior moderator on CompuServe, was the hub for a BBS network.
I determined in late 80s that editor was most valuable function for coping with "infoglut" (term coined by BYTE Magazine?). The editor role's is to filter and explain.
Today we'd call that function or role curation.
The only thing that has changed is the scale. Any criticism of moderation you could possibly articulate has already been pile driven into the deep firmament by legions of people before you.
FWIW, I'm personally familiar with a handful of sites that do moderation well. HN, ravelry.org, r/askhistorians, metafilter. There's certainly others. I'd LOVE for some academic ethnographers anthropologists to try to explain how and why and when moderation seems to work well. In the style of Clay Shirky or Michael Lewis, making stuff obvious once someone points it out.
Source: was a junior moderator on CompuServe, was the hub for a BBS network.
I determined in late 80s that editor was most valuable function for coping with "infoglut" (term coined by BYTE Magazine?). The editor role's is to filter and explain.
Today we'd call that function or role curation.
The only thing that has changed is the scale. Any criticism of moderation you could possibly articulate has already been pile driven into the deep firmament by legions of people before you.
FWIW, I'm personally familiar with a handful of sites that do moderation well. HN, ravelry.org, r/askhistorians, metafilter. There's certainly others. I'd LOVE for some academic ethnographers anthropologists to try to explain how and why and when moderation seems to work well. In the style of Clay Shirky or Michael Lewis, making stuff obvious once someone points it out.