> One somewhat-related bit on the topic of moderators: does it bother anyone else that the stewards of some of these communities are effectively 100% anonymous?
It doesn't bother me one bit.
If the community is that big a company should fork over cash and pay employees to moderate it instead, or keep an eye on the volunteer moderators for any suspicious actions.
Instead of exposing identification I rather have moderators be subject to yearly votes. That way squatting is less of an issue.
> Instead of exposing identification I rather have moderators be subject to yearly votes.
The would just create a brigading problem.
Political subs could encourage their members to join lists of hundreds of subreddits and all vote for picked candidates. Coordination could happen on some other site as well.
"It's a subreddit" is a diminishing comment when it comes to these channels where you have significant amounts of people turning to them for information.
That's the point of my comment, really: this isn't just some site on the internet anymore.
It doesn't bother me one bit. If the community is that big a company should fork over cash and pay employees to moderate it instead, or keep an eye on the volunteer moderators for any suspicious actions.
Instead of exposing identification I rather have moderators be subject to yearly votes. That way squatting is less of an issue.