>Does hubski have any form of moderation similar to reddit? so you mean make the users play whack a mole with trolls while the admins do nothing or next to nothing? God I hope not. Hell I hope that we don't end out going the subhubski route either (Well I secretly hope we do so I can snag #atheism and maybe make it not be terrible.) --- Vaguely related: Hubski doesn't feel like it would really survive a large amount of growth to be honest. I think Hubski at 25k users would be a wildly different beast then it is now, especially since a voting clique would muck everything up. Even if the downvote isn't an option they could still paint the opposition as not as well loved.
> Hubski doesn't feel like it would really survive a large amount of growth to be honest. What if the magic user number was found and users wishing to sign up would be required to join a waiting list? Then there could be some metric for determining the activity or impact levels of users and the least active would get bumped every week or so, making room for new users.
I'm not sure that I agree that Hubski couldn't survive a larger influx of users. That said, your suggestion to have a ceiling on the amount of users and have a waiting list is a very interesting one in my opinion.
I think this could work without bumping anyone. The largest problem with growing online communities is rate of growth, not absolute size. I think it is worth considering a system in which anyone can sign up for an account, which allows them to follow/ignore users and tags, but only allow a set percentage of them (as a function of total user base) comment and vote.
Not necessarily. I'm here just as much to read the comments of others as I am to post myself. I think I left a key part out of my first post. The idea would be to let a set percentage of new users become full users each day. So, if 200 people sign up in one day, the first 50 become full users immediately, 50 are granted full status the next day, etc. This could have a chilling effect on growth, but mk has said before that growth isn't his primary goal anyway. I think anyone who can't wait a few days isn't a good fit for this site in the first place.
Even in my brief time here, I couldn't agree more. The less attention the better; a trickle of new users is natural, a flood is not.Vageuly related: Hubski doesn't feel like it would really survive a large amount of growth to be honest. I think Hubski at 25k users would be a wildly different beast then it is now, especially since a voting clique would muck everything up.
I've talked to MK in person about this, beatingwomen came up specifically, and came up here on Hubski when someone posted some battered women content. I asked MK to make a post about how it was handled at the time but he hasn't. I'm not surprised he hasn't posted a history of moderating hubski yet, he is a busy man with hubski being far from his most important life activity, but I would still like to hear about how he has and how he plans to deal with offensive content. I fear Hubski becoming too popular. The community as it stands seems to know each other enough that a conversation happens with a degree of context that informs the discussion, integrating the inflow of new people pretty effectively. I don't know how a big influx of peopel would effect hubski, but I'm afraid of it happening. That being said I think MK would probably be interested in seeing what happened if it did.
I think I can shed some light on that for you as I was the OP of the #beatingwomen posts. Basically I came here and posted just to see if i could and mk sent me an email explaining why he removed my post. I didn't cause a fuss because in the day or two that it took him to realize I was posting I actually lurked and realized this is a good site. I decided to call off my circle of friends and instituted a hands off trolling policy for hubski. Unless they want to get kicked out of my subreddits on reddit, they will leave hubski alone.to make a post about how it was handled at the time but he hasn't.
It depends. The tagging system might work out great. Say on Reddit there is r/programming and r/programminghumor (or r/programmerhumor), here you can just have a post tagged with #programming #humor or #funny and it would lead to the same thing. I am sure that as long the moderators do a good job at moderating and not feeding the trolls, there won't be much problem.
To expand on pigferret's response, moderating a subreddit is a notoriously time consuming and thankless job. As a result, very few subreddits are properly moderated. In short, if hubski grows large enough that moderating any discrete part of it take more than a few minutes per day, it is far from a given that moderators will do a good job.
You bring up a point - I can easily see people abusing the tagging system to just slap commonly followed tags on their stuff. #funny #humor #atheism #kittens #followthis #OHGODWHYWONTYOULOVEME
The author is only allowed to add one tag, the followers add the rest. See here. I'm not sure I agree with it, I think the author should be able to add at least 2 or 3 tags per post.