How about Lemmy having Junk and not-Junk buttons, like email clients have, which can be pressed to indicate spam posts. With a threshold of say five clicks by users on the Junk button it would automatically remove a post (or maybe “frozen” : still visible but greyed out and web links in post and comment made unusable, which might discourage spammers to spam on Lemmy instances). To avoid abuse (Like users creating more than one account to have posts deleted of users they have a personal problem with) this privilege would be given for example to long standing Lemmy users with a certain amount of comments and posts. By doing this the dependency on community mods and admins will be decreased and the empowerment of regular users increased while posted spam has a short life time.
What do you think ?
I’m kinda against super-downvotes, but you’ll be able to do this once we get reports implemented. To me, I’d much rather have a panel where mods and admins can see things with high downvote ratios, since its possibel some kind of action needs to be taken there.
I agree with your sentiment, but I think it is important to acknowledge that this isn’t so much a “super-downvote” but a vote in another dimension. Downvotes don’t differentiate between “non-interesting” and “malicious”.
That being said I think downvote ratio + poster history is probably enough to infer the difference between boring and spam so I don’t think the added complexity of a “Junk” button is worth it.
that this isn’t so much a “super-downvote” but a vote in another dimension. Downvotes don’t differentiate between “non-interesting” and “malicious”.
It works in theory but generally people don’t use these features as intended. Even downvotes which usually should mean “this is irrelevant to the discussion” most of the time are used as “I don’t agree with this”.
I still recommend the idea of voting, creating posts and creating communities being gatekept behind a small, certain amount of participation. Invisible sockpuppets are trying to manipulate posts here for a good while, and it has been long since I am recommending it to avoid the problems. Even reddit has this system in a limited manner.
I would prefer a button to send it to moderation and if moderation consider it, greyed it out or remove it.
I like that this avoids the sometimes-problematic wisdom of the crowds. But at the same time, this solution empowers ‘wise’ users only. And, perhaps more importantly, reduces the burden of work on mods. Moderating is work that we can all help reduce, I think.
sounds a good idea!
and confirmation at registration-time from an admin…
I think once we get bigger and report functionality gets added, it won’t be that much of a problem anymore. it’s important to note that any anti-spam method comes at the risk of frustrating users, discrimination and potential for abuse. we could enforce a certain account age or positive karma for posts, or we could introduce shadow bans, or we could make a button for trusted users to empower them, but that would be empowering them over normal users.
that being said, you’ve got an interesting idea. giving contributors more power to moderate the communities sounds good.
deleted by creator
I think those communities will either revived by someone else or will be ignored in favor of some other more active communities. once we get really big though, then just upvotes and downvotes would be enough to throw spams into the dark realm of the forgotten, never to be seen again.
I guess I must work on my chill out skills in my Zen Room ;)
yes, achieve tranquility, feel one with the universe xD
I think it is good! When a post gets a certain amount of flags by users with enough karma, it will be taken down.
Idk, report buttons might be abused and limiting report rights to established users might create incentives to spam even more. (eg when the heuristic involves amount of posts)
