After weeks of hard work, I would like to introduce you to version 1.0 of the "OSNews Style Guide: Rules and Guidelines for Publishing and Participating on OSNews" [.pdf]. Read on for some small notes on what this actually means.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-08
I agree, but perhaps there is something to gain from the system checking who is modding whom. For example, there have been occasions where I replied to a comment in disagreement, this was interpreted (presumably by the person to whom I replied) as a personal attack, and the post was modded down. I don't have a problem with this. But then this person (presumably) went through the rest of the comment section and modded down my other posts, even though they didn't have anything to do with him, and they had been modded up by other readers.
Some suggestions for reasonably simple to implement moderation rules, to be applied on a per-story basis:
1) You may not mod the comments of a user who replied to you
2) You may not mod a comment to which you replied
3) You may not reply to a comment which you modded
Rule 1 directly addresses the situation described above. It eliminates the ability to retaliate against a known user via anonymous modding.
Rules 2 and 3 have to go together, since the lack of one provides a loophole for the other. The idea comes from Slashdot. Basically there are two ways to respond to a comment, either by replying or by modding, but not both.
I think that these rules, especially Rule 1, will significantly decrease the abuse of the mod system.
Member since:
2005-06-29
Seeing who modded what is utterly pointless and will only create a whole slur of posts about "why did you mod me?" and more of that nonsense. There is absolutelty NOTHING to gain from seeing who modded who.