jiml (![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small} xuth) wrote,@ 2008-03-09 00:14:00 |
|
OkCupid entertainment
I recently discovered OkCupid's flagmod (or moderating images, profiles and messages that people have flagged as inappropriate). It is among the most entertaining things you can do on OkC in my opinion. Not only do you get to see the things that are against OkC's rules, but you also get to see all the things that narrow minded people think shouldn't be seen. You know, the interesting stuff. You do have to wade through a bunch of pictures of peoples pets and windows desktop images to find the interesting stuff but that's not so different from anything else on OkC.
The way it works is that anyone moderating can agree or disagree with the flagger (or respond "can't tell") as well as leave a comment that subsequent moderators can read. The comments are often better the content being moderated (though at times that's not saying much).
OkC doesn't give lots of details of the process but it looks like once there are sufficient votes as to have a sufficient statistical confidence one way or the other, OkC takes the action determined by the voters. Occasionally there will be something that goes to the point of needing 200+ votes. I would not be surprised if users didn't earn higher weighting based on the results of previous elections compared to their votes but I don't see any evidence of it.
I recently discovered OkCupid's flagmod (or moderating images, profiles and messages that people have flagged as inappropriate). It is among the most entertaining things you can do on OkC in my opinion. Not only do you get to see the things that are against OkC's rules, but you also get to see all the things that narrow minded people think shouldn't be seen. You know, the interesting stuff. You do have to wade through a bunch of pictures of peoples pets and windows desktop images to find the interesting stuff but that's not so different from anything else on OkC.
The way it works is that anyone moderating can agree or disagree with the flagger (or respond "can't tell") as well as leave a comment that subsequent moderators can read. The comments are often better the content being moderated (though at times that's not saying much).
OkC doesn't give lots of details of the process but it looks like once there are sufficient votes as to have a sufficient statistical confidence one way or the other, OkC takes the action determined by the voters. Occasionally there will be something that goes to the point of needing 200+ votes. I would not be surprised if users didn't earn higher weighting based on the results of previous elections compared to their votes but I don't see any evidence of it.
