You are here: Home » Subcultures » Human Moderation; Another Look

Human Moderation; Another Look

The other side of having articles vetted by human moderation.

Although I am pro human moderation before publication, there is a down side.  Especially when moderators are also contributors.

On Triond, our work is virtually NOT moderated.  There was an extremely glitchy piece of software that bounced any article which quoted authorities.  This was rather funny, especially when the software would find the exact place from which quoted, although you did publish that authority in your article.

On Wikinut nothing is published until it is vetted by a Moderator, whose name appears at the bottom of your article.  In this way you know who it was who gave or denied you that Star.

Star Pages on Wikinut are what ‘Hot content‘ is to Triond.  The difference is that Star Pages change every day where Hot Content festers, day after week after month after year.

The Moderators are the only arbiters of Star Pages.  So that guy who doesn’t like or like your topic or like your opinion withholds that Star.   So an article with perfect grammar, dealing with an incredibly interesting topic, with pictures, back links, bold; all the ‘ingredients’ to create a Star Page are nothing but a waste of your time.  For the Mod doesn’t like you, or your topic, or your opinion, so passes the article into oblivion.

On the other hand, as the Mods are also Contributors you’ll see crap upon crap filling the Star Pages.  Written by a Moderator who practices the one hand washes the other, it’s rare anything from the keyboard of a Mod doesn’t get a star.

So timed, that almost every day one will find at least two from this Mod, two from that Mod.  For they practice the ‘hand washing.’

Some of the stuff may be good, but most isn’t.  Readers ignore it, a few might read it and wax lyrical, especially those who expect that very Mod to read their work and give them a Star.

As we know, anything that can be corrupted, will be corrupted.

Liked it
User Comments
  1. Mark Gordon Brown

    On September 6, 2012 at 8:50 pm

    I hope you are not calling me corrupt.

    I do find some moderators go to quick sometimes, perhaps checking off the “Excellent” box rather than where it says “Good”, I am sure I have done this myself too, but never do I intentionally deny a star, nor intentionally give one that is not earned on merit.

    Some keys to getting a star on Wikinut are being original (not republished), using bold or italics, photos, links, good spelling/grammar – being factual, and good length. People do not have to meet all these criteria, but it helps.

    I do wish Triond would update their Hot Content Thing!

  2. Ruby Hawk

    On September 6, 2012 at 9:04 pm

    What I wish for is for Triond to get back on the good side of Google. Our views have fallen off drastically since we were given a low rating.

  3. A. Fool

    On September 7, 2012 at 8:56 am

    No Marc, you are fair. If you look at Star Pages Now you will note a particular Moderator is always there with what can only be called garbage. Literary garbage. Nothing anyone would want to read, nothing of any value. The kind of item that were an average user write would NOT get a star. However, being a Moderator another Moderator will always Star him.

    Many people have noticed that if they write about X on Wikinut they don’t get a Star. IF particular MODs rate their work.

    A number of people on Wikinut have said that if YOU read their work they are treated fairly. Other Mods are quite biased

  4. A. Fool

    On September 7, 2012 at 9:08 am

    Ruby…I warned, I did everything I could to alert Triond as to what would happen. And it’s happened. Where I could expect a few hundred hits a day I now am lucky to get 100. Many times I log on to see 5 or 19 is. The owners have killed this site.

Post Comment
Powered by Powered by Triond