the power of community
And about voting. Almost every community which allows public input needs some moderation technique. To use another of Clay Shirkey’s essays - a group is its worst enemy. (I read essays by other people too, I promise). There is a danger of groupthink by allowing regular users influence over new content but this is, in my view, the lesser of the many evils that result from unhindered posting.
Firstly though, it’s fairly crucial to figure out what is meant by a bad tag. Are bad tags negative and destructive? Are they overtly personal references? Are they irrelevances? Is it juvenile or adult humour gone horribly wrong? Are they mundane phrases which add nothing to the post and are incapable of standing on their own? All of the above? None? Hard to tell with any degree of objectivity, is it not?
This is why allowing many people to vote is a good thing, in my opinion. I recently asked a few people if they wanted a key for precisely this reason - to bring in a fairly diverse opinion to the tag voting stakes.
Will this result in a voting war, as JJ seems to think? I don’t think that the distinction between good taggers and bad taggers is clearly demarcated at all. One man’s comedy is another man’s insult; everyone except the guy who slipped on a banana skin usually points and laughs… Everyone, in short, has their personal little buttons pushed by some post/tag or the other. I’ve made mention in a personal email about a few tags/topics which push my personal buttons. Right now, as overlord (uh.. loverlord says one unfortunate typo) I decide. I may even be making the right choice but that kind of unilateral editorial decision in a so-called social site makes me feel profoundly uncomfortable. No, I’m not making a stupidly grandiose statement like Achcharu being for the people and of the people; but I’d still prefer that my all-too-obvious personal editorial biases are diluted by saner, more reasoned taggers. That would be pretty much every person who has an access key right now. That’s where voting comes in.
There is another, more subtle reasoning behind allowing more people to vote. This is one of my guiding principles in lots of different activites. If you don’t have a fix, don’t bitch in public about something. If you’re given a means of fixing something and you don’t use it; you just lost your right to be taken seriously. If someone finds certain tags objectionable and does not vote; umm.. guess what? I just stopped caring. If someone finds something as trivial as the colour scheme not to their liking? Send in your own or don’t expect me to read your mind.
People who know me probably realize laziness is very much one of my guiding principles. Voting is, indirectly, a way to cut down on the people bitching about the so-called bad tags. Don’t bother complaining, just take it to the polls, people! *grin*. To paraphrase a tag itself, vote for them all and let the automatic moderation decide.
On 19-Mar-07 at 6:50 pm,
Tz. wrote:
You know, I had no idea “zombie fiction” was so influential.
On 19-Mar-07 at 8:54 pm,
Curious Yellow wrote:
I can’t see the tag!
Where is it?
I must see it.
It pleases me.
On 20-Mar-07 at 5:49 am,
N wrote:
hmm…as a break from school you built Ach…kkkk…personally prefer getting blindingly drunk (but then you’ll make millions in the software industry one day while I’ll get hit by a bus jaywalking)…I’m with yellow, wanna see this zombie tag…please oh please overlord!
On 20-Mar-07 at 10:28 am,
Darwin wrote:
Loverlord, I like that one! It can’t possibly get any cheesier:D
I still don’t see you on Ach though…
On 20-Mar-07 at 10:49 am,
drac wrote:
Tz: you have no idea. It was inspired.
CY/N: It’s in the archives of Ach1. I never bothered to import the old tags back in because the server structure for storing tags and posts is completely different. Couldn’t be bothered writing a convertor, really.
Besides, the post that it was tagged against no longer exists. Let’s just say that it was easter related and leave it there.
Also, getting blindingly drunk seems to lose its allure after a while. Believe me, I’ve been there. It gets boring. Still doesn’t stop me getting sloshed on occasion, but err..
Darwin: I suppose it’s completely wrong that I feel the need to break into Shaggy’s Mr Boombastic lyrics when I hear it. Yeah, forget I said that.
Gah. All these demands
When the number of serious voting bugs die down to single digits… I’ll contemplate it. Need to do a few tweaks to the voting algorithm today anyway.
On 24-Mar-07 at 5:33 pm,
G wrote:
Hello drackety
Apologies for derailing the thread a bit but I tried mailing to both your fierydragon addresses for an access key and have received no reply yet. Have I been restricted in some way? :p
On 25-Mar-07 at 1:10 pm,
drac wrote:
G: check your mail
On 26-Mar-07 at 10:22 am,
G wrote:
And now your turn.
Let me know if nothing’s come through again.
On 30-Mar-08 at 1:29 am,
Java Jones wrote:
My view is that tags should reflect, in some way, the post in question and not be a means of irrelevant personal attacks – as many on ach are. There’s also some of the ‘rules’ that are being, what appears to be, selectively applied. Some tags that exceed 8 words are allowed, whilst others are not. If there’s a group that gangs up on bloggers, it seems to be counter-productive to the ‘noble’ intentions of the site.
On 31-Mar-08 at 9:51 am,
drac wrote:
Java Jones: I do not have regular internet access at the moment, so I’m just vaguely aware of the apparent controversy that appears to have sprung up, but let me respond as best as I am able. Please do bear in mind that I have not had either the time nor the internet access to read all the content that has been generated by this latest saga.
a) Your view is laudable, but I’d challenge you to figure out a way to determine relevance to the post sans subjectivity and without babysitting the site 24/7 (hint: I certainly do not have the time, nor can I in good conscience ask the other volunteer administrators to do so). What you see on Ach represents a good-faith, best-effort at moderation, given that all of the people thus far involved have their own lives outside the internet. I encourage anyone to complain about specific tags which offend them (this has always been the case) at which point I can make a decision about what (if anything) needs to be done. I always read email, even if a response is a few days late (as it will be these days).
There also exists a mechanism for removing tags which are objectionable without any moderator intervention. This is completely in the hands of the individual users of the site, provided enough people agree. This mechanism has been very infrequently invoked - draw your own conclusions as to why this may be the case.
b) You are entirely mistaken that 8 word or longer tags are completely disallowed. This has never been the case. There is indeed a warning printed out and users are given the opportunity to fix lengthy tags. The issuance of a warning also allows me to maintain an automated record of which users are consistently writing essay-length tags, at which point a quiet email usually suffices to restore order.
On the other hand, I have no hesitation in enforcing the rule about not having blogger names and nicks in tags. If there is any “selective” application of that particular rule, I fear it has erred significantly in your favour to the cost of bloggers that you have called out in apparent ignorance. You may recall the email where I recounted your numerous infractions. Consider that there are others on the site with similar difficulty in absorbing rules and etiquette surrounding tagging, who deserve as much leniency as you got over an extended period of time.
c) Are there noble intentions for this site? Achcharu is a personal feedreader project, as I repeatedly mention. I work on the site and provide resources because it works for me, and as long as it continues to do so - then my primary objective has been accomplished. Clearly, it doesn’t work for some people and that’s ok by my book.
If you have any specific ideas about how to enforce better conduct (in your opinion) on tagging in a non-labour intensive way, I’d certainly like to hear from you - or anyone else. As sensitive as I am to criticism, non-specific exhortation to improve the conduct of taggers, change the government or facilitate world peace only deserves the indifference that has thus far been my reaction to this whole affair.
On 01-Apr-08 at 8:26 pm,
sez wrote:
I admit. I tag bad. but it’s so much fun !!