One of the struggles I have found with having elevated moderator abilities in a small community moderated site is the risk of other members growing used to the fact that moderation is already "taken care of".

For example: on a low activity Stack Exchange site that doesn't have a huge amount of users with the ability to cast close votes, it's not uncommon for a moderator to have the time to read each question posted daily and decide whether or not it is within the scope. The frequent binding close vote of a moderator might mean that other users never get the chance to use their privileges and as a result become accustomed to the fact that there's little need for community moderation.

How can I balance my actions to encourage moderation by the community?


I'm elaborating on ChrisF's answer of building in moderation tools. This is important. But, that's not all there is to it. Every piece of forum software I've used has the ability for users to flag a post (usually for spam). Smaller sites, in general, don't use this feature that often.

Why? I suspect, it's because moderation is taken care of for users. What does it do for me to flag this post? Does it disappear immediately? Usually not. It still needs someone to come along and accept the flag.

Adding in another aspect to this self moderation is important. Gamification. If you do something that helps the site, the site administrators provide you with something in return: a shiny pixel; a slightly larger number; a way to show that you are winning the internet (or at least this small corner of it). The Discourse forum software does the same thing. You've helped this community grow? We will trust you just a little bit more by providing you with more benefits.

What do you do if you aren't on a platform that supports this kind of reward system? Make one, manually. Publicly acknowledge your users that are helping to moderate the community. Do you have 5 users that vigilantly flag every spam bot that posts on your PHPBB board? Thank them. Do you have a user that monitors your support subforum and diligently helps every poor soul that wanders in? Thank them too.

It's amazing what a little, intangible, reward can do. It helps people feel part of the community and it raises their reputation in the eyes of the community.

| improve this answer | |

Build in the moderation tools to the everyday use of the site.

You'll either need a reward system so that you can automatically detect those users that are participating well (like the reputation on Stack Exchange, but other systems are possible) or have a mechanism for manually allowing people more access to the administration side of the site.

By building up people's rights gradually you can hopefully ensure that people learn the ropes almost without being aware of it. Additionally make any actions that your users can perform non-destructive and undoable so that if there are mistakes made (which inevitably there will be) you can reverse them.

The users at each level of responsibility should be able to monitor each other and even those above and below them in the system. This will help engender a feeling of community ownership over the site moderation. Once you have this the users will moderate themselves to a large extent.

| improve this answer | |

Stress the fact that you can't (and won't) read every single word written on the site, and that good moderation starts from good flags from the users.

You need to build a culture of flagging where you usually won't find one. This is a few things Stack Exchange did to create one:

  • Make free-text flags a user's last resort. Itemize flag reasons. Give people a list of reasons why they would want to flag. Let them pick from this list, so that they can flag more efficiently. This also removes the blank page dread ("oh god what do I write now?") and social friction ("Hi I am sorry to interrupt but... Hope this helps! I appreciate what you're doing! Go team! --xXxsnip0rz2000xXx").
  • If a rank or group of users in your forums have the ability to fix some of those flag reasons (for example, they can pin things and one of the flag reasons is "please pin this"), allow them to handle these flags for you. This shares the burden and puts you closer to your fellow users.
  • Act quickly on reports. If you can set up notifications of some sort, that's awesome. Stack Exchange tells their moderators how long they take to handle a flag in average.
  • Thank people for their reports. Stack Exchange gives users the list of flags they've made and whether or not a moderator has acted on them.
  • Consider giving people a small cosmetic boost for good reports, like a badge.
  • Do not punish bad reporting unless it devolves into abuse and spam. You want to get more reports rather than fewer if that means missing trouble. If a user picks the "wrong" flag reason but you touch the post otherwise, the flag was still a useful one.

Another thing you can do is aggressively cut down on the "us oppressed users vs them nazi moderators" false dichotomy. If there were teams, they would be "us reasonable users vs them annoying pricks".

Here's a list of flag reasons that may come to mind in a forum:

  • Thread flag reasons:
    • This thread is important needs to be pinned
    • This thread is derailing and needs to be split here
    • This thread is degenerating and needs to be cleaned up
    • This thread is going nowhere and needs to be locked
  • Post flag reasons:
    • This post is offensive, spam or gibberish and needs to be removed
    • This post has a broken link and I have the right one
    • This post is breaking the forum and needs to be edited
  • User flag reasons:
    • This user's name, avatar or profile is inappropriate and needs to be changed
    • This user has two account and they need merging
    • This user is impersonating someone else and needs to be stopped
| improve this answer | |
  • Unfortunately many of those measures require forum software changes that moderators do not usually have the power to adopt. You can simulate them by encouraging people to use some sort of flag reason form, but that only risks making the process even more convoluted and dreadful. – badp Jul 29 '14 at 23:13

You could attempt to use minor rewards as an incentive. If you have a voting system in place, give them points per moderation. However, as with any crowd-based moderation, it would stand you in good stead to set the bar early on, cracking down on under-moderated or over-moderated posts. This ensures that people will not try and leech points or other incentives whilst doing minimal effort.

Also, give them reasons why they should improve moderation. Say it's for their own benefit and that they are helping others out in the process, not just themselves.

| improve this answer | |

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.