Two weeks ago, I posted an idea about how we might introduce custom sorting of comments.
The general idea was that users could anonymously and individually rate other users as 'poor' 'neutral' or 'good' in regards to their comments. As a result the ratings would customize the comment sort for a user based on his/her ratings.
After some more discussion, it became clear that the most useful signal for influencing the comment sort was if a user's comments were considered to be 'poor'; It is much easier to draw a distinction between a 'neutral' or 'poor' commenter than it is between a 'neutral' and 'good' commenter', as a result, the signal is more reliable.
The point was also raised that rating users could become taxing, and this could make the effect less useful.
For these reason's our thinking on the issue has evolved, and so has the possible implementation.
Here is the current scheme:
In addition to being able to 'ignore' or 'mute' a user, you can 'hush' them. 'Hushing' a user increases the rate at which that user's comments fall to the bottom of a thread. Thus, all things being equal (time and votes), comments from users that you have hushed will be found at the bottom of comment threads.
Hushing a user will only effect your comment sort, not the sort for other users.
It is possible that the amount that a particular user is hushed could serve as a signal for some sort of global bias. However, generally speaking, that is not an approach that we prefer to take. Instead of applying community signals to top-down moderation, we prefer to allow individual moderation to lead to global effects. For example, if many users ignore a specific user, that user's posts are less likely to be shared and seen by the rest of the community without need for top-down moderation. Hushing keeps with this approach. If a significant number of users hush a specific user, that user's comments are less likely to be voted-up, or responded to, as a result, the effect of hushing can alter the comment sort across the entire community.
Another reason why this implementation seems preferable to the one originally suggested, is that it is functionally similar to 'ignore' and 'mute', and would be both easier to implement and to explain.
Your thoughts are much appreciated.
I think hushing is a good way to make someone go away in your comments. Some thoughts: 1. Is it possible to put this under ignore (or mute)? I don't use them so I don't know their full capabilities and functions but it seems logical that if I want someone out of my feed, I'd rather have their comments at the bottom as well. And it means that you don't have three ways of making a user go away. Either put it under one of the existing ones or make it automatic in some way. I don't think people want a third thing to keep track of. 2. It needs to be easy to un-hush someone. People change, both behaviour and opinions. Maybe you encounter an annoying newb and hush him. Haven't we all had an annoying newbie stage in our online ventures at one point? What if that newb becomes a great contributor later on? He's still hushed. Either have a way to easily see that a comment is being hushed, or add a link to unhush them to that comment next to the link and save buttons. 3. With three ways to negatively impact a user's visibility, I think it would be nice to have positive impacts. I was thinking about a 'relation number', a factor to indicate how much you vote on someone. That the more you vote on someone, the higher their comments and posts will appear. Not by a large amount, but enough to nudge it one or two places up. Badges have a greater impact. And to prevent echo-chambers, this number could degrade by a set percentage per week. This will also make sure that you only see a person higher if you still find their posts insightful. 4. What is the main goal of the improved comment sorting? It might be a good idea to get that clear. To prevent lowest-common-denominator, to make larger discussions still valuable, to give the user more customization? You mentioned them all in your previous post but I don't think they are all complementary. And the extent of this new sorting method is also unclear: do you want to simply nudge comments up or down a bit, or make comments rely heavily on the interaction between the user, or something in between?
Thanks. Ignoring hides a user's posts. Muting them prevents them from commenting on yours. Currently, both do drop the user's comments to the bottom, like hush. If we implement Hush, we will actually be separating the functionality. The reason being, that each function serves a purpose, and the purposes often don't overlap. I would hush users that I would not want to ignore. I do ignore users I do not want to mute. Automating is very difficult, because you will always create an artificial bias based on your assumptions and limited knowledge. I'd like to start with it being the same as ignore/mute. Highlighting their status might work against the functionality. It's fairly quick to toggle, just click on their name, and then click the toggle button. I'd argue that most of the site does just that. You follow people, share their posts, vote them up, and badge them. There is currently a setting called 'share-counts'. If you toggle it on, you can see how many times you have shared a user's posts by hovering over their name. (BTW I recently added a link with explanations for the settings) But even there, I think we would be assuming too much if we used this as a signal to sort comments. A very good new commenter would be biased to sort beneath an average one that you had shared some posts of. IMO the need for the bias to degrade indicates that it has fundamental issues that need to be mitigated. I see two primary goals: 1) to add a user-specific customization to comments that is similar to those applied to the feed that results in a better experience for that user, 2) to enable an individual moderation effect that leads to a higher quality site overall. Hush would only nudge down the ones that were selected as poor, and only for that user. Voting and discussion will remain the way to nudge up the good ones, and that will remain shared. As with the rest of the site, positive signals are public and generally have community effects, negative signals are private and generally have individualized effects.1. Is it possible to put this under ignore (or mute)?
2. It needs to be easy to un-hush someone.
3. With three ways to negatively impact a user's visibility, I think it would be nice to have positive impacts. I was thinking about a 'relation number', a factor to indicate how much you vote on someone.
4. What is the main goal of the improved comment sorting?
do you want to simply nudge comments up or down a bit, or make comments rely heavily on the interaction between the user, or something in between?
While I fully agree with the drive to add more user-specific customization to comments, I'm not convinced stripping the hush from the ignore and mute is going to work. Preferably, if you want to get rid of someone, there should be two options: the Get Out of the Way option and the Get Out of my Sight option. Which is kinda what we have now, I think: it's quite difficult to guess the exact workings of the three functionalities. But one option would be to reduce a user's visibility, the other to remove it. I see no reason to have a third option. It is difficult, but if you have to do everything yourself it soon becomes something that requires upkeep. I don't want to have the RES-effect, that if I don't keep up, my comment section will be horrible. Maybe it is possible to have some automated comment sorting based on previous interactions, and give the user the ability to nudge it back down or further up. It's a ranking after all, and in the end it's just a numbers game. Difficult, but not impossible. Maybe just greying out the comment? I don't know, I'd just like some visual feedback that a comment is being moved because of my actions. Also, if we ever get to name a sleeping pill / liquor, it shall be named hushski.Automating is very difficult, because you will always create an artificial bias based on your assumptions and limited knowledge.
Highlighting their status might work against the functionality.
Ideally, it would be great if the option to filter your feed mapped well on to comment curation. But, I don't think that is the case. Ignore actually exists primarily because people can follow tags. If you only follow people, it's fairly easy to limit your exposure to a user by who you follow. However, if you follow a tag, ignore is the only way to avoid a specific user that posts with that tag. Mute is designed primarily so that users can protect their own posts against abusive comments. Biasing the comment sort is fairly distinct from these functions. There may be some overlap with these functions and Hush, however, although ignore and mute currently bias the comment sort, I have never used them for that effect, since their primary effect is much more consequential. At any rate, it will be an experiment. We can run it for a while, and see how people feel about it, and how it might be changed or improved.