Targeted, Democratic Content Moderation
In an earlier post I suggested a process intended to maintain journalistic standards in a globally accessible, user-maintained aggregated news site. Its key feature was a purgatory section where new articles would be rated by readers for quality, apparent credibility, and a few other traits before being published. If a report didn't get high enough numbers it would be deleted from the system or, in the case of a close call, maybe it would be reviewed by designated members of the relevant community.
That description probably sounds very similar to Digg's Upcoming section, but this post should help differentiate the two. I'll describe a quick twist that turns an open and fairly loose peer review scheme into a targeted one that (I think) stands a decent chance at providing accurate regional and topic specific news without losing article integrity.
more »
Creative Commons Attribution NC SA 3.0 License