[Feedback Thread] Moderator/Admin Official Comments and Downvote Immunity

@Log: I just skimmed the topic but from what I can...

2016-12-29T04:44:08-05:00

I just skimmed the topic but from what I can tell this has veered off it's original intent and the problem presented was already fixed. If you wish to discuss the comment system as a whole or specific facets such as are people actually voting please make a thread to address specifically that.

@user_460797: > Type-kun said: > > What? Where did I? I...

2016-12-29T02:40:35-05:00

Type-kun said:

What? Where did I? I mentioned a discussion about showing comment scores, and I linked issue #1702. I don't remember mentioning anything else.

Then it is ok. I only want to know if that was also discussed somehow. And by topic I meant "comments".

@Type-kun: > Provence said: > > You talked about a...

2016-12-29T02:38:21-05:00

Provence said:

You talked about a discussion regarding this topic. Where can this be found?

What? Where did I? I mentioned a discussion about showing comment scores, and I linked issue #1702. I don't remember mentioning anything else.

@user_460797: > Type-kun said: > > Erm... I don't quite...

2016-12-29T02:33:34-05:00

Type-kun said:

Erm... I don't quite understand what you're asking for, can you elaborate?

You talked about a discussion regarding this topic. Where can this be found?

@Type-kun: > Provence said: > > But it seems that...

2016-12-29T02:32:45-05:00

Provence said:

But it seems that @Type-kun mentioned multiple times a former discussion. Might you want to link us to that, so we can read the reasoning^^?

Erm... I don't quite understand what you're asking for, can you elaborate?

@Jarlath: Anyone else having issues with the bookmarklet...

2016-12-28T23:59:21-05:00

Anyone else having issues with the bookmarklet not showing images from Twitter again?

Edit: whoops, this belongs in the issues thread.

@user_460797: > BrokenEagle98 said: > > Okay... well, the...

2016-12-28T23:27:35-05:00

BrokenEagle98 said:

Okay... well, the order for comment votes cannot be determined since the comment entities cannot be accessed, to include the "created at" timestamp. The number of upvotes and downvotes are also not tracked separately, unlike the post score.

So...what does that mean? Impossible to count?
If yes, then I'd still say that one should make this possible (but other than this, I can't really imagine a need for that) or one should still lower the default threshold to -2.

But it seems that @Type-kun mentioned multiple times a former discussion. Might you want to link us to that, so we can read the reasoning^^?

@BrokenEagle98: > Provence said: > > 1. Count all comments (in...

2016-12-28T23:24:31-05:00

Provence said:

1. Count all comments (in maybe one month)
2. That what you suggested with the per cents.

Like I said: If necessary. And maybe, if possible something that counts this:
Comment A has been downvoted to -1 but was later upvoted to 0.
-> Neutralization of the downvote
That would mean that it counts how many posts were downvoted, but were upvoted again so that its score is now zero. If there will be a big number, than one could assume how necessary it is to lower the threshold, because the downvote gets neutralized afterwards. Off course the comment will be hidden for some time, but not for so long that the downvote destroys anything.

Okay... well, the order for comment votes cannot be determined since the comment entities cannot be accessed, to include the "created at" timestamp.

Also, the number of upvotes and downvotes are also not tracked separately, unlike the post score.

Therefore, the only source of data available is the current comment score... :(

@user_460797: 1. Count all comments (in maybe one month) 2....

2016-12-28T23:04:11-05:00

1. Count all comments (in maybe one month)
2. That what you suggested with the per cents.

Like I said: If necessary. And maybe, if possible something that counts this:
Comment A has been downvoted to -1 but was later upvoted to 0.
-> Neutralization of the downvote
That would mean that it counts how many posts were downvoted, but were upvoted again so that its score is now zero. If there will be a big number, than one could assume how necessary it is to lower the threshold, because the downvote gets neutralized afterwards. Off course the comment will be hidden for some time, but not for so long that the downvote destroys anything.

@BrokenEagle98: Are you asking for something like a breakdown...

2016-12-28T22:58:16-05:00

Are you asking for something like a breakdown of all comments sorted by scores and percentages...

E.g...

Score: 0, 45% of all comments
Score: 1, 5% of all comments
Score: -1, 4.3% of all comments

...and so on, and so forth?

@user_460797: Well, according to what I see: Not many voters...

2016-12-28T22:51:43-05:00

Well, according to what I see: Not many voters are here.
And I'm more talking about discussions about flagged posts and take it as an example. It is really easy to gain a -1 in these discussions and that is kinda meh if then a whole site of the discussion is missing and you have to reveal them first.
But ok, that is only what I#ve observed, but maybe @BrokenEagle98 can create a report that gives facts about how many scores were given to comments if necessary.

@fossilnix: How many people actually vote on comments?...

2016-12-28T22:45:28-05:00

How many people actually vote on comments? (Since the scores are only visible with userscripts, I honestly have no idea.) We should take those numbers into consideration before changing the threshold, so it's not moved too far. I agree that it ought to take at least 2 downvotes, but it shouldn't be too hard to hide shitposts and fanboy drooling.

(EDIT: Before someone complains, I want to specify that by "fanboy drooling" I don't mean excited posts about new content, I mean "OMG so sexy I would do this and that to her fat ass")

I might be wrong about this, but it seems to me that a lot of the comments that break the rules are handled with downvotes, not moderator tools. (In fact I'm probably wrong about this, since my only evidence is clicking "show all comments" and seeing a bunch of rule-breaking comments that were allowed to stay because they were hidden. But in lieu of more evidence, I'll continue.) Since there's (thankfully) no "karma" or "combined comment score," it seems like the only point of comment voting is to allow the community to self-police the comments section. Lowering the threshold too far will diminish our ability to do that.

One downvote is too few, but 5 might be too many, depending on how active voters are.

(Is it derailing this thread to be talking about normal-user comments?)

@user_460797: If one downvote is enough, then I don't know...

2016-12-28T20:07:38-05:00

If one downvote is enough, then I don't know how good this is. It is not like these comments are awful or so. Maybe you just stumble across one person who doesn't agree with that and boom, hidden. Set it to 2, so that 2 people have to downvote (or there are multiple sockpuppet accounts). Anyway, it seems safer for normas conversations, even if mods have now the power to make some commentaries sticky.

@BrokenEagle98: > evazion said: > > Hiding the comment when...

2016-12-28T19:57:35-05:00

evazion said:

Hiding the comment when it's downvoted isn't intentional, in fact I don't really like that behavior normally. Any opinions on this? I think downvoting should just dim the comment if it puts it below your threshold.

Dim the comments until page refresh, which would then I assume hide it...?

I could go for that. Especially since that's how below threshold comments look when displayed without cursor hover...

While we're at it, there's been some talk in topic #9127/p147 of lowering the default comment threshold to something like -5. I'm not really for it (since I'd probably just set mine back to 0 anyways), but what do others think about that...?

@evazion: This feature is now live. > BrokenEagle98...

2016-12-28T19:34:25-05:00

This feature is now live.

BrokenEagle98 said:

On Devbooru, I did notice that when "downvoting" sticky comments still lowers the score of the comment, which I guess was intentional. It also hides that particular comment until the page is refreshed, which probably wasn't intentional but an artifact of the Javascript...?

Allowing downvotes is intentional because stickied comments are always shown regardless of score, so downvotes don't really matter. This way the comment is visible, but it's still possible to tell if people are downvoting it (I'm curious to see if downvoting mod comments is indeed a regular occurrence).

Hiding the comment when it's downvoted isn't intentional, in fact I don't really like that behavior normally. Any opinions on this? I think downvoting should just dim the comment if it puts it below your threshold.

@BrokenEagle98: +1, I like the idea of Mods being able to...

2016-12-27T09:07:22-05:00

+1, I like the idea of Mods being able to "sticky" anyone's comments. Thanks for the extra HTML markup BTW, as the default shading on my crappy monitor doesn't show up very well so I'll probably end up changing it.

On Devbooru, I did notice that when "downvoting" sticky comments still lowers the score of the comment, which I guess was intentional. It also hides that particular comment until the page is refreshed, which probably wasn't intentional but an artifact of the Javascript...?

Overall, I'm of the thought to let the current changes as proposed by Evazion go through and just try them out for a while... if things need to be changed at some point, then another issue can just be created.

@Mikaeri: Wow that's nice. Great job on that, evazion....

2016-12-27T02:31:43-05:00

Wow that's nice. Great job on that, evazion. I'm +1 on having that go live.

And I'm going to have to really agree with Sacriven and the other mods on this one. It isn't a mod's job to be 100% official all the time. Not every comment should be a "moderator" comment -- Reddit and other sites don't do it that way either.

Provence said:

Well, I'm just used different to moderation then. When it works, then it is ok (it probably won't, since if that is the intention, then there will be probably some mods who would make it always "official".
To me, it doesn't make much sense, though. If a moderator says something, then it should be cleared up as soon as possible and not another mod should step in if there is already said something. I still don't like this, but it is better than a complete no.

It should make complete sense. Mods can masquerade as regular users too. On default, you can't see colored names that indicate the role they have. And IMHO its better to leave it that way (even if it can be turned on in the settings). Everyone makes dumb comments, but Sacriven is right in that if a mod+ makes a bad comment then that's held up to a higher degree and divides users, because users will likely think that mods can say any dumb crap that they want whereas they can't. It's hypocrisy. If a comment needs to be made official because of such and such arguing/controversy/personal attacks then let it be so. But I'd say more than 90% of the time if you're commenting often because you like discussion, you're not going to be running very often into things where you absolutely HAVE to have a comment be seen.

EDIT: One thing to add, also, is that the way we have it now, downvote-immune comments are intensely reflective of how other normal users perceive the site compared to the higher ups. I've seen one comment go as far to say it's a shame that the mods are as I quote, "SJW's".

So yeah, mods can be wrong too. No one's ever going to 100% agree with you.

@evazion: Umm, so I went ahead and implemented this, but...

2016-12-27T02:12:15-05:00

Umm, so I went ahead and implemented this, but I didn't see this thread until after.

Basically, I added a 'post as moderator' checkbox, defaulting to off, but you (or any mod) can edit the comment later to turn it on. It's not on Danbooru yet, but it is at http://devbooru.evazion.ml:3000/comments if you want to see what I'm talking about. Quoting myself from issue #2799:

Adds a 'post as moderator' option to the comment form. This creates a so-called sticky comment.

Stickied comments may be downvoted, but they are never hidden (they're always visible, regardless of score).

Stickied comments have a slight background highlight.

Only mods may sticky comments.

Mods may sticky comments left by other mods (or even by regular users).

Admin comments may now be downvoted.

Stickied comments are always visible and are highlighted. They can still be downvoted, but it has no effect.

I did it this way so that mods can sticky existing comments that may have already been downvoted. Mods can also sticky other people's comments. This is mainly intended so that mods can sticky existing warnings given by other mods, but it's also allowed to sticky regular users' comments, in case that's useful.

@user_460797: Well, I'm just used different to moderation...

2016-12-26T23:05:37-05:00

Well, I'm just used different to moderation then. When it works, then it is ok (it probably won't, since if that is the intention, then there will be probably some mods who would make it always "official".
To me, it doesn't make much sense, though. If a moderator says something, then it should be cleared up as soon as possible and not another mod should step in if there is already said something. I still don't like this, but it is better than a complete no.

@OOZ662: I don't see a situation where a mod somehow...

2016-12-26T22:44:59-05:00

I don't see a situation where a mod somehow forgetting to mark their important comment as immune (which should be rare as a comment serious enough to deserve immunity should be carefully constructed and deployed) would cause some sort of massive crippling problem. At worst the situation would continue a little longer until either the first or another mod came along and edited or replaced the comment.