Should Forum Members Be Allowed to Moderate Their Own Threads?

[Cedric]

We all know that moderation is essential to maintain a healthy and constructive discussion environment on a forum. However, I've been wondering: What if we allowed the original poster (OP) to have some degree of control over their own threads? I believe that was an option on SMF but I'm not completely sure.

Here's the idea: Should we consider letting the OP moderate their own thread to some extent? Of course, there would be certain guidelines and limitations in place to prevent abuse, but could this approach promote more responsible and community-driven discussions?

Here are a few points to consider:

1. Ownership and Responsibility: Allowing the OP to have a say in moderation could make them more invested in their thread's quality. They could help keep discussions on-topic, prevent spam, and encourage positive interactions.
2. Reducing Moderator Burden: Our dedicated moderators do an excellent job, but with more user participation in thread moderation, they might have more time to focus on overall forum issues and less on individual threads.
3. Moderation Guidelines: We would need to establish clear guidelines and limitations for OP moderation, ensuring that it aligns with the forum's rules and values.
4. Community Input: Should the community have a say in the extent of OP moderation? What mechanisms could be put in place to ensure fairness and transparency?

So, what are your thoughts on this? Do you think allowing OPs to moderate their own threads could be a step towards a more user-centric and community-driven forum environment, or would it create more problems than solutions?

 

[Ravenfreak]

I think it's fine to allow members to moderate their own threads. This allows them to lock or delete the thread if they no longer want people to post in their threads, without having to wait for a staff member to close the thread.

 

[Empire]

Yes and No, they can remove all posts under their topic that might be legit or not, if it's a positive answer with a bad review then they might remove that bad review even if it's not negative.

I might say, ((Hi your theme is rubbish, consider getting a dark theme))

That topic owner would remove that post right away

Then again mods and admin would still see the post as it would be hidden if they did remove it.

So you going to get bad and the good, depends who owns that topic, then again I would have rules in place for those people

 

[Sinistra]

I think with a great post count comes great responsibilities. lol Each user group on my community gets a new moderation ability to use so say you hit 50 posts you can delete your own posts. but only if someone else hasn't posted after. 150 ability to close own topics. 300 delete own topics. so on and so forth. If they put in the effort to be a part of the community I feel they should have a say in what is in their topics and on their profile status updates.

 

[Cedric]

I think with a great post count comes great responsibilities. lol Each user group on my community gets a new moderation ability to use so say you hit 50 posts you can delete your own posts. but only if someone else hasn't posted after. 150 ability to close own topics. 300 delete own topics. so on and so forth. If they put in the effort to be a part of the community I feel they should have a say in what is in their topics and on their profile status updates.

Interesting that you do it this way. But I can see the beauty of it. The more involved you are, the more liberty you're given.

 

[Darth Cognus]

Bad eggs ruin the bunch on this one, if there's something to moderate it should be up to people who have been recruited with that in mind to see it done, consistently. I'd be aghast seeing certain people moderate their own threads. In a discussion you may have gotten it started but the point is for the thread to become more than its founder, generally. Actually if I were a staff moderator and posted a thread I would prefer another moderator to make the call than me if feasible. This differs from cases where someone marks a solution, deletes their own post, updates the OP and what have you.

To put it another way if everyone is to be trusted to moderate their own thread then you don't need moderators in the first place really, and this breaks down outside of a utopian or quite small group. If certain people are to be trusted with it (ie earn by activity) I'd be inclined to offer them a position, not automatically give them the power to dictate to fellow members even if they spawned a thread. Ability to drop a high volume of posts in no way qualifies someone to make judgement calls.

Certain areas are designed differently of course, especially content oriented ones - a blog thread, 'here are my screenshots', a personal guide what have you. Even certain threads on this forum, but not necessarily one like this where you spark the conversation but members enter with a relevant, but new track of thought. The merits change depending how the overall forum works and what the software allows. In these cases it compares to having local mods of a forum who kind of run themselves.

If someone really wanted to do this though, the ability to see posts were deleted and why would be critical. There would need to be moderators able to override bad calls and... some care is required for the jerk who decides to make threads specifically to play god. What was once a set of rules only appointed people need to follow, staff/moderation conduct, is now something that every member must consider because now they all have the responsibility. Different approaches in a community at scale make it the morning noon and evening show of your f, q & s forum.

Basically this is a way of doing things with its own suite of problems, perhaps equal or even greater, and unless I was a masochist running a social experiment I would not want to be the one to try it with a remotely flammable community that actually needs the moderation.