As a follow up to this post about livejournal's recent suspension of several hundred user accounts, in his latest update on the situation SixApart CEO Barak Berkowitz name checked metafilter citing us as a good example of community policing.
We know we can learn a lot from other communities that use a combination of reputation software and human judgment to gauge community opinion, and we are now actively exploring how we can let the community "vote" on what is acceptable content in order to create greater consistency.
i'm looking for articles/opinions summarising (self-)regulatory processes of community weblogs such as MeFi, as orientation for the latest bouts of antville soul-searching.
On metafilter, there is a bottom up approach to the policing of public space. Ie, citizens flag “bad” posts and then have meta discussions which really serve as trials by a peer group, if you will. The analogy breaks though because the jurors are not randomly selected and thus usually have a vested interest in the decision (which can lead to name calling, etc). Ultimately, these discussions are formed such that mathowie and jessamyn have moderating powers “in check” by the people. They can weigh in on the issues, make decisions, and face public scrutiny when a decision is made, especially if the decision is vastly unpopular. What are some of the other ways that you can think of to police public on-line spaces?
At what point does "Community Policing" become censorship? [More inside]