Self-Moderated Thread

[CakeSG]

We should have self-moderated threads for premium/supreme members. Because sometimes people start trashing/flaming on a thread and no staff is there, you can easily delete it.
Self-Moderated threads would only let the maker of the thread to delete comments
Staff still get all their perms and staff comments can't be deleted

 

[CakeSG]

Ahh, you just made my point. What if the OP abuses the system. Any premium can make a thread that can abuse easily by removing random comments and feels like overpower.

Ok? Thats not abuse

 

[SoldierAlex]

Give them power on THEIR threads. It cant really be abused

That's where you are wrong. It's the easiest thing to abuse. There is a reason why it's only for moderators. I would see a lot more harm being done than any good.

This is is similar to why Ajdin made himself the only one with access to the ACP of the site. You want to minimize the amount of people you trust with great power.

Also, earlier there were some points made about people being able to remove sales trashing. I believe this is not a valid reason to give this feature to premiums. Sales trashing does not happen regularly, in fact, if we asked Doge or any other moderators I'm pretty sure the amount of warnings given out for it is very low compared to other things.

This is a feature that many people would abused and one that I'm against.

 

[Jack]

We should have self-moderated threads for premium/supreme members. Because sometimes people start trashing/flaming on a thread and no staff is there, you can easily delete it.
Self-Moderated threads would only let the maker of the thread to delete comments
Staff still get all their perms and staff comments can't be deleted

People complained about staff censoring threads. I don't see how letting the OP censor negative feedback and constructive criticism on their thread is any different.

 

[Dannyj]

This will get heavily abused and I know that for a fact. People frequently report posts on their threads that are negative reviews and want us to remove them.

If it's actual unfounded sales trashing, then yes we'll remove it. If it's a legitimate review with reasons stated and screenshots in an informative way, then it stays.

So if there is an issue, report it and we'll deal with it. We have mods for a reason.

I agree with doge and so need to disagree with this post.

 

[Ivain]

Let's sketch a little scenario.

Person A makes a thread to sell a build.
Person B recognizes said build, looks up the download link and posts that in the thread.
In the current situation, Person A can't do shit about it, so if they were intentionally trying to sell a downloaded build, they're in trouble.
If they're innocent because they bought that build from someone, they can state as much in the thread, and probably won't get banned for it.

With your suggestion implemented, it would go as follows.
Person A makes thread, Person B posts link, Person A removes post by person B. Person B is limited to reporting the thread and/or making a ticket, which can take a lot more time, depending. In that time, person A can already have sold the build.

New scenario to portray the reason you made this thread.

Person A makes built thread.
Person B sees them as competition and acts like an ass, lowballing and criticizing them.
Person A counters that once, with a single comment, and reports them for thread trashing. This may take a few days max, but if person A reacts professionally it's likely at least some of us will take their side. Before the thread is even removed, we see how Person A deals with shitheads like Person B, and depending on that we might come to respect them more.


With the suggestion implemented, of course the comment gets removed by Person A, as is your goal.
The result is that person B may be tempted to start shit elsewhere, or at least state "person A removed my devouch" and shit like that. Heck, unless person A has the presence of mind to screenshot the comment, Person B can claim it said whatever, and only staffmembers with access to removed posts can prove them wrong.

It will NOT stop the trash, simply displacing it to threads made by others.

Final scenario.
Person A provides a service. Person B hires that service, but is not happy with it.
Person B leaves a devouch, complete with details and reasoning.
Person A disagrees (most of us will, with devouches, unless we're willing to admit we fucked up).

In our current situation, Person A counters the devouch with an explanation. If it's a false devouch (because they never dealt with person B?) they can say so and report the post. little damage to their reputation, right?

With your suggestion implemented, Person A removes the devouch. Ignoring possible reactions from person B, this means our information on Person A is extremely limited and basically censored. For all we know, they have a dozen devouches, none of which we know about (again, this is ignoring any measures person B may take to counter the removal of their devouch).


TLDR: This suggestion does more damage than it does good. If implemented, it will remove some inconvenience for thread owners, but it will endanger those making use of their service, since negative feedback from others gets censored.