When I have thought about the notion of Forum moderation and karma/scoring from time to time, I always end up comparing it to Usenet Newsgroups -- an 'older' (Internet-wise) means of discussion 'forum'. Some observations:

• Very few moderated newsgroups exist, but because Usenet is not site-based, moderation has to be done in a manner that, by its very nature, prevents flame wars, off-topic posts, etc.


• The vast majority of newsgroups are unmoderated, so anything goes.


• Usenet provides no flame protection (with the exception of the aforementioned moderated newsgroups).


• Usenet has kooks, loons, trolls, etc., just like we have seen on this forum.


• Usenet does not insulate readers from 'homework' or 'gimme code' types.


• Usenet provides no means to attribute a score or karma to a post or a poster. Contributors develop a reputation as a natural consequence of what they post.

If this forum were to change the scoring/karma system, my input would be to attribute scores to threads/posts, not members.

Regarding off-topic threads/posts, I don't have a big problem with them as long as I can quickly identify them so that I can choose to not read them. To that end, how about?

• Any member scoring a thread's root post with OT, flags the thread as OT until a moderator overrides that designation.


• Any member scoring a subsequent post in the thread OT, flags that post as OT until a moderator overrides that designation.

I am not suggesting more moderation for that, just that a moderator can permanently override a member's OT score when necessary.


I'd say to moderate only as much as you want. If 'homework' slips in, so be it. Let flame wars flame on if you want -- they typically only hurt the flamers' reputations.