April 20th, 2019 08:44

Moderation tools

Ana Gelez
Ana Gelez Public Seen by 33

Currently, Plume has extremely basic moderation tools. The only actions you can take is to ban someone (which just delete their account and content), or to block an instance (which prevent any activity from this instance to be actually saved).

So, I would like to open a discussion about what tools are needed, and what kind of situations we need to handle. I propose you to just post what tools you want (and why if it is not obvious).

Here is what I propose:

Difference between admin and moderator (#582)

Currently, we only have an admin role, that can edit the instance settings and do moderation.

Moderation notes (#583)

Admins/mods should be able to take notes about a specific user, that are visible to all other admins/mods.

Being able to see users email (as admin/mod) (#584)

To have a way to contact them about an issue if needed. Another solution would be to implement direct messages in Plume, but I think it's too much work while email can handle this job quite well.

Being able to block someone (as an user) (#585)

Eventually with a note to remember why they were blocked. I think we need to discuss the exact behavior of blocks: for instance, can you still mention someone you blocked? Can they still see what you post, or is it just you that won't see them anymore?

Being able to block someone (as instance admin/mod) (#586)

Same as above, but at instance level.

Banned email list (#587)

As an admin, you should be able to "ban" an email, or a set of email matching a pattern to avoid registrations with these emails.

Report an user (#588)

You should be able to tell your admins/mods that there is an issue with this user (and what it is). If the person being reported is on another instance the report should also be reported.

Being able to edit/delete someone's profile ? (as admin/mod)

Or a blog, so that if they contain something offensive it can be removed.

Maybe not a so good idea

Being able to edit/delete a post or a comment (as admin/mod)

Maybe not a so good idea

Being able to silence someone else/a blog

Switch between allow/block list federation modes (#353)

Suspend an account (Original message, #589)

Being able, as a moderator, to de-activate an account, making it impossible for the person to log-in again. The content this person posted should probably be hidden too. Moderators should probably be able to cancel this action afterwards.

Your help is of course welcome on this topic, as I'm not really used to do moderation :sweat_smile: So if you have ideas for other tools, they are welcome! Also, if there is anything wrong with what I proposed above, we can discuss it, it just a proposal.

Marek Lach

Marek Lach April 22nd, 2019 15:06

Silencing of blogs / users would probably be somewhat useful for a blogging platform like Plume. The silencing of a user/blog would just mean that their content won't be displayed in the feeds of someone who has that user/blog silenced. But it would still be possible to mention the user, or like their post.


Unicorn April 24th, 2019 08:14

I think this is an important one, if I want to set up a site centered around one topic, I would like to largely (if not completely) block other instances from showing up on there, or at least be selective towards instances that display similar content.
However, completely blocking them would be overkill as other instances would then not be able to view or interact with my content either.

For this purpose, a whitelist would be useful, not just a blacklist :)

Ana Gelez

Ana Gelez April 26th, 2019 17:55

@unicorn1 There are ongoing efforts to rework how timelines work, and it will probably allow to precisely choose what should or shouldn't be displayed on the homepage, while keeping posts from other instances visible on other pages. Maybe this would solve your issue?

Otherwise I think we also have an issue on GitHub to switch to an "allow-list" federation model, like Peertube does, where you have to approve each instance before federation with them.


Unicorn April 30th, 2019 07:42

Yeah the first part goes in the direction of what I was looking for :)
Basically something like an instance-wide mute of another instance. I want to be able to stop an instance from showing up on my instance, but still federate with it (be able to interact both ways through articles, comments, ...). In my case, I want to be able disallow any other instance's content to show up on my instance's feeds, so that's why I mentioned the whitelist approach would be important, instead of just forbidding a few from showing up, I want to forbid all except for a specified few.
If I want to have my instance centered around a movement or a topic then this kind of tool is important to keep it clean of random other things, while still federating with them :)


Unicorn April 30th, 2019 07:48

About the "Being able to edit/delete someone's profile (as admin/mod)":
I don't think that editing a profile or blog should be accessible to admins, I would prefer something like the ability to suspend an account or posts (non-permanently), as well as warning users. Giving admins and mods edit access can falsify your profile/posts/whatever in a way that you do not want, they can misrepresent you etc.
I think that suspending and warning is a better solution. I'm willing to discuss this though :)


eloisa May 1st, 2019 18:44

Heyyyy,Eloísa here!

From what I can see you already have the moderation tools wishlist pretty much made up there in that list and it's good for me.

Thank you!

A quarta, 1/05/2019, 14:56, Ana Gelez (Framavox) escreveu:

Ana Gelez

Ana Gelez May 16th, 2019 18:31

I think I will create the related issues on GitHub to have them in our "official" TODO list, unless someone wants to raise a concern with the proposed features.

And of course, you can continue to propose other features here if you want.

Ana Gelez

Ana Gelez May 17th, 2019 19:35

Update: I created an issue for account suspension:

Ana Gelez

Ana Gelez May 17th, 2019 19:37

Ana Gelez

Ana Gelez May 17th, 2019 19:40

Also, when writing all these issues, it appeared to me that it was not very clear what the differences between block/ban/silence/suspend may be, and that this system was not very flexible, so I was thinking about having a detailed "permission" set for each user, that moderators can tweak as they want (for instance, having a list of checkboxes to tell if someone can comment, write articles, be displayed in timelines, even log in, or whatever). What do you think?


Unicorn May 18th, 2019 12:28

This idea of permissions reminded me of how e.g. Discord is handling it, with users being assigned roles that carry certain permissions, or users being assigned (or revoked) permissions on an individual basis. In my opinion this is very practical for managing communities with different roles and channels, but I am not sure what sorts of permissions could be employed for what purposes, because our use case differs a bit from Discord. We could make a list with a "suggested permission - purpose" sort of format, I'll try to come up with a few :)


Unicorn May 18th, 2019 12:48

First of all, we need to be able to assign roles for permissions to be of much use. Individual permissions is fine, but hard to manage and keep track of. It's easier to have different roles you can assign to users, and modify the permissions of these roles. I will list some example permissions first, then illustrate how they can be coupled with roles to be useful :)

Example permissions:

  • Edit permissions -> This one is obvious ;)
  • Post to public timeline -> Not sure, maybe outward image? Bit of an edge-case
  • Post to local timeline/front page -> Control quality of content on front page
  • Post anything -> Can be temporarily restricted e.g. on rule violation
  • Boost -> Not sure, maybe same as above
  • Like/favorite -> Not sure, maybe same as above

(something that would have to be considered though is how this would federate, I don't know enough about the code behind it)

Example uses:

Curating content to ensure quality/conformance to rules/...

Set up a role for newly joined users that restricts posting to local/public timeline, that way you (as an admin/mod) can evaluate quality of writing or just allow the best writers to show up on front page

Restricting members who violate rules

If a member violates the rules of an instance, the admin/mod can assign a role that restricts ability to post/interact

Just initial thoughts :)

Ana Gelez

Ana Gelez May 23rd, 2019 12:23

I have no idea how this would federate either to be honest, but we will figure it out if we decide to go this way.

However, I don't know if this isn't a bit too much for our quite basic needs? Like, is it really simpler to change the role of some user than just changing one individual permission. I agree that when you want to edit many time the same permission for a lot of user it is really useful, but I don't know if you have to do that often? (I hope I correctly understood what you proposed too, tell me if my questions don't make sense).

And I think, we could actually have something like "predefined permission set" on top of individual permission editing, where you could create a generic set of permissions, and assign them to a list of users. This would more or less do what you propose, but will still allow to have per-user permissions (or maybe that was what you proposed from the start and I didn't understood correctly (sorry, it is a bit hard to understand clearly English for me sometimes :grimacing:))