Posted by Larry Hoover on June 9, 2006, at 8:48:42
In reply to Re: Implementation of trigger flags, posted by Dr. Bob on June 9, 2006, at 3:18:16
> > All Bob needs to do is to enable a function that allows:
> > 1. any person to flag their own post
> > 2. others to flag posts that got overlooked
> >
> > The 2nd one could work either of two ways. A deputy could go and add a missing flag. Or, if a threshold number of people click on some notification button of some sort, a flag could be added to the post.
> >
> > I think Babblers can manage this without any need for administrative sanction, except in the most extraordinary circumstances.
> >
> > Lar
>
> > I agree it's not always easy to know what might be triggering. But I do think that any graphic or detailed account of upsetting things such as violence, suicide, self-harm, abuse, etc. might be more likely to trigger someone, and thus, might be a good rule of thumb for now.
> >
> > gg
>
> We're making progress! Should we go with the above rule of thumb for now?
>
> (1) is certainly necessary. (2) is more complicated. How about starting with:
>
> 2a. someone else posts to the thread, flags their own post, and adds "^ 2" or something like that to their subject line to indicate that the flag is actually for the post that's 2 up
>
> Then later:
>
> 2b. anyone could flag the post directly, but only deputies could unflag (and reflag) it
>
> BobGood to see you back, Dr. Bob. Especially so when you come back with such a glorious response.
My only question is, why not 2a and 2b simultaneously? The first person to find an unflagged trigger post can certainly post a subject line warning, to serve in the time between when the post is first noticed, and when a concensus forms on whether that belief is commonly held.
I don't think there's anything there that is too complicated to implement the entire package. It could be that making gradual changes is much harder on people, Bob, because they just get finished making one change, and it's on to another one. And different posting or reading styles would have people in different belief systems, depending on how frequently they read posts or specific boards at Babble.
I can imagine this exchange:
"But I thought the new rule was......."
"No. No. That was last week. We were just doing that for a while. The new rule is that you...."Lar
poster:Larry Hoover
thread:614568
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20060525/msgs/654785.html