2015.06.15 Morning Coffee: Feedback and Call to Action
Morning Coffee is a user-created discussion series where Snapzu members can check in with each other in a relaxed environment.
We are experimenting with different formats and ideas, so feedback is very welcome!
Today, we want to ask you about your experience here at Snapzu. Why do you think it's been successful in fostering such a positive user culture so far?
Is it size? Snapzu is still very small and it's tough to get away with bad behavior. Is it the reputation system? When downvotes actually affect your standing, it pays to be good. How about the fun of leveling up? We're given an incentive to post quality content. Is it the invite system? Only those who want to be here get in, and invites act as a basic filter for incoming users. Is it that our accounts are more personal? Avatars, levels, reputation — they all instill a sense of ownership, and 'throwaway' accounts make less sense. This is in stark contrast to reddit, where there is no real context when coming across other users, and it's hard to actually care about them, or even your own image.
Conversely, what are the potential negative consequences of such a community, if any?
We also want to encourage you to help Snapzu grow! Snapzu is a content-based community, and apart from contributing to the site yourself, the best way to help is by inviting good people. If you're sitting on Snapzu invites, send them out! Friends, family, even strangers — as long as you think they'll be a good addition to the community, ask them to join. Keep in mind that their profile page will reveal that you invited them.
From /u/drunkenninja:
I would just like to point out that the best way to do this is to use the tribe invite codes provided within approved tribes of the referral program. Just start a tribe on a topic you love, meet the minimum requirements for referral program validation and then submit it. Once your tribe is accepted you can use the many tools to tastefully spread the word about the platform and your community, and the best thing is that people ultimately get what they ask for!
So, grab your sustenance of choice, pull up a chair, listen to or ignore today's (1) eclectic (2) cafe (3) music (4) and let's go!
Edit: Head over to /t/asksnapzu for the Question of the Day!
Join the Discussion
For me, the things I like the most is that when you are making a post you are encouraged to make sure you are posting good content: adding sources, quality "cover" pictures, links, videos, etc. all add to a really quality post. I also really, really like the ability to cross-post by default, it really helps to find related tribes and therefore more content you are interested in.
On reddit, downvotes really don't mean anything other than some people not seeing your post. Here it seems a bit more harsh. While I think that will make people more civil and thoughtful with their posting, I am slightly worried some people who are willing to downvote based on disagreeing rather than shitposting would definitely have a lot of power to decide what messages people are comfortable posting.
All in all I am very happy with my experience here so far. I really hope the community has a productive growth-spurt, because the potential here is extraordinary, and the people here seem to be very community-oriented. Glad I found this place, honestly.
edit: Also, good morning to you, it's afternoon here so I'll have my coffee late with you folks!
Good day! My 2 cents, I was in Digg, left there during the Digg Patriot wars, went to Reddit, still go there for some of the subs, was made aware of Snapzu from an old Reddit friend, Adelle Chattre....and we disagree on some issues, and yet because of our respect for each other's opinion, not because we always agree I am here.
I can tell you, I have used the downvote once since I have joined...and I am not afraid to use it, just very conscious of when or why.
The reason for me is simple. I have an opinion, we all do. Many may not agree with it...and that's ok. I may not agree with other's opinions. I just don't vote them up as opposed to voting them down. We all know what bury brigades are. I am very much of a mind of not enabling this behavior. So if you don't agree, pass. If you do, vote.
Very good points. I agree that downvotes need to be handled carefully. So far I've only been downvoted once and haven't doled out any myself, but I foresee some problems with the system.
Have a great afternoon! I'm wondering if we should change the series title to something accommodating to everyone, as the site seems to have a large international representation.
Edit: To clarify, downvotes should be reserved for spam, trolling, or otherwise unacceptable behavior (based on site and tribe rules). A differing opinion should not be downvoted; you can spite them by not upvoting.
I don't count my downvotes, I say what's on my mind regardless. But even on Reddit, the only time I downvote is when someone is trolling blatantly. Rudeness, disagreement, I upvote those because I want people to see them. Echo chambers are boring, and honestly I picked this over Hubski because of that.
Oh no please don't, it makes me feel like I still have a lot of day ahead of me! This is my Internet Morning™!
I know what you mean with the down votes but it's expected. Theres always "that guy" somewhere.
I think it's a number of factors working together to elicit a positive environment for users which then naturally creates a "lead by example" sort of attitude, which strangely enough I have been witnessing is getting even more positive as the number of users grows. This approach is great because abusive users are then quickly stamped out by the community without the need for admins to constantly have to make the call, and instead a strong community does this naturally.
If you look at the site from the outside (a logged-out user's perspective) you will notice many similarities to reddit, but are quickly surprised that while there are certain organizational similarities (tribes, voting, links, commenting, etc) the whole platform enjoys a completely different fundamental core. While reddit is built on karma which promotes karma whoring and cheap tactics, it doesn't do much for creating a meaningful persona that is then positively reinforced by the rest of the community which is already familiar with the general concept.
The XP leveling system as well as Rep score are a key factors in honest positive interaction that is driven by retaining the feeling of anonymity yet with the avatar, banner and other "career" building functions give you the feeling of responsibility for your own profile, even though it isn't really your private identity. I think people quickly make the realization that while you just don't have enough friends to discuss the topics you truly love, you can do so here behind the safety of your computer and your anonymous profile (if you so choose).
I don't yet see any negative consequences with this approach, but I'm sure with such a strong community we can overcome any issues that may arise.
takes a sip of his morning coffee
I definitely agree that we need to actively continue to grow this place, as I have no doubt it will only get better as our community grows and further organizes itself. I would just like to point out that the best way to do ...
... Read Full[This comment was removed]
I have only been here a few days but it's been a good experience so far. I tend to thrive on smaller boards because its much easier to express myself. On larger places someone already beat me to the topic and said what I already would have, and I see no point in echoing people. I post because I want to, the leveling up is a nice side effect but it doesn't cause me to post more.
I think the invite system is great, it filters out low effort people. By that I mean people who are just coming for memes, are trolls, etc. Lets face it, those kind are not going to expend extra effort to join a place. As another side effect it's keeping this place from getting overrun like Voat and Hubski are. Those places are a mess right now. Voat is so bad it doesn't even work half the time (I guess to be fair it is currently being DDoS'd).
I suppose the negative consequences are there is gonna be a certain amount of quality people who can't find an invite. I would imagine the majority would know where to look however. I wanted to try the place out and went to /r/redditalternative and found a topic with a code that worked. The second downside would be there is something to be said for an extremely populated place. On Reddit I can find very specific subs like /r/ssbm, /r/90shiphop, /r/learnart, and so on and so on.
That has it's place of course, but I love places like this even more because like you said you can meet people and connect to them. I'll throw in I like to have an avatar, it keeps people that much more identifiable. I am already recognizing people thanks to that.
I wish I knew people who use forums. I don't know even one in real life to give my codes to. I'll throw them on /r/redditalternatives eventually I guess.
Edit: I just remembered something worth mentioning, I was kinda hoping to find a place without downvotes. Just because it gets abused so fast. People start using it as a disagree button rather then just filtering outright spam. No one is abusing it right no...
... Read FullI feel that the down vote is necessary in a website like this that can be bombed with spam at any given moment. It gives the people the power to moderate themselves just as long as it doesn't get abused.
Well, I think a word of caution may be in order. A lot of people are fleeing reddit because of claims of censorship when they shut down /r/fatpeoplehate when the admins decided it was causing too much trouble. There's also some not-so-subtle accusations of Ellen Pao being a Social Justice Warrior (SJW) and wanting to leave to protest that. But based on my second post to the Lounge such people are going to be disappointed by Snapzu because it's not going to be any more tolerant of bad behavior than reddit is. It's just a small enough community that people either haven't had the nerve to test the policy or they've found obscure places to restart their campaigns. I confidently predict that before too long there will be users who declare that they've been betrayed here like on reddit and that the site admins are horrible people like Ellen Pao.
On a more positive note the interface is fairly complex and requires some time to adjust but I think it works well. It is not simple but it's very powerful. About the only feature I'm not seeing is an easy way to track what I've posted, such as discussion threads and comments along with snaps on a single page. I often review what I've written to check how it's being received or what mistakes I can find after the fact.
You're right.
However, while I don't entirely disagree with reddit's actions, the inconsistency of both their rules and how they were enforced was tiresome.
I think there are a few things Snapzu can do to avoid similar drama. First of all, they need to make it perfectly clear to users what is allowed and what isn't. Anything up for interpretation will be attacked. The rules just need to be straightforward and enforced consistently. Secondly, while I didn't leave reddit because of Ellen Pao (I left because the community was mostly impersonal, immature, and straight up insufferable), I found it odd that someone with such questionable integrity and a giant spotlight on them had seemingly become the face of reddit. It's unattractive, and Team Snapzu can avoid that by simply being professional.
It's also possible that disgruntled people leaving may not be a bad thing. It could even be a good thing. But that's a very fine line we're treading.
Edit: I also think the user interface is a bit confusing. It makes sense now, but it took a lot of getting used to. I think a lot can be simplified to make it easier for newcomers.
[This comment was removed]
The problem with Reddit's current subreddit banning policies is that they are not equal. Subs like SRS get by without so much as a slap on the wrist, while others that don't jive with the admins world views have to worry so much about sticking to the rules. I'll settle for the Snapzu admins being objective, even-handed and honest in their dealings with the community.
I agree, the reddit admins have been extremely hands-off when it comes to bad behavior which makes it all the more shocking when they're finally prompted to move. Nevertheless, many of the comments I've seen suggest that some of the self-exiled redditors coming here expect that there will be no censorship at all. I think it's in the best interests of the site for the admins to nip that impression in the bud.
[This comment was removed]
For me, it is the good content. On other sites such as reddit, there is a whole lot of content, but not as high quality as the content on Snapzu. Also, the downvote system encourages users to continue to post high quality content. On reddit, the consequences for getting downvoted are low. Here, your total reputation lowers.
Another benefit of the downvote system is that people will think, and usually respond, before downvoting. On reddit, users reputation could be completely demolished with one comment.
I also enjoy the lack of a hivemind, and I enjoy the acceptance of all opinions.
So far, my Snapzu experience has been a good one.
I didn't really find it through reddit, I found it earlier before all the reddit drama. I do enjoy the smaller community because I feel that my voice is heard, although I know that new members keep this place fresh with new blood which is always good. I'ver shared all my invites so if /u/teamsnapzu can provide me with some more, I can help spread the word some more.
Hi Grandtheftsoul, we credited you with 10 more codes!
We really appreciate you all taking a moment to spread the word about Snapzu and this community, it means a lot to us to see so many great new people joining and taking part!
Gah, school started again and work got busy. Not going to be around here too much the next few weeks sans the weekends. Oh well. It seems like everybody else said what I would say. I do agree with the sense of ownership. I think it has to do with the importance of snaps. It really feels like you are building your personal brand at the same time as actually being a member of the community. People follow you and are interested in your content so you feel the need to maintain a certain level of quality with your content. However, because of the other features of the site, you still get that entire reddit feel. This encourages the openness of the reddit community while also discouraging low-effort content.
The only real disadvantage of this is that people will be more scared of being downvoted because it hurts their own reputation, much more than it does on reddit. It is not a problem now because we have a great community, but as we grow, it will be harder and harder to have this sort of self-policing. We need to find a way of encouraging judicious downvotes. Simply pointing to voting guidelines (like reddit) and saying "That's not what its for" doesn't work. We need to give people a better reason to not downvote immaturely besides saying it is improper site etiquette.
I think the reputation concept is explained rather well in the faq:
Here is my take on it... The benchmark score of 99% (notice its already not possible to hit 100%) today may be 87% three months from now and it would be perfectly normal for everyone that has 87% to be extremely happy that they have the top reputation score at the time. No matter what you try, some people will downvote, and it's the same concept with literally everything else we don't want people doing.
Here are some examples: Some people will drive drunk, s...
... Read FullI understand, but I think it makes some assumptions about human nature that can't be depended on to be universal. I'm talking about people who like to play rules lawyer and find a way to game any system they touch. I see the results of such behavior everywhere in reddit, including some of the subreddits I still like to contribute to. Such people will gladly sacrifice their reputation if it means they can promote an agenda or just see how they can manipulate the system. Reddit has a large pool of trolls and ideologues who have karma scores in the negative as the price for what they're trying to achieve. Some used to hold contests to see who could go lowest and how quickly before reddit put a cap on it.
I don't want to come off like I'm telling you how to run the site. It's your space and your vision. I have no intention of interfering with it. But there are lessons I've learned from reddit and I hope you'll bear them in mind.
Every system can be gamed, not a single system in the world is bullet proof and never will be. However a good system depends on society (community) and the people that are a part of it to diminish the effects others have on gaming that system. This is explained with the benchmark reputation score dropping until it evens out at a number that takes into account "the gaming of the system". From what you mentioned there is two things that are of concern to you. 1. People downvoting others mercilessly, without cause or reason other than to be a "troll", and 2. doing whatever is needed (trolling) to get as many downvotes as possible.
I think the first problem is handled well with the flexible reputation benchmark, and as for #2... Unlike on reddit, you cannot have a negative reputation score, so instead you will see a ratio of up votes vs down votes represented by a percentage, like 32%, I don't know about you but that's pretty boring of an accomplishment and I'm sure it would be easy enough to build in functionality that will punish those with an extremely low reputation score. But then again, how much do we want the system to be in charge of?
PS. You didn't come off as negative, you strike me as someone that sees the potential in this platform and is worried that it might fall due to it growing and being effected by other not so friendly individuals. Your questions have merit and I think need to be answered as well as the topic needs to be discussed. Such a democratic approach is complex, so we need to understand how we all play a role in this system.
There's a third I mentioned as well: not just trolls who think it's fun to be disruptive but ideologues who accept low reputation and penalties as the price for accomplishing their goals such as the Digg Patriots and the Libertarian downvote squad on reddit in 2012. That such behavior is technically against site rules doesn't stop them from risking banning, shadowbanning or other penalties.
I agree, it's a silly accomplishment. And yet there are people who like to play that way.
I have no clue. I agree that the system should be community driven as much as possible. Even when it gets gamed I think the community should decide what it wants to see and what it considers appropriate. That attitude does not make me popular with some moderators. ;) My earlier proposal is a thought on reinforcing community voting and diminish the impact of ideologues who have an axe to grind and don't care what cost they must pay in the process.
I appreciate that. I understand that I can come off as aggressive or at least passionate when I argue. I'll someti...
... Read FullWhile I believe the negative effect that low reputation score individuals have on the community should diminish the lower their reputation score gets (ie. their down votes would have no effect on rep), I don't think we should do more in the form of creating additional functionality that automatically bans these members. The reason why I think it's important that these individuals shouldn't be banned is the same reason why Ellen Pao is having a hard time on reddit, and else where.
People shouldn't be afraid to express themselves and their opinions no matter how ridiculous they may appear to a majority. As long as their form of expression follows rules set fourth to keep things flowing, we shouldn't as administrators interfere in those interactions, let alone go around banning everyone with an unpopular opinion. Having said that, anyone that breaks the ToS by trolling, abusing, doxxing and or harassing others should still expect to get the good ole boot.
It's human nature to try and be different, even if it means to harass other people in order to reach the opposite end of the scale. That type of activity needs to be dealt with on a case by case basis with full transparency so that the community can be aware of what happens.
... Read FullI think you misunderstand me. I don't think anyone should be banned unless they're demonstrably disruptive. Reddit identified a group of people whom they could demonstrate were genuinely disruptive and brought the hammer down on them. I don't disagree with that action.
But bans should be used sparingly and only as a last resort. Certainly the conditions under which someone can be banned should be clearly spelled out. I absolutely don't think anyone should be banned for espousing an unpopular opinion. Automatic bans should never be done. But I think there are ways that people who just want to be contrary can be discouraged from being disruptive.
I enthusiastically approve.
I didn't misunderstand you, and I know you aren't in favor of automatic banning. I just wanted to clarify this for anyone else reading our exchange. I'm happy we're in agreement /u/spaceghoti.
Just going to point out that I meant a literal reputation, not the reputation score haha. But I do agree with your take on it.
What if downvotes provoked a small hit on our own stats? Perhaps the more people downvoting the same thing the smaller the hit to each individual? That way downvotes come at a cost but you're vindicated if the content warrants the behavior. They'd probably want to take this away from brand new accounts, though.
The danger there is the promotion of groupthink, but like the abuse of downvotes it's hard to avoid.
[This comment was removed]
The question is however... should it be avoided? How much more control should we give the system? I for one am perfectly happy with a lesser average as long as everyone is effected by the same exact system. I imagine it like inflation effecting currency, it doesn't matter who has it, everyone that has it is affected equally.
That's the big question. How do you balance free speech and open expression with a stable, positive community? What do you do with the inevitable trolls who get their kicks out of disrupting communities and exploiting loopholes? The more users come here from reddit, digg or other social media sites the more of an issue this is going to become. However you decide to deal with it, you should at least be aware that it's coming.
Agreed, it's an important subject and believe me I don't think it's being ignored or down played.
It's funny you should bring up digg, because that is the perfect example of a team of admins that did everything wrong. They saw a problem with their system that sadly couldn't handle being gamed, as well as no active solution on how to absorb the effects of the problem. So instead of tweaking the system, and working towards allowing the community to mitigate the issue they completely overhauled it, gave themselves all the power and cut out the community all together. This ended really badly for them.
So, I think the goal here is to approach it from an angle that empowers the community by building the foundation and creating the tools that are capable in off-setting the negative effects of the negative/abusive minority.
I am a fellow Reddit refugee. One of the things that drove me toward Reddit in the first place was the concept of a free exchange of ideas. Unlike Digg or Fark, I saw it as a pure democracy - shitpost and you'll be downvoted. The cream would rise. But there has been such a shift of attitude there. It's like they didn't trust in the community itself. Or maybe they wanted to make the community in certain people's image.
Anyway - I'm happy to be here - ready to help it grow!
Lot of people joining lately --- including myself. This place has the most potential out of all the reddit alternatives I tried.
Good content, friendly people. Very few assholes make it in, but when they do they are put in their place.
I like it cause it's small and people are decent to each other. I don't like people joining from Reddit with shock value obscene user names and would enjoy that not being allowed.
Hi all, I haven't downvoted (and typically don't for these types of sites), but I wonder what exactly the protocol for downvoting is? I read the FAQ about when you should downvote. Is there a forced entry for why you are downvoting snaps/comments? Maybe in this way people who are downvoting legitimate comments that add to the opposite side of the discussion can be curtailed. If someone loses privileges to downvote, because they only seem to be downvoting opposite opinions (as opposed to just straight up spam/trolling), I wonder if it would allow for the healthy environment here to survive longer.
I don't think telepathy is a feature in the site. How do we distinguish between someone who thinks what they're downloading is not contributing to the site and someone who simply disagrees with what they've read?
Are you asking about someone who is lying (intentional or not) about the reason why they are downvoting? That certainly would be the next question about how to handle arbitration.
I don't have any specific ideas off the top of my head, but I'm sure there are ways of allowing the community to try to suppress this type of activity.
Granted. The point being we're never going to be able to determine with any degree of certainty whether someone was using downvotes simply to punish or if they genuinely felt they were discouraging bad behavior. I don't think we'll ever be able to eliminate the use of the downvote as a button for "I disagree."
You're right unfortunately.
It just looks nicer and it seems the users are working hard at being decent. That said, the number of Reddit moderators has me worried- they are the overseers of all that went on in the Reddit world. Hoping they don't bring their Reddit culture with them.