Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Notifications
Mark all as read
Q&A

Welcome to Codidact Meta!

Codidact Meta is the meta-discussion site for the Codidact community network and the Codidact software. Whether you have bug reports or feature requests, support questions or rule discussions that touch the whole network – this is the site for you.

Parent

Codidact marketing for community posts

+11
−0

In the last few months the Codidact team has opened several pages across various social media platforms (see the bottom of this post for a list). Up until now the admins have occasionally shared posts on Twitter, but we’d like to use these platforms more intentionally to promote community content.

We recognize that different communities might want different kinds of content promoted. A generalist group like Cooking might prefer broad outreach, while a more specialized site like Electrical Engineering may struggle to cope with an influx of uninformed questions. Please use this thread to tell us what your community wants, and what you don’t want.

A few questions to start the conversation:

  • We currently let users with the Curate ability promote posts across the Codidact network. Should we choose some subset of these for promotion?

  • Should we take submissions from moderators only or let anyone suggest a post to be shared?

  • Would it make sense for us to open a meta thread and let people nominate high-quality posts there?

  • Are there any guidelines we should put in place around the content we share, e.g. avoiding controversial questions?

  • How should we enable community members (or anyone else) to object to a promotion or proposed promotion? We don’t want to create controversy; how do we avoid unintentionally doing so?

  • How should we treat posts that are timely? (Promoting it now seems helpful; it might be less relevant by the time a meta discussion resolves.)

We’d like to do something lightweight (likely manual at first) where mods, admins, or community members can share high quality posts quickly. We also want the communities to have a voice, and we want anybody to be able to easily let us know that we ought to reconsider something we’ve promoted. Additionally, nominations will be minimally curated by the community admins for quality and equitable distribution among communities.

Social Pages

LinkedIn

Facebook

Twitter

Edit based on discussion:

We've had some really good suggestions on ways to get posts nominated. Based on some of the discussion, we've opened a separate question on obtaining ability privileges. We would love to have some of the automated processes suggested and we'll work toward those in the future, but for now I think we'll just open a post and let anyone make suggestions and vote. The Codidact social admins will then post what seems appropriate from those nominations and other community content. We want to be really transparent and flexible with this process, so if anyone has concerns or questions let us know!

Why does this post require moderator attention?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

0 comment threads

Post
+8
−0

We currently let users with the Curate ability promote posts across the Codidact network. Should we choose some subset of these for promotion?

Well this seems like an extremely hard ability to earn. Does anyone but moderators and staff actually have it? As an example from Software Development, Curate is described as:

To earn this ability, you need to have at least a 90% positive reception rate for your posts, with a hard minimum of 16 positively-received posts. You also need at least a 99% helpful rate for flags you have raised, with a hard minimum of 196 helpful flags. (These numbers may vary from site to site.)

196 helpful flags! Meaning 198 in total, where 196 have to be helpful. Seriously!?

This community gets some 2-3 posts per day and then it's one of the more active. What are we even supposed to flag? And woe if you make a mistake...

To compare with SO, I have 85% helpful post flags after some 10 years of using the site. Been doing lots of custom flags. And 94% helpful comment flags - not even those reach 99%.


Would it make sense for us to open a meta thread and let people nominate high-quality posts there?

That could work. Though why not just pick from whatever is recent and somewhat up-voted? Preferably with as varied topics as possible per community.

Are there any guidelines we should put in place around the content we share, e.g. avoiding controversial questions?

If it fulfils the Code of Conduct (be nice; be respectful) & local community rules, that should be sufficient. I believe there was some drama over at Someplace Else when some supposedly controversial question was posted. But since we don't have the same Twitter-Driven Development as they do, I think we can be more far more lenient in freedom of speech.

How should we enable community members (or anyone else) to object to a promotion or proposed promotion? We don’t want to create controversy; how do we avoid unintentionally doing so?

I think it should be integrated with the flagging system so that objections can be done without confronting anyone in public. I think the community-specific moderators can be trusted to deal with such flags at their own best judgment. Unless they are partial, either because they made the nomination in the first place, or in case they posted anything under the post getting flagged. Then the site should simply hand the flag to an impartial mod/staff instead.

Why does this post require moderator attention?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

1 comment thread

General comments (5 comments)

Comments on Codidact marketing for community posts

General comments
Monica Cellio‭ wrote over 1 year ago:

BTW, the privilege thresholds can be changed for individual communities. We probably should have rolled out lower levels to start with rather than the "mature, active site" levels that we designed for.

Olin Lathrop‭ wrote over 1 year ago:

@Monica: I looked around on the EE site (where I'm a moderator) but couldn't find any of these settings. I looked in "moderator tools", and also on the page of individual abilities, like "curate". I agree with Lundin that 196 flags is excessive. I'd also be willing to explicitly grant certain abilities to users that have shown a history of contributing good content and seem to get how the site works.

Lundin‭ wrote over 1 year ago:

@Monica Cellio The‭ 99% is way too high for a mature site too.

sau226‭ wrote over 1 year ago:

Have we considered changing the thresholds to be lower by default in the code, and then adding a setting that we can flip to bump them up, when the site is deemed to be "mature" and "active", thus requiring higher thresholds?

Jirka Hanika‭ wrote over 1 year ago:

@sau226 - Perhaps 80% helpfulness and at least 2 flags in total? (Language & Linguistics has handled approximately 2 helpful flags over the first year of its existence in total, I think. Not counting flag testing.) I'm trying to hint that a more direct access at the settings might be easier to tailor to the needs of each site than just one or two arbitrary levels.

This community is part of the Codidact network. We have other communities too — take a look!

You can also join us in chat!

Want to advertise this community? Use our templates!

Like what we're doing? Support us! Donate