Search for: All records

Social media users may perceive moderation decisions by the platform differently, which can lead to frustration and dropout. This study investigates users’ perceived justice and fairness of online moderation decisions when they are exposed to various illegal versus legal scenarios, retributive versus restorative moderation strategies, and user-moderated versus commercially moderated platforms. We conduct an online experiment on 200 American social media users of Reddit and Twitter. Results show that retributive moderation delivers higher justice and fairness for commercially moderated than for user-moderated platforms in illegal violations; restorative moderation delivers higher fairness for legal violations than illegal ones. We discuss the opportunities for platform policymaking to improve moderation system design. 

This paper introduces a game-theoretical strategy for optimal dispatch of building thermal loads, based on a marginal price model derived from an actual dispatch curve. A non-cooperative game is formulated, and the existence and uniqueness of the Nash equilibrium solution are proved aided by the variational inequality theory. A game solution algorithm is presented in this paper to solve the control problem with guaranteed convergence. The proposed game-theoretical control technique was evaluated against a baseline energy minimization strategy and a socially optimal solution, through a simulation test of a virtual market comprised of six buildings. The results show that the proposed game-theoretical strategy could achieve performance very close to the social optimum with a Price of Anarchy of 1.0041 and a 24% cost reduction compared to the baseline energy-priority strategy. 

Online harassment and content moderation have been well-documented in online communities. However, new contexts and systems always bring new ways of harassment and need new moderation mechanisms. This study focuses on hate raids, a form of group attack in real-time in live streaming communities. Through a qualitative analysis of hate raids discussion in the Twitch subreddit (r/Twitch), we found that (1) hate raids as a human-bot coordinated group attack leverages the live stream system to attack marginalized streamers and other potential groups with(out) breaking the rules, (2) marginalized streamers suffer compound harms with insufficient support from the platform, (3) moderation strategies are overwhelmingly technical, but streamers still struggle to balance moderation and participation considering their marginalization status and needs. We use affordances as a lens to explain how hate raids happens in live streaming systems and propose moderation-by-design as a lens when developing new features or systems to mitigate the potential abuse of such designs. 

As each micro community centered around the streamer attempts to set its own guidelines in live streaming communities, it is common for volunteer moderators (mods) and the streamer to disagree on how to handle various situations. In this study, we conducted an online survey (N=240) with live streaming mods to explore their commitment to the streamer to grow the micro community and the different styles in which they handle conflicts with the streamer. We found that 1) mods apply more active and cooperative styles than passive and assertive styles to manage conflicts, but they might be forced to do so, and 2) mods with strong commitments to the streamer would like to apply styles showing either high concerns for the streamer or low concerns for themselves. We reflect on how these results can affect micro community development and recommend designs to mitigate conflict and strengthen commitment. 

Content moderation is a crucial aspect of online platforms, and it requires human moderators (mods) to repeatedly review and remove harmful content. However, this moderation process can lead to cognitive overload and emotional labor for the mods. As new platforms and designs emerge, such as live streaming space, new challenges arise due to the real-time nature of the interactions. In this study, we examined the use of ignoring as a moderation strategy by interviewing 19 Twitch mods. Our findings indicated that ignoring involves complex cognitive processes and significant invisible labor in the decision-making process. Additionally, we found that ignoring is an essential component of real-time moderation. These preliminary findings suggest that ignoring has the potential to be a valuable moderation strategy in future interactive systems, which highlights the need to design better support for ignoring in interactive live-streaming systems. 

When people have the freedom to create and post content on the internet, particularly anonymously, they do not always respect the rules and regulations of the websites on which they post, leaving other unsuspecting users vulnerable to sexism, racism, threats, and other unacceptable content in their daily cyberspace diet. However, content moderators witness the worst of humanity on a daily basis in place of the average netizen. This takes its toll on moderators, causing stress, fatigue, and emotional distress akin to the symptomology of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The goal of the present study was to explore whether adding positive stimuli to breaktimes-images of baby animals or beautiful, aweinspiring landscapes-could help reduce the negative side-effects of being a content moderator. To test this, we had over 300 experienced content moderators read and decide whether 200 fake text-based social media posts were acceptable or not for public consumption. Although we set out to test positive emotional stimulation, however, we actually found that it is the cumulative nature of the negative emotions that likely negates most of the effects of the intervention: the longer the person had practiced content moderation, the stronger their negative experience. Connections to compassion fatigue and how best to spend work breaks as a content moderator are discussed. 

Volunteer moderators (mods) play significant roles in developing moderation standards and dealing with harmful content in their micro-communities. However, little work explores how volunteer mods work as a team. In line with prior work about understanding volunteer moderation, we interview 40 volunteer mods on Twitch — a leading live streaming platform. We identify how mods collaborate on tasks (off-streaming coordination and preparation, in-stream real-time collaboration, and relationship building both off-stream and in-stream to reinforce collaboration) and how mods contribute to moderation standards (collaboratively working on the community rulebook and individually shaping community norms). We uncover how volunteer mods work as an effective team. We also discuss how the affordances of multi-modal communication and informality of volunteer moderation contribute to task collaboration, standards development, and mod’s roles and responsibilities. 

Content moderation is an essential part of online community health and governance. While much of extant research is centered on what happens to the content, moderation also involves the management of violators. This study focuses on how moderators (mods) make decisions about their actions after the violation takes place but before the sanction by examining how they "profile" the violators. Through observations and interviews with volunteer mods on Twitch, we found that mods engage in a complex process of collaborative evidence collection and profile violators into different categories to decide the type and extent of punishment. Mods consider violators' characteristics as well as behavioral history and violation context before taking moderation action. The main purpose of the profiling was to avoid excessive punishment and aim to integrate violators more into the community. We discuss the contributions of profiling to moderation practice and suggest design mechanisms to facilitate mods' profiling processes.