jstockdale's Journal: Musings about the moderation system

Although I don't really have an idea for improving the system, it seems that one flaw in the moderation system is the rapid falloff of moderation that occurs as the article ages. Specifically, by the time an article has reached near the end of the main page the moderation on it has nearly become static. Although we want moderation to seize at some point, this seems too soon. Would encouraging some moderators to read at +1 newest first correct such errors? There is a flaw here but I'm not sure its addressable; once an article gets enough comments it becomes increasingly hard to moderate, unless of course we have a comperable number of active moderators to commenters, which is most likely unfeasable. Anyway ... nuff said.

Re:Old Article Moderation

[jstockdale]

Actually the "good discussion for about 1 hour, then it's over" part was what I was kinda trying to get at. Your right that I didn't explicate that point well, but by keeping the moderation alive I meant to imply keeping the discussion alive and preventing the commentary from becoming static.