Collective Moderation: Message Score and User Reputation

Idea name: Message Score and User Reputation


Users should be able to rate messages as valuable (Like) or not (Dislike). Fortunately, we already have reactions. How about we make a small improvement?

Variant 1) Let’s add two more: + (upvote = score +1) and - (downvote = score -1)
Variant 2) Let’s assign values to: Like (score +1) and Dislike (score -1)

Score = Upvotes - Downvotes

Messages with score below -X (that’s to be determined) would get automatically folded/hidden. That will allow public chat members to moderate collectively.

Also, I would add another metric => User Reputation = sum of the user’s messages score.

User Reputation below -X or -X% (of all User’s messages) would make that user’s messages to fold automatically. This will enable public chat members to silent trolls and spammers.

Right now, it takes only one troll/spammer to ruin the conversation (and make people turn off the app).

Use case: *As a user, I want to be able to score messages so the valuable content could shine through the chaos made by trolls and spammers.

Target user: everyone

Why this is important: because it will improve retention. Right now, using chat isn’t a pleasant experience, especially if the public chat gets bombarded by trolls.

Any other comments: It opens new possibilities.

We could run a weekly contest and award users for TOP1 Most Liked Message - which will incentivize users to put valuable content in.

We could make profiles with the high (to be determined what does it mean) reputation to stand out. That way we would appreciate the value these users provide to the community.

Upvote, Downvote, User Reputation, and automatically folded/hidden replies, Karma…sounds like we already have that – Reddit.

Yeah, let’s disregard any idea that was implemented anywhere else :slight_smile:

1 Like

Let’s disregard copy paste and come up with innovative ideas…just like did. You can downvote my comment/s if you disagree with it.

I would downvote it as totally unproductive.

Your argument is: “let’s not do it, just because someone else did something similar”, while not providing any solution to an existing problem (which will only intensify over time).

The fact that someone did it (and we can clearly see it to be an effective solution) means it’s a good idea.

Innovation just for the sake of innovation, innovation just to be different by all costs - that’s irrational. Especially, since we are dealing with real issues we need solutions for.


This sounds like an idea for extensions, allowing to sort messages in a channel.

Beyond an extension, I personally need convincing on the idea of message scores and reputation. 3 reasons why I’m cautious:

  • Neither are ultimate measures of quality. Sensationalism and popularity contests around the corner
  • Both tend to reinforce themselves
  • Both can easily be gamed, which is a problem especially in combination with first two points

That said, I recognize the problem of finding order in chaos of messages. So I see the appeal of an extension. Aside from that I’d like to think of other options to bring chaos. Status updates can help, as can threads


Reputation is important to me on any public platform where users can post. I appreciate this suggestion being surfaced for discussion where it might be further improved upon. Reputation-based content ranking shouldn’t be dismissed out of hand simply because it was used and/or abused elsewhere, but I do feel that Status core contributors should only implement features that match the principles they express, especially censorship resistance.

Status users should never be automatically opted in to any form of filtering, as that is a form of censorship. If filtering exists, users should control its thresholds and be able to opt in and out at any time. To avoid abuse of a reputation-based system, account duration and the use of SNT as a trust metric could be used. The upcoming Tribute to Talk feature will eventually address/discourage unsolicited content at the private chat level, but perhaps could be used as a trust metric for reputation.

I always encourage people to express a dissenting opinion… but if you don’t have a “better” idea, it’s unproductive to tear down other potential solutions (especially battle-tested ones) without offering one of your own.


Great suggestion! I was concerned about the risk of people taking this Feature Request as a step towards some kind of censorship. Having it implemented as an extension (so optional) mitigates that risk!

Yes! If we gave users multiple options: hide downvoted messages, sort messages by score, etc - that would be even better!

I don’t think there ever will be an ultimate measure of quality. The perception of value (or quality) is subjective. This makes it complex (at least in the long term), but I don’t think that’s a reason to drop the idea altogether. For now, we could introduce something simple (even a hotfix).

I do think that the garbage flood (malicious random messages) is a big threat to us. It may take us a few months back if our users become discouraged and bored with having to deal with spam every day.

As we grow in popularity, this isn’t our local problem anymore. Now it’s publicly known fact:

We’ve got little time to fix it.

Sensationalism would eventually get downvoted too. Popularity contests - I’ve got nothing against it. In both cases, it’s not up to us to decide - users will decide by voting.

But don’t have to. It’s just a matter of two factors:

  1. Formula (= at what point the messages should be folded)
  2. Folded messages will have to be open in order to get upvoted or downvoted.

What about messages with a positive score? Good for their authors. Good, well-received content is what we need.

What if you had to have SNT in order to be able to score a message (and influence user’s reputation)?

I think that extension is a great idea!

Status updates can help, as can threads

Threads! I think threads are super-important.

1 Like

I just wanted to let you know I agree with you 100% :slight_smile:


The User reputation is really important and if the user received lots of reputation or the same like reddit (Karma points) I guess instead of points what if badge, like what @petty propose here:

1 Like

You’re right. You’re right.

Do we feel we are anywhere closer with this now we have reactions to messages? I think profiles will/can aid the user rep angle…

1 Like

I guess we might be a bit closer - like technically closer (as there is an interface already - reactions). But when it comes to the main issue (actual collective moderation and/or user reputation) - no, because reactions mean nothing.

Spam message can get 100 dislikes and that will change nothing for no one. So we need to tie reactions to message (and user) score, and then to user score, and then hide/fold messages based on message or author score.

1 Like

This topic was automatically closed 0 minutes after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.