5

I have quite a few helpful flags on many of the Stack Exchange site.

enter image description here

But I have low rep on most of these sites, as I only go there to help flag spam and abusive posts found in charcoal HQ

enter image description here

There are more ads to be seen on Stack Exchange sites, so I'm noticing ads, where previously I hadn't noticed them.

Can we have a waiver on the ads, if we reach certain benchmarks of participation, other than rep please?

e.g. a min number of helpful flags on a site, edits, etc.

Improve this question
10
  • 1
    This sounds like it'd add a lot of overhead for calculating the privilege and only affect a percentage of users across the network so small that it can't even be represented in any reasonable number of significant figures. Do the ads really affect your use of the site in any way? As you admitted, all you're doing is stopping by to flag stuff.
    – animuson StaffMod
    Commented Dec 27, 2016 at 4:44
  • @animuson added noise and overhead to already busy minds, checking spam and abusive links for ads. It's actually distracting when looking at spam, as there's an ad right there. It confused me the first time it happened. Over a post.
    – user310756
    Commented Dec 27, 2016 at 4:46
  • @animuson have they only recently been put above individual posts, or have they always been there and I've not noticed?
    – user310756
    Commented Dec 27, 2016 at 4:47
  • They've always appeared in that spot (though I don't know if it's possible that they aren't displayed at all if there's just nothing to show on that site). I don't know the history of which sites have had ads for how long, but we recently expanded the list so your chances of seeing them across the network have increased.
    – animuson StaffMod
    Commented Dec 27, 2016 at 4:49
  • 3
    I don't particularly mind the ads themselves, but the fact that they nudge the contents of the page down while loading it, sometimes just when I'm about to click the flag link (or the downvote arrow) really irks me. Could the page schema be set up to reserve space for the ad when it's going to be displayed so that the things we can click on stay put once they are there?
    – tripleee
    Commented Dec 27, 2016 at 5:40
  • 2
    As an aside, dishing out rep for high-accuracy spam flagging over a period of time would coincidentally solve this problem, and feel like The Right Thing to do for SE.
    – tripleee
    Commented Dec 27, 2016 at 5:41
  • @tripleee maybe you could draft an answer with these points?
    – user310756
    Commented Dec 27, 2016 at 5:44
  • Thanks. I posted an answer with the reputation suggestion, though I don't see how the "me too" comment would fit into that answer.
    – tripleee
    Commented Dec 27, 2016 at 5:52
  • @tripleeewell you're suggesting that the other mods tasks earn rep. So that's new to the question.
    – user310756
    Commented Dec 27, 2016 at 6:09
  • You could always run adblock.
    – Journeyman Geek
    Commented Dec 27, 2016 at 10:01

3 Answers 3

Reset to default
6

I donno. Reputation is a measure of overall involvement in the site. While I do occasionally indulge in a little dogpiling of the unworthy - I find that taking into account smokey, this might not necessarily be a good thing.

I consider 200 rep trivial - I've gotten it on most sides I've had the slightest bit of involvement in

If you're only flagging (and outside of smokey, I have no idea how one spots spam on a site you're barely a user of) - essentially, rather than adding value to the site (as edits and new posts do), you're destroying content of negative value. Its awesome but with a few exceptions, there's no exceptional need for people to go to a site just to do it.

In addition Rep for flags seems a terrible idea.

Lets consider the worst case scenario. Tom J Spammer has a bright idea. He creates a bot that flags spam from his competitors, gets rep, then posts spam. He's a clever little fella, in all the wrong ways, and hooks it into smokey's posts. Yeah, I don't like this idea.

I'd take that moment, take a quick look while the image loads to make sure its right, and whack it. I don't think extra benefits for folk who're essentially on spam hunting safaris makes sense in the bigger sense of things.

Improve this answer
4
  • The question does not suggest to award rep for helpful flags (which is indeed not a good idea, in my opinion).
    – wythagoras
    Commented Dec 27, 2016 at 10:43
  • 1
    Some of the low-traffic sites do not have a significant base of their own users whacking spam, and benefit from having the Smokey squad flag and ultimately remove unwanted stuff quickly. Especially for sites in early beta, the regulars typically want to focus on developing the content, not on keeping out vandals, and are not terribly familiar with the procedures we have for that. I would not dismiss the "exceptional need" just because you don't see it on the sites you are active on.
    – tripleee
    Commented Dec 27, 2016 at 10:48
  • One of the answers does. and indirectly - that's the best fit unless you count spam flags as a secondary count of 'trust'. Which I feel it ought not to be.
    – Journeyman Geek
    Commented Dec 27, 2016 at 10:57
  • 1
    I don't think the hypothetical threat here is ever going to be an issue in reality. You are assuming the spammer's competitors post spam in sufficient quantities, and that identifying them correctly is trivial (in which case other spam fighters are likely to get there before the spammer's bot), and that somehow this spammer's spam posts are not easy to detect by similar means. We already have good tools for allowing regular users to report problems like this, as proven by the fact that stumbling across spam on one of the main sites without looking for it is a rare event.
    – tripleee
    Commented Dec 27, 2016 at 11:24
3

I'd like to propose another solution.

Reduced ads is one of those privileges that you don't necessarily need to know the site or the site subject enough for to have. Most of these privileges, like commenting, are already covered by the association bonus, but "Reduced ads" is not.

How about awarding the "Reduced ads" privilege on all SE sites once you have passed a certain rep level, for example 4k on one site? It could also relate to network-wide rep. In either case, the threshold should not be too low because that will cost SE too much money.

Improve this answer
2
  • maybe give it at 100, with the association bonus?
    – Journeyman Geek
    Commented Dec 27, 2016 at 10:57
  • 1
    Changing the reduce ads privilege to be awarded at 100 instead of 200 is probably the only way this request will ever be completed. I don't see any strong reasons for making that change, but I also don't see any strong reasons for keeping it at 200. I'm fairly sure that was just an arbitrary number chosen to fill a gap.
    – animuson StaffMod
    Commented Dec 27, 2016 at 19:17
1

Awarding reputation points for consistent high-accuracy spam flagging over a period of time would coincidentally solve this problem within the framework of regular reputation, and seem like the Right Thing to Do for SE anyway.

The "Hide ads" privilege is awarded at 200 reputation points, and if you are trusted on the network, you already have (probably slightly over) 100, so my proposal would be to award 100 rep for 100 spam flags, out of which at least 95 helpful (the numbers are just off the cuff; because there is a daily cap, this will require some conscious effort and longevity ... maybe the helpful limit should be 97 or 98?) and maybe even throw in a bronze badge for those who care about flair.

For this particular problem, awarding the reputation just once should be sufficient, although I would not mind receiving another reward for 500 or 1,000 helpful spam flags.

Improve this answer
2
  • I like this type of idea. It would reward those moderating the site. Thanks for writing up the answer.
    – user310756
    Commented Dec 27, 2016 at 6:09
  • 4
    As a mod who has to handle those flags, this idea gives me the juddering horrors when I imagine all the flags I would have to handle from users (and/or future spammers) who cannot and will never flag accurately, but are hammering the flag button every day on the off chance they'll hit the rep jackpot. The already-helpful users you're thinking of would certainly appreciate the idea, but the bad actors you're not thinking of would outnumber them.
    – SevenSidedDie
    Commented Dec 27, 2016 at 17:18

You must log in to answer this question.