Post by Maria Ogneva, Director of Community

This post was inspired by the discussion I participated in on this PBS Mediashift blogpost.

One of the commenters brought up an interesting position (albeit a bit strongly worded), which I hadn’t seen discussed that much in community management blogs, and that’s the emergence of socialware that allows for a more democratic system. This got me thinking about the delicate balance that each community manager must strike between moderating the community, while empowering the community to exhibit its own leadership and a democratic system of attaching value (as well as taking away points) to certain activities and contributions. This system would ideally be partly automated and partly voted on by other users. Communities like Digg, Kirtsy, StumbleUpon and many others allow for such a democratic system through which community members can decide on the most valuable content. Over time, most communities should aim to take on some of these features.

There’s definitely a merit in the community manager giving the community room to breathe; there’s a danger in over-moderating – it’s stifling. Community participation tools are getting better and better. In addition to evaluating content, now comments can be also valued. Commenting platforms like Echo, IntenseDebate and Disqus allow to evaluate each individual comment, allowing the commenter to accumulate points, which are basically an indication of how valuable the community finds that person. The quality and quantity of your contributions allows you to garner more respect and recognition from the community, not to mention that using these systems allows you to collect and collate your contribution from all over the Internet. I think stuff like this makes community participation fairer and more democratic. Ideally, a community (through blend of own features and external features like Disqus), would be able to reward dedication, participation, leadership and non-destructive dialogue.

However, without human interference (which ideally should be minimal, unless there’s a conflict), any such system can be easily gamed.  If a community manager looks at him / herself as a steward / evangelist of community vs. a policeman / enforcer, I think it would help strike a balance between enabling lively, yet organized chaos.

Print or Email Article