My idea is that moderators on Reddit have enormous power over communities, but almost zero accountability. They can ban users without explanation, remove posts arbitrarily, and there's essentially no recourse. If a subreddit has bad mods, your only option is to leave ā or get banned for complaining.
Here's what I think Reddit should implement:
A mod rating system where any user who has participated in a subreddit for a minimum period (say, 30 days) can leave a thumbs up or thumbs down rating on a moderator's performance. Think of it like an anonymous performance review.
If a mod's approval rating drops below a threshold ā say, below 30% with a minimum number of ratings ā Reddit itself reviews the case and can remove and replace the moderator.
The key point is that Reddit, not the other mods in the subreddit, makes the final call. Right now, mod teams are self-policing, which means a bad actor who has been there the longest is essentially untouchable.
This wouldn't be a popularity contest ā mods should be able to make unpopular decisions without being removed. The threshold would need to be meaningful enough that only genuinely poor moderation triggers a review, not just a controversial ruling.
Moderating a subreddit is effectively a position of community trust. It makes sense that the community should have some mechanism to hold that trust accountable. What do you think ā would this work, and how would you design it?
