Return to Question

After reading various politics.meta questions, the following question has occurred to me:

Is the ratio of moderation:site content for this stack exchange considerably higher than the original hard-science stack exchanges?

And can we maintain the required ratio of moderation:site content indefinitely?

I'll leave this question open for the floor, but my two cents:

• The average person on the internet who drifts into town and asks or answers a question here tends to treat politics as a synonym for opinion*.
• The Stack Exchange Network design doesn't work well with opinions and opinions don't resolve into useful information that "make the Internet a better place to get expert answers to your questions".
• The level of moderation required to get opinionated users to comply to the site's terms of reference is high, very high because of the assumption internet blowflies have of political discourse on the internet. As Penny Arcade has stated, there are negative effects to giving any anonymous person access to an audience.
• Education doesn't work so well because the internet population is very large - teach a herd of camels how to fish and they will forget it as soon as they are back in the desert (of Yahoo! Answers).
• Hence, if a stack exchange site whose topic is prone to opinion and ideological cant is to stay above water, the ratio of moderation:site content required is high and stays high. At least until intelligent civic engagement is taught in primary school and is reflected in our political role models.

_{* Instead of the clean realm of policy and the implementation and negotiation of policy. i.e. An actually seriously interesting site instead of forum backwash.}

After reading various politics.meta questions, the following question has occurred to me:

Is the ratio of moderation:site content for this stack exchange considerably higher than the original hard-science stack exchanges?

And can we maintain the required ratio of moderation:site content indefinitely?

I'll leave this question open for the floor, but my two cents:

• The average person on the internet who drifts into town and asks or answers a question here tends to treat politics as a synonym for opinion*.
• The Stack Exchange Network design doesn't work well with opinions and opinions don't resolve into useful information that "make the Internet a better place to get expert answers to your questions".
• The level of moderation required to get opinionated users to comply to the site's terms of reference is high, very high because of the assumption internet blowflies have of political discourse on the internet. As Penny Arcade has stated, there are negative effects to giving any anonymous person access to an audience.
• Education doesn't work so well because the internet population is very large - teach a herd of camels how to fish and they will forget it as soon as they are back in the desert (of Yahoo! Answers).
• Hence, if a stack exchange site whose topic is prone to opinion and ideological cant is to stay above water, the ratio of moderation:site content required is high and stays high. At least until intelligent civic engagement is taught in primary school and is reflected in our political role models.

_{* Instead of the clean realm of policy and the implementation and negotiation of policy. i.e. An actually seriously interesting site instead of forum backwash.}

After reading various politics.meta questions, the following question has occurred to me:

Is the ratio of moderation:site content for this stack exchange considerably higher than the original hard-science stack exchanges?

And can we maintain the required ratio of moderation:site content indefinitely?

I'll leave this question open for the floor, but my two cents:

• The average person on the internet who drifts into town and asks or answers a question here tends to treat politics as a synonym for opinion*.
• The Stack Exchange Network design doesn't work well with opinions and opinions don't resolve into useful information that "make the Internet a better place to get expert answers to your questions".
• The level of moderation required to get opinionated users to comply to the site's terms of reference is high, very high because of the assumption internet blowflies have of political discourse on the internet.
• Education doesn't work so well because the internet population is very large - teach a herd of camels how to fish and they will forget it as soon as they are back in the desert (of Yahoo! Answers).
• Hence, if a stack exchange site whose topic is prone to opinion and ideological cant is to stay above water, the ratio of moderation:site content required is high and stays high. At least until intelligent civic engagement is taught in primary school and is reflected in our political role models.

_{* Instead of the clean realm of policy and the implementation and negotiation of policy. i.e. An actually seriously interesting site instead of forum backwash.}

After reading various politics.meta questions, the following question has occurred to me:

Is the ratio of moderation:site content for this stack exchange considerably higher than the original hard-science stack exchanges?

And can we maintain the required ratio of moderation:site content indefinitely?

I'll leave this question open for the floor, but my two cents:

• The average person on the internet who drifts into town and asks or answers a question here tends to treat politics as a synonym for opinion*.
• The Stack Exchange Network design doesn't work well with opinions and opinions don't resolve into useful information that "make the Internet a better place to get expert answers to your questions".
• The level of moderation required to get opinionated users to comply to the site's terms of reference is high, very high because of the assumption internet blowflies have of political discourse on the internet. As Penny Arcade has stated, there are negative effects to giving any anonymous person access to an audience.
• Education doesn't work so well because the internet population is very large - teach a herd of camels how to fish and they will forget it as soon as they are back in the desert (of Yahoo! Answers).
• Hence, if a stack exchange site whose topic is prone to opinion and ideological cant is to stay above water, the ratio of moderation:site content required is high and stays high. At least until intelligent civic engagement is taught in primary school and is reflected in our political role models.

_{* Instead of the clean realm of policy and the implementation and negotiation of policy. i.e. An actually seriously interesting site instead of forum backwash.}