# Meditations on the Kiwi News content moderation policy

Source: https://telegra.ph/Meditations-on-the-Kiwi-News-content-moderation-policy-06-20

## Summary

Tim Daubenschütz writes that the Kiwi News content moderation policy, introduced on June 6, 2023 to curb off-topic submissions, has become too restrictive and now holds back content from being posted. He notes that Alex Palmer and others pointed out early on that the document featured too many "DON'Ts," which made users second-guess new links before posting. He credits the policy with streamlining title submissions in the "How to submit" section and with helping keep off-topic content off the front page. The article sets the stage for a change and asks readers about their experiences, whether the site could benefit from a broader range of news, and whether central moderation leads to good outcomes.

## Article

Meditations on the Kiwi News content moderation policy

Tim Daubenschütz

On June 6, 2023, we introduced a content moderation policy to Kiwi News as a means to combat off-topic submissions and improve the site's overall content quality.

In that process, we also introduced new moderation tools like the ability for administrators to hide links or edit titles. In the context of June 6, these policies made sense, and that's why we implemented them quickly.

However, the mere threat of such a policy also changed posting behavior - but not only that, the site's permanent user base doesn't seem to be stable - hence, it has now become my suspicion that the content policy holds back more content from being posted. While before its introduction, we had many diverse submissions, when asking for "hacker engineer," we certainly limited the spectrum of fitting content.

Additionally, I now feel like the moderation policy is too restrictive. In hindsight Alex Palmer and others even pointed this out initially, saying the document featured too many "DON'Ts," which made users second guess every new link before posting. And in that regard, the policy then misses its target - namely, that of improving content quality.

Recently, and I'm not sure if this is due to lack of interest, that policy, or the summer news cycle, the site's top content hasn't been fresh enough (although it's been quality-wise pretty good).

But policy served its need a couple of times as it allowed us to weed out the front page from content that didn't fit there. The "How to submit" section is probably its best outcome, as it streamlined title submissions (there's now only one way to title a submission).

For me personally, the policy also provides grounds for legitimacy to moderate in the first place.

Still, I do think the policy has now influenced the submission process too much, and so with this article, I want to set the stage for a change.

What have your experiences been with the moderation policy?

Do you think Kiwi News could profit from a more broad array of news? And do you think centrally moderating the site leads to a good outcome? How has the content been for you?

Because if not, other community moderation tools do exist, and moderation could be implemented too - e.g., with downvotes or flagging, with subreddits and quadratic voting. Our Telegram channel and the NFT holders could take over moderation, although the question remains who'd then also post content?

In any case, we'd love to hear your opinion on the site's content and how you've perceived it in the last two weeks, and we'd love you to reach out to me and Mac for it!