分析Reddit moderators争议内容，揭示平台内容审核的复杂性
The Gray Area: Characterizing Moderator Disagreement on Reddit
- 通过430万条日志分析争议案例特征
- 七分之一审核案例存在分歧，近半由自动系统处理
- 大模型难以判断争议内容，人类专家仍不可或缺
志愿者版主在维系在线对话中起关键作用，但常就内容是否允许存在分歧。本文聚焦版主间的争议，称为‘灰色地带’。基于24个不同主题与规模子社区5年共430万条审核日志，我们分析了灰色地带案例与无争议案例的差异。结果显示，每七起审核案例中就有1起存在争议，多涉及用户意图不明的情况（如网络挑衅、集体刷屏）以及社区治理矛盾。令人担忧的是，近半数灰色地带案例由自动化系统决策。信息论评估表明，灰色地带案例本质上更难裁决，且当前先进语言模型也难以有效处理。研究强调了专家人类版主在监督审核流程中的核心作用，并揭示了现有审核机制与工具面临的挑战。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
Volunteer moderators play a crucial role in sustaining online dialogue, but they often disagree about what should or should not be allowed. In this paper, we study the complexity of content moderation with a focus on disagreements between moderators, which we term the ``gray area'' of moderation. Leveraging 5 years and 4.3 million moderation log entries from 24 subreddits of different topics and sizes, we characterize how gray area, or disputed cases, differ from undisputed cases. We show that one-in-seven moderation cases are disputed among moderators, often addressing transgressions where users' intent is not directly legible, such as in trolling and brigading, as well as tensions around community governance. This is concerning, as almost half of all gray area cases involved automated moderation decisions. Through information-theoretic evaluations, we demonstrate that gray area cases are inherently harder to adjudicate than undisputed cases and show that state-of-the-art language models struggle to adjudicate them. We highlight the key role of expert human moderators in overseeing the moderation process and provide insights about the challenges of current moderation processes and tools.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品；中文卡片由大模型生成，请以原文为准。