We did consider community driven, that is the entire point of members reporting it. The fact that we need to screen it for moderation purposes doesn't really change that. If something is decided by the community but turns out to be a problem in the view of moderation, it will be removed regardless. Just like every other feature be they poll, thread creation, gift bot abuse, avatar shenanigans etc. The point of making moderation screening it before the highlight applies is to try and prevent problems rather than having to deal with them as a reaction. I'm looking for abuse/issues, not doing a "is this funny" check or whether or not I personally like it.
Here are some things we simply don't want to deal with: inappropriate/insensitive comments being highlighted by members, reducing discussion or replies, highlighted posts being used to win fights, highlighted posts being used to troll or otherwise antagonise members in subtle ways, getting into an argument with members because we removed a highlight. A post can be 90% fantastic but have a small element that is also not ok. A post can be 100% correct but the user is still being an asshole about it. The point is, we don't want to be too picky with these but there are considerations that we need to make as staff that we don't expect other users to be able to make. Users might not be happy with not being able to choose but I'd bet that is still better than when we're taking highlights down that they feel are 100% correct to users/communities. There will also be a cascading affect where you can then highlight posts that call out mods/users taking down the highlight. Community tends to react faster than moderators, this is why reports are often a game of catchup, find out what is happening, decide on it. You already see posts that were reported go unaction for a long time, imagine such a post highlighted... It will be frustrating to everyone involved. All of this nonsense is really far and away from the purpose of this feature which is simply an option to try and highlight some positivity or fun. I'm sure there will still be mistakes and issues now and then but it will be far less and easier for us to manage.
Nothing stops you from both reporting it for a highlight and posting to tell the member you appreciate them/their post. If anything, posting to say something can be nice in and of itself which is sort of the intent of this feature any way.
The "is or is not likes" calling argument feels pointless. This isn't how I use likes. Maybe it is how you use it and how you will use this feature. Cool. Moving on.
This feature is also not intended to replace threadmarks which are a more permanent feature to highlight important updates or informational posts within a thread. These features might work together but generally speaking serve different purposes. If you see a threadmark, you should probably read it to better understand either the rules or the topic at hand.
On the concern for moderator workload front, sure. It is more work for us, it will not always be quick either but I'll be honest. Seeing a maybe not funny post in the report queue will not do anything too much for me. The report queue can be at times a queue of some of the forums most toxic and tiring posts. Adding some "Is this worth highlighting?" into the mix is not going to be a problem personally and I'll be honest, I don't see a huge number of members using this feature regularly any way.
The way this feature works is a bit clumsy. It is one of the many features we have wanted for a while but also on the backend of things it isn't exactly the what it appears to be. It is a bit complicated but this isn't a feature built from scratch to do what we want so what we can change is also limited. It frustrates staff too and while we turning it back off is always an option I still hope there is stuff we can enjoy from this. I'm not sure what else we can add or change to this all I know is that it isn't easy to work with so try not to take our lack of commentary on people posting "This is a better method" type posts as us dismissing the idea entirely. Even if I like some ideas I can't even really comment on the feasibility of it right now.
Jokes will always be subjective and how familiar you are with the context definitely affects how well it lands. For this reason I personally didn't really want jokes and funnies to be highlighted. With that said though I also recognise it isn't just about me. Who am I to say that others shouldn't get to have a look at a maybe funny. I did consider that if it becomes just a jokes and funnies feed it would be a bit disappointing but I can add that to the considerations when the time comes. I can't exactly force members to make the content I want and then other users to report it for highlighting. This is still going to be something that needs to happen as users post, as others react and choose to report and then moderator reviews.
In any case, if this isn't a feature you want to use that is fine too. I've yet to do tournaments myself, not everything is for everybody. If you don't like any of the highlighted posts, that is fine too. If you do like the highlighted posts, that is great. There will always be some disagreements in this. When I clicked this thread I was expecting to see more discussion on what type of posts people wanted to highlight and examples. If you don't like what we have, give us examples of the cool stuff, the good stuff. We can add to the examples as well.
I've talked with mods endlessly about giving things to the community, this is one of them. I want more but honestly, some of the reactions make me question whether it is worth it at all.
Have you seen how discouraging the poll results were for things like inclusitivity and representation. Probably not because we ended up killing such polls almost every time. If you think that our forum is full of compassionate, understanding people who are also not internet users who have been over multiple decades now, conditioned by consumerism, social media and entertainment to be reactionary and often hyperbolic or worse yet dismissive in their online interactions I don't know what to tell you.
It isn't just important topics either. There is endless console wars. Trolling each other "for some fun and laughs" in typical internet fashion. Sometimes there are valid criticism that can be subtle or dogwhistling or inappropriate in some ways. You could read an otherwise great post and maybe highlight it. You might not catch the comment that calls out the problematic nature within the post. Others might not as well and so a post with inflammatory or inappropriate content continues on highlighted. This will only further serve to frustrate members. The amount of of "fuck you, got mine" type posts that users will casually endorse. The "I'm just here to talk about games, this is issue is important but I'm not here to talk about that and it doesn't need to be in this topic". The "this is fine to me" handwaving. "All the [minority status] friends I have say..." type posts. The dogpiling over something minor. The snark that made you laugh at the expense of another member. The us vs them mentality across threads, against different communities, against staff etc.
As a moderator, I have been forced to view things with a lot of intersectional considerations. I still make a lot of mistakes. So yes. Forgive me if I don't feel confident that giving users the keys won't result in messes that we'll have to step into and moderate, likely leading to pointless bans and frustrations all around. You have something? Our users will argue over it. Some of them to the graves of their accounts if they are passionate enough. Look no further than this thread where users feel like quitting over it. And I don't mean this in a disrespectful way, people feel how they feel and will have disagreements. I trust members to make mistakes. We all do. I don't want to ban people for them/situations caused so if looking through and denying some of the highlight requests leads to less of it then so be it.
I realise your post probably didn't deserve all of this response but I'm tired of people trying to paint moderators like the forum's biggest asshole.
No offense, but your response's tone and the depiction of Era members as untrustworthy speaks volumes about the recent moderation this board has employed in recent years. Recently, it's been seeming as if the mods here have been choosing to deflect criticism instead of addressing it constructively (typically in long-winded posts that beat around the bush). Judging by how often the mods here are ignoring concerns, as well as not addressing criticism (but pushing their own "nah, it's my way or the highway") responses...it's been pretty revealing. The Constructive Community and general meta commentary in this message board have been sharing insights about some of the poor moderation practices here. Why is nothing changing?
