Moderation Tool for Ban Appeals

Goal: Reduce moderation burden and exposure to toxic ban appeals Evidence rating (PDN): Convincing Civic signal: Welcome — Ensure user safety When to use: Reactive

What it is

An automated tool that requires users to provide more information in their ban appeals before they are sent to the moderators.

Intended impact

To decrease the workload on moderators and the amount of toxic appeals that moderators are exposed to when reviewing appeals.

Evidence that it works

Atreja et al. (2023) conducted a field experiment with a Reddit community that looked at how ban appeals differed when users were asked to provide an additional set of information in their appeals by a bot compared to those who did not have to do so. The bot would only forward completed ban appeals to moderators.

By shifting the effort to the users to provide the reasons and evidence for overturning their ban, the authors observed a 70% decrease in the number of appeals that moderators received which led to a similar 60% drop in the number of appeals they reviewed. (Note: all results we report in this review are statistically significant, unless otherwise stated.) Furthermore, when the bot was in place there was a 90% decrease in the number of toxic appeals that moderators were exposed to.

Mod teams might be concerned that, while AppealMod decreases their workload, it could have a negative impact on users, specifically by decreasing the number of successful appeals or by creating resentment among users who prefer their appeals to go directly to mods. The authors, however, did not find any evidence of those negative effects. The number of successful appeals was not significantly different when AppealMod was used and they similarly did not see any difference in the number of toxic messages sent to mods.

Why it matters

Volunteer moderators offer their time and effort to keep their social media communities thriving. Yet their status also leaves them open to ill-intentioned actions by members of the community. Bans, which have strong consequences for members, may spur greater toxicity and retaliation that manifest in the appeals. By adding friction to the ban appeal process, the tool enhances the moderation experience by alleviating the moderator’s workload and protecting their well-being.

Special considerations

While the tool offers clear benefits to the moderators, in this study the researchers were not able to examine its effect on all users or the community as a whole. Further research would be needed to be conducted to see if there is likewise a positive, neutral or negative impact.

Citations

• *AppealMod: Shifting Effort from Moderators to Users Making Appeals* — Shubham Atreja, Jane Im, Paul Resnick, and Libby Hemphill. (ArXiV)

---

From the Prosocial Design Network's Digital Intervention Library (https://www.prosocialdesign.org/library/moderation-tool-for-ban-appeals), licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Reformatted for the RT Commons; text otherwise as published. Library citation: Prosocial Design Network (2024), Digital Intervention Library, https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/Q4RMB. Anything built from this pattern should credit the Prosocial Design Network and the researchers cited above.

Details

• goal: Reduce moderation burden and exposure to toxic ban appeals
• citations: [object Object]
• image alt: An illustration of a user interface layout with two main sections. On the left, there is a rectangular panel with multiple lines, likely representing a list or text content. On the right, there is a smaller panel with a search bar at the top and two circular icons below it—one containing a checkmark and the other an "X"—which likely symbolize approval and rejection actions. The style is minimalistic, with a dark outline and simple design elements.
• image url: https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/647f696dc653a97c26f42a0b/67648661a593318200025339_moderation_tools.webp
• pdn rating: Convincing
• when to use: Reactive
• civic signal: Welcome
• pdn library doi: 10.17605/OSF.IO/Q4RMB
• civic signal goal: Ensure user safety