Closed Bug 909802 Opened 11 years ago Closed 7 years ago

Build Editorial Flagging/Feature Guidelines for Webmaker

Categories

(Webmaker Graveyard :: General, defect)

Product:
Webmaker Graveyard
Component:
General
Platform:
x86
macOS
Type:
defect
Priority:
Not set
Severity:
normal

Tracking

(Not tracked)

Status:
RESOLVED INCOMPLETE

People

(Reporter: kat, Assigned: erikad)

References

Details

Suggest a two-step process to ensure we are covered legally re: Make flagging/deletion/featuring (pertaining to bug 905629): 

1) I draft Editorial Guidelines copy w/Brett,ErikaD re: 
* The kinds of Makes we feature (ie, irresistible to remix..)
* The kinds of Makes that will be flagged (ie, potentially abusive..)
* The kinds of Makes that will be deleted/users banned (ie, racist)

2) We then work with front-end folk (Gavin, Kate, Dale) to implement that page (similar in look to https://webmaker.org/feedback but something like webmaker.org/guidelines ) on Webmaker. 

Note: Right now am looking into Facebook's flagging guidelines (called 'community standards') as starting point - they're quite comprehensive re explaining different types of removed content: https://www.facebook.com/communitystandards
Blocks: 905629
Blocks: 909804
Awesome. Adding Erika Drushka to have a look at this from a copywriting perspective (when we are ready).
Yay, Drushka! (btw, pad was private, now public. #fail).
The reporting feature has a green light from the code reviewers ( Bug 905629 )

I won't merge and land it until we have this bug done, and we ship editorial guidelines. I might update the reporting bug afterward to link to said reporting guidelines.

Is this almost ready to go?
Flags: needinfo?(kat)
Flags: needinfo?(erika)
Adding Jacob, as a good resting place for this content will be on SUMO.
I have these editorial guidelines marked to be on SUMO when ready. Right now the etherpad still has wording for Facebook, so still needs to be edited and revised for Webmaker. 

Should I just replace the word "Facebook" with "Webmaker" or does someone want to take a stab at customizing it?
Flags: needinfo?(brett)
Jacob, I'd like to work with you to build this to ensure it fits with the wider editorial strategy here. Let's do next week?
Flags: needinfo?(kat)
Flag me when you guys are finished and I'm happy to review the copy.
Just so I'm not blocking myself on something I shouldn't, would we all agree that we need editorial guidelines before launching the reporting feature in Bug 905629 ?
So I found a document that we'd been using in the past :

https://make-dev.mozillalabs.com/en-US/events/legal/content-guidelines/

I think with some small changes to make this less event-centric, we can use this as a basis for our editorial policy.

Erika, want to take a stab?
Assignee: nobody → erikad
Flags: needinfo?(brett) → needinfo?(erikad)
From a copy-writing perspective, this needs only very minor changes, as you mentioned Brett. The one questionable point is:

10. No content or events that are un-related in anyway to Mozilla’s Webmaker Initiative.  

Is that supposed to be a vague, catch-all opportunity for us to delete any content we don't like?

Kat and Jacob, where are you guys at on this? Can you please Brett's link and let me know if there is anything to add or remove?
Flags: needinfo?(kat)
Flags: needinfo?(jacob)
Flags: needinfo?(erikad)
Flags: needinfo?(erika)
I actually prefer something more aligned with the Facebook guidelines. The guidelines that Brett linked to are a bit more strict, and reflect our former approach toward a younger, <18 year old audience. 

I guess I'm mainly thinking about: "5. No content that glamorizes or encourages alcohol, drug or tobacco use." 

Last I heard, we're targeting 14-24 year olds, so folks who are over 21 are legally allowed to use alcohol. Does that mean we take down a remix of "Keep Calm and drink a beer" because of that policy? We don't actually know the age of the person making it so it's hard to say I suppose.

I'd like us to be pretty open minded about free speech if possible, with exceptions to abusive bullying and hate speech.

Also in regard to: "10. No content or events that are un-related in anyway to Mozilla’s Webmaker Initiative." 

I think we should just strike that one because that language is specifically meant for the summer code party events and event platform. I don't think it reflects the new Webmaker site.

If we need a catch all policy that would allows us free will to take down something, 9 times out of 10 we could invoke the copyright clause.

Just my two cents.
Flags: needinfo?(jacob)
Agreed. I think the best way to do this is combine the (quite comprehensive, and I think accurate) Facebook guidelines I put in the pad above with the old Webmaker guidelines (which as Jacob points out don't fully represent the community we're focusing our attentions on in this next stage of the site). 

Happy to have chat about this during week to mash em together.
Flags: needinfo?(kat)
Ok team, I mashed up the two sets of guidelines and added them to the pad: https://webmaker.etherpad.mozilla.org/editorialguidelines

Please review!
Good mashing Erika! I think it all looks exactly as I'd want it to look - and I do agree that stating clearly what the penalty for violating all of the above is, would be a good thing (ie, user account deleted, make taken down, etc). 

Then we can say we've been completely explicit here.
Looks pretty good to me.

Since we have the flagging feature coming, we could also suggest that if you see content that grossly violates these guidelines, you can flag them as inappropriate and they will be reviewed by Mozilla's editorial board.

We have to walk a fine line with this, since we don't have the resources to guarantee a response to every flagged submission.

Also, it's pretty easy to break these guidelines. Like if someone makes a video calling John McCain and old **** who doesn't know how to use the interent, that is technically degrading an individual based on age.

Perhaps we should state something that says that this is a community standard and not every violation will be removed. Justification for removal will be based on the level of threat against someone's personal safety weighed against the value of contribution toward meaningful public dialog.
I added this at the end:  

This is a community standard and not every violation will be removed. Justification for removal will be based on the level of threat against an individual or group's personal safety weighed against the value of contribution toward meaningful public dialog. Consequences for violating this standard can range from content being removed from webmaker.org to account deletion. In cases involving credible threats of harm, Mozilla may contact law enforcement agencies.

[kind of a downer ending, though. I'd be nice to end that page on a more positive note.]
Did this get implemented? Can I mark this as closed?
Brett, can you assign to have this implemented? Thanks!
Flags: needinfo?(brett)
Let's give this a review w/ legal.  Will bring you into our process.
Flags: needinfo?(brett)
Component: Editorial → General
Andrew, this bug got sidelined. Do you want to add editorial guidelines to Webmaker?
Flags: needinfo?(andrews)
Yes! It's an important part of community management and also relevant to the Webmaker.app (Mobile) project that we are in-development on (which has a "flagging" feature). Can we attach the latest version of the document to this bug (sorry if I'm missing something)?
Flags: needinfo?(andrews)
The draft is here: https://webmaker.etherpad.mozilla.org/editorialguidelines

Comments and recommendations from legal can be viewed in Bug 965566
Flags: needinfo?(andrews)
Closing this bug as part of the Deprecation of the Webmaker Product on Bugzilla. If this issue needs to re resolved in another manner, re-file it in a new Product or find the associated project on Github (http://github.com/mozilla) and file an issue there.

see bug 1347718
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 7 years ago
Resolution: --- → INCOMPLETE
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.