Quora Post Deletions: Policy Violations and Moderation Practices

Quora, a popular question-and-answer platform, often faces the challenge of moderating user-generated content while balancing the need for clear guidelines and user transparency. When a post violates Quora's policies, the platform typically identifies the source of the violation but sometimes falls short in explaining the specific reasons behind the deletion or warnings.

Identifying Violations

Quora almost always identifies which post, question, or comment is the source of a violation. However, users often advocate for more detailed explanations to help them understand the specific issues and prevent future mistakes. According to industry best practices, the platform is supposed to provide a basic identification of the type of violation based on a set list of issues, such as plagiarism, spam, or lack of factual support.

For instance, past users have reported that Quora sometimes mischaracterizes "plagiarism" as the reason for a deletion, even when proper quotation marks and citations were used. A more helpful approach would be to include the specific offensive text in the notice of the violation, allowing users to learn how to avoid such moderation issues in the future.

Reasons for Lack of Detailed Explanations

There are several explanations for why Quora moderation does not provide more detailed reasons for flagging violations. Some of these include:

Inviting Debate: Providing detailed explanations may invite further debate between moderators and users, which could be time-consuming for the moderators. Lack of Resources: Moderators may not have the time or resources to provide detailed explanations or defend every decision. User Self-Editing: Users are given the ability to self-edit and appeal, allowing them to explain any errors. No Roadmap to Violations: Providing too much information could potentially guide users on how to circumvent identified violations.

Common Violations and Their Identifications

When violations do get identified, they are often briefly listed, such as spam linking to commercial sites or self-promotion. For example, links to book sellers, personal blog pages, or other commercial sites have sometimes led to automated deletions. However, these often stem from automated systems that may sometimes misidentify links or content.

User Experiences and Moderation Resilience

Over the past five years, a few experiences have highlighted the difficulty in identifying the source of violations. While the general reason is often provided, the specific text that triggered the decision is rarely if ever identified. This has meant users having to guess the cause of the violation and make changes to their content accordingly.

Instances of violations and their resolutions varied. Complaints about bias in moderation are common, but a fair review often suggests that violations were evident and appropriately handled. In my case, I have been successful in editing content to resolve issues often due to errors in automated systems. Providing references and replacing links with written citations has been effective.

One incident involved a moderator deleting a comment for being "rude" for calling someone "obtuse" for repeatedly refusing to acknowledge factual information. Another instance involved violations of the BNBR (Be Nice Be Respectful) policy, usually due to reacting emotionally to comments that may not have been respectful.

Conclusion

While Quora has made strides in identifying policy violations, more transparency in explaining the reasons behind deletions and warnings would significantly benefit users. Improved communication could help users understand and avoid future issues, enhancing the overall experience on the platform.

For further discussion on this topic, please explore related articles and forums on Quora and other platforms, which frequently debate these issues.