One of the main features of my site will be Discourse-style trust levels, the higher your trust level, the more moderation privileges you gain. I’m also considering either a jury system, where multiple users collaborate on moderation decisions, or a meta-moderation system, where users can vote “fair” or “unfair” on moderation actions taken.
Someone mentioned to me in another post that Bluesky also has a very good moderation system, but the best one I’ve found so far is Discourse. What I really like about it is that you earn trust levels by reading posts, not by taking moderation actions. I definitely don’t want to gamify moderation the way Stack Overflow did, that was the worst I’ve ever seen.
Had a quick look at your doc, and the juries idea does not sound good.
Moderation is not something loads of people want to do. Take a look at the list of unmoderated communities: https://programming.dev/u/Vacant - Forcing random users to be involved would likely annoy your users.
For certain types of reports, CSAM, gore, etc, you absolutely do not want to share that to random users. If your users are underage, it could be illegal to do that anyway, but sensitive users may not want to be exposed to triggering content.
Maybe you make being in the jury opt-in, but if most don’t opt in your back to regular old moderation by the few who have the stomach for it.