Project Proposal: Sensitive content report moderation

[sarayourfriend]

Description

Part of #383

Tagging @zackkrida and @obulat for review. I don't have strong reasons for choosing y'all but with the potential cross-team dependencies I felt like Zack was a good option. Everyone else is already involved in multiple other discussions, so I selected you Olga, because I hadn't pinged you for a discussion yet and the two you're already reviewing look like they'll be moving into decision soon. We won't start discussing this document until you have availability though, of course!.

This discussion is following the Openverse decision-making process. Information
about this process can be found
on the Openverse documentation site.
Requested reviewers or participants will be following this process. If you are
being asked to give input on a specific detail, you do not need to familiarise
yourself with the process and follow it.

Current round

This discussion is currently in the Decision round.

Blockers should be shared by 2023-05-01.

Checklist

• My pull request has a descriptive title (not a vague title like
  Update index.md).
• My pull request targets the default branch of the repository (main) or
  a parent feature branch.
• My commit messages follow best practices.
• My code follows the established code style of the repository.
• [N/A] I added or updated tests for the changes I made (if applicable).
• I added or updated documentation (if applicable).
• I tried running the project locally and verified that there are no visible
  errors.

Developer Certificate of Origin

Developer Certificate of Origin

Developer Certificate of Origin
Version 1.1

Copyright (C) 2004, 2006 The Linux Foundation and its contributors.
1 Letterman Drive
Suite D4700
San Francisco, CA, 94129

Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies of this
license document, but changing it is not allowed.


Developer's Certificate of Origin 1.1

By making a contribution to this project, I certify that:

(a) The contribution was created in whole or in part by me and I
    have the right to submit it under the open source license
    indicated in the file; or

(b) The contribution is based upon previous work that, to the best
    of my knowledge, is covered under an appropriate open source
    license and I have the right under that license to submit that
    work with modifications, whether created in whole or in part
    by me, under the same open source license (unless I am
    permitted to submit under a different license), as indicated
    in the file; or

(c) The contribution was provided directly to me by some other
    person who certified (a), (b) or (c) and I have not modified
    it.

(d) I understand and agree that this project and the contribution
    are public and that a record of the contribution (including all
    personal information I submit with it, including my sign-off) is
    maintained indefinitely and may be redistributed consistent with
    this project or the open source license(s) involved.

[github-actions]

Full-stack documentation: https://docs.openverse.org/_preview/1176

Please note that GitHub pages takes a little time to deploy newly pushed code, if the links above don't work or you see old versions, wait 5 minutes and try again.

You can check the GitHub pages deployment action list to see the current status of the deployments.

[zackkrida]

This looks excellent, I've requested changes specifically concerning incomplete information on blurring and displaying images in the Django UI. All other feedback is non-blocking.

[kaueburiti]

I don't know if I'm talinkg about something that you already know about, but maybe a good call would be to have a grid view as we have on TOS report tool (NSFW CONTENT!!!).

We have wonderful feedbacks about how much this kinda of visualization increase the moderation speed.

[kaueburiti]

Anothe thing that's is extremely useful to moderators are hotkeys that takes actions without needing to click in anything.

Like we do have in our TOS report tool.
If you type "Enter" it will take a specific action, if you type right arrow, you go to the next report, if you type something-that-i-forgot-now you apply a specific community label to that post, etc..

[sarayourfriend]

Thanks for those suggestions @kaueburiti, they're very helpful insights into what moderators expect. Being able to turn blurring off sounds like a great idea and easy to implement without adding much technical scope. I will modify the project proposal to specify that requirement. Would you consider the other two things (grid view and custom keyboard interactions) "must haves" for moderators to be able to do their work, keeping in mind that Openverse's report volume is currently relatively low (less than 2 per day)? Just trying to understand how critical those two tools are for the job so I can know whether to add them as requirements to this project or defer them to a fast-follow project.

[kaueburiti]

Would you consider the other two things (grid view and custom keyboard interactions) "must haves" for moderators to be able to do their work, keeping in mind that Openverse's report volume is currently relatively low (less than 2 per day)?
@sarayourfriend
hmm, I didn't know that the volume was so slow hehe

Well, so I believe that those are not must have at all, but when the volume increases those are very important features in my experience 😅

[sarayourfriend]

Okay, thank you for that clarification. Our team doesn't have a good way to demarcate things that are "fast follows" vs what must be completed for a given project to be considered "finished" and I do want to be defensive of scope on this project because it could essentially go on forever. Project there specifically being the Openverse "project" i.e., a unit of work, not the ongoing project of enabling and improving moderation, which as I said in the proposal, is a forever thing for us.

I'll ask the team what the best way to record that is without expanding the scope of this baseline project. Just want to clarify though that it'll get put down as a future requirement 🙂

[obulat]

The proposal is very thorough and clearly shows how much work needs to be done for this part of the Content safety goal.

[sarayourfriend]

I'm moving this proposal into revision. I plan to have the revised document ready by Wednesday, 2023-04-26.

[sarayourfriend]

I opened a new project thread for us to make further improvements to the moderator tools in the future: #1885

[sarayourfriend]

This proposal is now in the decision round. Please share any blockers by 2023-05-01 @zackkrida and @obulat.

[sarayourfriend]

@zackkrida is AFK until Monday, so it's safe to assume that we might not have a decision on this until at least the day after the current deadline. That's fine, but if you could share your thoughts after the revisions @obulat, I would be grateful to have a head start on planning any additional revisions needed, if any exist.

[obulat]

@zackkrida is AFK until Monday, so it's safe to assume that we might not have a decision on this until at least the day after the current deadline. That's fine, but if you could share your thoughts after the revisions @obulat, I would be grateful to have a head start on planning any additional revisions needed, if any exist.

All the revisions look good, @sarayourfriend. Having input from someone more familiar with the content moderation process at scale also gives confidence. Thank you for your input, @kaueburiti !
I have no objections.

[zackkrida]

No blockers here. I have some open suggestions for typos and formatting, and one open question about the contents of the doc. LGTM!