>>I think that pre moderation has hurt the content on this site.
There has not been one single post disallowed that would have contributed value-added content. Not one. In fact, some have made it out there that wouldn't have turned into the good discussions they became without premoderation. There are a few reasons for that - but it works to an advantage in that respect.
Actually, the elimination of much of the unnecessary volume has increased the amount of content of value in terms of both quantity and quality because people aren't being as easily turned away by being over-whelmed.
>>A redundant post or two aren't bad, but fifty or a hundred redundant posts in a day will shove the meaningful ones into oblivion.
Not only shoved into oblivion, but turning away some of the very people who could provide meaningful input.
>>Ditto for bad titles - one or two are no big deal. But nobody has the time to look at dozens of "Need Help" or "I Can't Do This" to figure out if the topic is of interest or is something they can contribute to.
Ditto the amount of moderating time needed, putting it all together. I've done some controlled timing - some for just the Google forum alone. Even after pre-moderation, which has in fact made it far, far easier.
It all looks very different from the perspective of putting in multiple hours of moderating time a week and trying to evaluate what needs of members appear to be, who's who and who's doing what.
To be perfectly honest, personally speaking there are some I have considerably more sympathy for than others. There are some who do little more than lurk looking for information they themselves find valuable, and/or make an occasional casual comment, and do little more - if anything at all - other than derive benefit from those who do participate and post. That's fine - but there are others affected there certainly needs to be more concern for, IMHO.
There are those who actively participate on an interactive level, on a continuing basis, as active members who make valuable, substantial contributions to the community by their participation.
There is no such thing as an online community growing, or even continuing to exist, without active member participation. There is no participation without posting and being an integrated part of the community, maintaining a level of active, visible involvement.
Though the lurkers in the first group have also probably benefitted tremendously by pre-moderation, it's the second group I personally have gratitude to and concern for. Forum 3 has been quite interesting to observe since pre-moderation started, BTW.
Unfortunately, when thinking about a voting system I have to admit to having serious reservations, a good deal of of it stemming from what I've referenced in regard to the two groups described above. I believe it could possibly lead to a very inequitable situation.
>>community moderation (i.e. Slashdot style)
I never have liked the Slashdot style of moderation. Still don't, never will. I wouldn't personally participate at Slashdot, with the system they have - never have, never will.
I'll have to see it in action to really know for sure. Fortunately, in all the time I've known Brett and seen him in action - I know if there's any way to invent a better mousetrap, he's the one who can do it - and he does do it. It's been proven over and over.