The problem currently facing dKos is one that every large online community has gone through: Scaling up can be a real bitch.
You see, the fact of the matter is, dKos is getting huge, as all successful sites do. What it's imperative to see is that the choices that online communities make at this critical point irreversably shape the way in which they evolve!
Here, I'm going to look at some possible solutions to the current problems facing dKos. Read on after the break:
First, if you only read one article ever on this topic, you should make it "A Group is It's Own Worst Enemy" by Clay Shirky. He's been studying this stuff for a decade, and knows his stuff.
The Problem:
Essentially, what's happening to dKos is that there has been a rapid influx of new users and, as a result, the signal-to-noise ratio has gone down considerably. That's not to say that new members aren't bringing great stuff to the table - some of them certainly are. It's just tough to appreciate that when diaries are whizzing past at 50 per hour, and comment threads boom to unreadable sizes.
The Solutions
There are several ways to deal with this scale. One way is the chat room method: when things get too large and hectic, people start to leave, and the problem self-corrects. However, you also lose many of your best users this way. We're already beginning to see the first of this here on dKos, and frankly, I think it sucks.
The other primary way is through a moderation system, that creates a threshold for participation. This is the route that dKos is currently heading down, which is a good thing, IMHO. Moderation has the power to help address the issues with the two areas of the site that are becoming unmanagably large: The diaries and the comment threads. These are crucial, because they're both at the heart of what makes this a community.
The Diaries:
I believe the key is more moderation of diaries, and not just by the general base of users. Identify a core group of trusted users, and let them elevate the status of a diary through a rating/recommending system. When all users have the power to recommend, sensationalist themes begin to emerge, and the Diarists that shout the loudest are the only ones that get heard.
How you choose these trusted users is another issue. I believe that just relying on karma alone is a bad idea. As before, that only encourages users to sensationalize in their posts and makes them reticent to post on unpopular themes or disagree with others ("karma-whoring" emerges). And as Kid O pointed out, dissent and discussion are at the heart of any good exchange of ideas.
To combat this, why not make trusted users actually "Trusted"? I think the site should have a slowly-expanding circle of trusted users, based on recommendations by the current crop of trusted users. Here's how it works: Let Kos hand-pick the first set. After being approved, the small group of mods recommends users for TU status and collaboratively decides on who is worthy. And here's the beautiful thing: by doing this, you create a sense of accountability. TUs will only recommend people that they're convinced can be good mods, or it reflects badly upon them and possibly jeopardizes their TU status. Kos can have the final word on any new members of the gang. This also makes the community of TUs easily scalable - just ask your TUs to find some new folks.
The Comments:
In order to tease out the good comments, I suggest going to a moderation/thresholding system similar to Slashdot's. (Who you let rate comments is another issue - perhaps this is where regular users' karma should come in) Regardless, there needs to be a way to cut out the unrelated or unsubstantial comments and pull out the cream of the crop.
Are there downsides to this? Absolutely! Some great comments will slip under the radar, but that's a small price to pay for boiling a 500-comment thread down to the best and brightest, making it readable once again.
I hope that I've presented a cohesive plan here, and I hope that we adopt it and it benefits the community. Whether you agree with me or not, I want to hear your feedback, because this site is too great to lose.