Content moderation practices and technologies need to change over time as requirements and community expectations shift. However, attempts to restructure existing moderation practices can be difficult, especially for platforms that rely on their communities to conduct moderation activities, because changes can transform the workflow and workload of moderators and contributors' reward systems. Through the study of extensive archival discussions around a prepublication moderation technology on Wikipedia named Flagged Revisions, complemented by seven semi-structured interviews, we identify various challenges in restructuring community-based moderation practices. We learn that while a new system might sound good in theory and perform well in terms of quantitative metrics, it may conflict with existing social norms. Our findings also highlight how the intricate relationship between platforms and self-governed communities can hinder the ability to assess the performance of any new system and introduce considerable costs related to maintaining, overhauling, or scrapping any piece of infrastructure.

翻译：内容审核实践与技术需要随着时间推移和社区期望的变化而不断演进。然而，重构现有审核实践的努力可能面临重重困难，特别是对于依赖社区开展审核活动的平台而言，因为变革会改变审核人员的工作流程和工作量，以及贡献者的奖励机制。通过对维基百科一项名为"Flagged Revisions"的预发布审核技术相关的大量历史档案讨论进行研究，并辅以七次半结构化访谈，我们识别出重构基于社区的审核实践所面临的各类挑战。我们发现，新系统在理论上听起来不错，并且在量化指标上表现良好，但它可能与现有的社会规范相冲突。我们的研究结果还凸显了平台与自治社区之间错综复杂的关系如何阻碍对新系统性能的评估，并在维护、改造或废弃任何基础设施方面引入巨大成本。