Paper detail

Critical Challenges in Content Moderation for People Who Use Drugs (PWUD): Insights into Online Harm Reduction Practices from Moderators

Online communities serve as essential support channels for People Who Use Drugs (PWUD), providing access to peer support and harm reduction information. The moderation of these communities involves consequential decisions affecting member safety, yet existing sociotechnical systems provide insufficient support for moderators. Through interviews with experienced moderators from PWUD forums on Reddit, we examine the unique nature of this work and its implications for HCI and content moderation research. We demonstrate that this work constitutes a distinct form of public health intervention characterised by three challenges: (1) high-stakes risk evaluation requiring pharmacological expertise, (2) time-critical crisis intervention spanning platform content and external drug market surveillance, and (3) navigation of structural conflicts where platform policies designed to minimise legal liability directly oppose community harm reduction goals. Our findings extend existing HCI moderation frameworks by revealing how legal liability structures can systematically undermine expert moderators' protective work, with implications for other marginalised communities facing similar regulatory tensions, including abortion care and sex work contexts. We identify two necessary shifts in sociotechnical design: moving from binary classification to multi-dimensional approaches that externalise competing factors moderators must balance, and shifting from low-level rule programming to high-level example-based instruction. However, we surface unresolved tensions around volunteer labour sustainability and risks of incorporating automated systems in high-stakes health contexts, identifying open questions requiring HCI research attention. These findings inform the design of platforms that better accommodate vulnerable populations whose health needs conflict with regulatory frameworks.

preprint2026arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.