Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 158 Stack Exchange communities.

What is meta?
Here's how it works:
  1. Any Stack Exchange user can ask a question
  2. The community provides support, votes on ideas, and reports bugs
  3. Your voice helps shape the way Stack Exchange operates

It would help a lot if we could see moderated posts, specifically those deleted in moderation, during an election. Otherwise we're stuck with relatively unhelpful information like this:
(see Dragonlord's post, where he did his best to link to relevant info)

Which links to this:

Which says:

3...2...1.... user destroyed. poof!

Poof indeed. But the user and their posts are gone:

So I have no way of verifying that anything this moderator did was a good move.

I'm sure leaving a bunch of spammer's posts around isn't an ideal use of storage, but if we're going to effectively evaluate candidates, we really ought to have some useful way to evaluate removals like this. Otherwise it would be possible for someone to slip by who's moderated away perfectly good posts by new users and otherwise behaved well.

It seems the simplest way would be to just keep those posts on file and list them in a new Moderated tab in a Moderator's profile.

(DragonLord - sorry for using you as an example - I'm not trying to imply you're guilty of anything, just using a concrete example to demonstrate the feature need).

share|improve this question
I think posts like this will remain in Data Explorer. Perhaps the election page should link to a set of easy-to-use queries where you can just plug in the relevant ID(s) and it gives the info. – Matthew Read Jul 23 '12 at 18:32
What are you looking for? The examples you've presented in this question wouldn't show up in the user's history anyways, no matter how detailed. – wax eagle Jul 23 '12 at 18:40
@waxeagle The ability to easily inspect presented evidence like this, so you can simply verify that the posts/users they proposed be removed were worth removing. – Chris Moschini Jul 24 '12 at 5:09
@ChrisMoschini honestly, you either believe it or you don't. In this case there is chat conversation down the line that confirms a moderator destroyed the accounts. That's not done lightly. In this case it was just a user identifying a spammer to a mod, I'm not sure why it wasn't a flag instead of a chat message, but to each their own. – wax eagle Jul 24 '12 at 12:22

A moderator candidate is not a moderator. (Except when a new site gets its first election, when pro tempore moderators must run in the election if they wish to continue being moderators.) You cannot judge a moderator candidate on their past actions as moderators, since they have not performed any.

What DragonLord did here was to notice something wrong on the site (a spammer), and he notified the site's moderators through flagging (or perhaps here through a chat post, but the normal way is through flags). DragonLord's assertion that the user was a spammer was reviewed by a site moderator (studiohack, evidently), who agreed and destroyed the user (which completely removes that user's posts from the site).

Each candidate's nomination includes the count of “helpful flags”. All these flags are requests for a clean-up action that was approved by a moderator. You cannot directly evaluate such clean-ups because most of them leave no trace or have to remain confidential (to avoid retaliation, and in the interest of letting bygones be bygones if the user who had done something wrong mended his ways). However, moderators have done that job.

share|improve this answer
If that's the case it's hard to see average users like myself participating effectively in moderator elections, if you're just supposed to trust that an accumulation of helpful flags is all you need to know. The meta item counts could also use tooltips to explain to the newly invited what they're looking at. – Chris Moschini Jul 24 '12 at 5:12
@ChrisMoschini Why? The number of flags is only one criterion among many. Other things are visible, for example the candidate's comment and edit history, and their meta posts. – Gilles Jul 24 '12 at 7:21
For transparency; if I'm going to participate effectively in elections, above all I want to know what they're wiping out from the site and preventing others from viewing. There are numerous posts on meta about overactive mods. That above all is something I'd like to look for so I can ensure I don't vote for a destructive mod.……… – Chris Moschini Mar 27 '13 at 3:11

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .