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

I noticed that, while we have (at this point in time, 2009-09-02) 4 people who qualify for moderator status on serverfault, only one has been granted the "diamond". Are we going to have more moderators in the near future, or will poor Splattne be left to fend for himself? Just curious.


I'm talking about non-employees, folks. Read the question again - please.


So it seems there's confusion on two fronts - moderators are not necessarily "employees", but at the same time, the verbage used to describe their access isn't exactly clear either.

"Well, sometimes the magic works. Sometimes, it doesn't. " - Old Lodge Skins, in Little Big Man

share|improve this question
Don't sweat the downvotes here on Meta. They're used to indicate disagreement more than to indicate that a question is crap. – squillman Sep 3 '09 at 18:58
Hey squillman, how long have you been here? ;) good to see you. And thanks for the pointer. I'm currently gathering my thoughts for that upcoming "question"...should be interesting to see the reaction when it's posted (unleashed?) here. – Avery Payne Sep 3 '09 at 19:16
Shouldn't this be migrated to MSF, now that MSF exists? – Pops Dec 6 '10 at 17:00
@pop: It's a question that should now be asked on MSF, yes, but this one is over a year old and the situation has changed since then. – Jon Seigel Dec 7 '10 at 18:50
up vote 6 down vote accepted

Back when ServerFault was launched, mrdenny and Kara Marfia were appointed as community moderators, a position they still hold, so there are really 3 moderators (plus the dev team and Joel, but they fall under your "employees" umbrella). And given ServerFault's traffic, I think that 3 moderators are plenty.

Also, while 10k+ reputation was enough for Jeff to notice and promote splattne, it should not be construed that 10k+ in and of itself makes you elegible for consideration - lots of factors come into play. Besides, 10k+ rep users are already partially moderators because they can vote to close, delete, etc.

share|improve this answer
So there is another set of criteria that isn't mentioned. In other words, what you read isn't what you get. But at least I got the answer. – Avery Payne Sep 3 '09 at 0:49
@Avery: Since moderators can act unilaterally, Jeff has to be very careful about who he selects. Reputation alone isn't sufficient. – Kyle Cronin Sep 3 '09 at 0:52
Sounds like the FAQ should have a minor revision - "Moderator status at or above 10,000 reputation points is awarded based on a selection process used by SO employees", etc. etc. Not trying to be nit-picky, but it reads "one way" and turns out "another", which makes it a bit confusing. Just trying to help. And thanks for the answer. – Avery Payne Sep 3 '09 at 0:57
@Avery: Well the FAQ does say "moderator tools", not "moderator status", but I agree that the term is a bit overloaded here. But I'm at a loss to come up with better terms (other than "administrator", but that carries its own connotations too) – Kyle Cronin Sep 3 '09 at 1:03
How about "Community Steward"? "Trusted Member"? "Community Policing"? "Trustee"? – Avery Payne Sep 3 '09 at 17:41
@Avery: You're not the first to be confused about the wording. When I hit 10k, I was expecting doves to be released and confetti. Instead, I got to access a toolset that only gives me a bit more statistics than the average user. It is in no way comparable to moderator status :) – Sampson Sep 3 '09 at 18:12
@Jonathan Sampson, good to know that I'm not alone. It's alot like "wow, while I'm browsing the user page, I can see there are users with 10k, but they're not mods...huh? How did that happen?" – Avery Payne Sep 3 '09 at 18:15

Uh, there are other mods:

You can find this on the about page of any of the sites.

ServerFault for example:

share|improve this answer
re-read the question. – Avery Payne Sep 3 '09 at 0:47
@Avery: Besides @wood, they are not employees. Also, my answer was before your edit. So, re read the answer. – GEOCHET Sep 3 '09 at 1:05
If you look at the top of the question before the edit, you'll see a link clearly outlined that takes you to the.... user page. – Avery Payne Sep 3 '09 at 17:42
bah, nevermind. Too much time invested. I'll look at deleting the question... – Avery Payne Sep 3 '09 at 17:43
You are awfully full of yourself for someone who clearly doesn't understand what the FAQ says or anything about moderation here. Try toning down the attitude. You got your question answered, my answer being one of them. Deleting the question? Why? – GEOCHET Sep 3 '09 at 17:49
That seems confusing. Let me get this straight - if the question was "so bad" that it is being voted out of existence, then explain why I should not delete it? Isn't that the point of closing questions - to indicate that the question was somehow so horrible that it should be shunned? Or is civility lost here too? – Avery Payne Sep 3 '09 at 17:52
As far as being full of myself - well, I'm sorry you seem to think that. It was an innocent question in search of an answer. From my perspective, it clearly hit a nerve somewhere, which was hardly the intention. – Avery Payne Sep 3 '09 at 17:53
And there lies the contradiction that is confusing to me. I'm trying to be humble - offering to withdraw something that is being seen as a blight by others - and you then say I'm full of myself? This is just confusing to me. For civility's sake, I'll ask - could you clarify what you mean? And how you arrived at those conclusions? Obviously there's some nuance that isn't being conveyed clearly in text messages here, and I'd like to have a clear understanding of what that is. – Avery Payne Sep 3 '09 at 17:57
You are too emotional. Let it be. – GEOCHET Sep 3 '09 at 20:19

Hey sweet, I'm getting paid? Thanks for the good news! =)

Seriously though, currently, SO's user page 1 ends at 26k, and they have only 2 community mods. Though I think you could look at precedent to see that 10k doesn't a new moderator make, maybe this question is an indication that the wording could be more concise. That's the point of meta, right? If an idea gains enough traction and gets enough upvotes, it's likely to get some attention.

That said, I'm not sure the downvotes were intended to be hostile, but were possibly a vote against the idea. It seems a little nebulous on meta, whether the downvote is used to vote against the idea or the question. Though it's hard not to take downvotes personally.

Makes for some fiery posts, it seems.

share|improve this answer
re: fiery posts, I guess so. Although I don't frequent SO that much, most of my time is on SF. I'm working on a post for the near future that is very specific to things I've seen/observed on both SF and SO (and a few on SU as well), so this should be interesting... – Avery Payne Sep 3 '09 at 19:18
With the current exchange rate, if I was getting paid, I could quit my day job and retire. Considering that right now it is 7 to 1 USD. – BinaryMisfit Sep 3 '09 at 19:51
I can only imagine how beautiful the view is, too! Sign me up if you can make that work. ;) – Kara Marfia Sep 3 '09 at 20:24

I compiled a short summary of the current diamond moderator count and the links to the lists for each of them here.

Most of the diamond moderators are chosen by voting here on Meta, for example here and here, or in the past on the Stack Overflow Blog for example here. That said these moderators are chosen not for their knowledge or skill particularly, but rather for their ability to manage the community and make fair judgements and resolve issues.

The 10K mods are mainly focussing on keeping the content clean, rather then managing the users. A lot of the diamond moderators you will find actually don't have very high reputation counts, with the few exceptions.

The major differences of the tools provided to moderators is listed here. Also diamond moderators have final say powers, if we close or delete it is immediate, no 5 user waiting period as is the case with 10K moderators. Also diamond moderators can view moderator tags and flags.

Lastly we get the Flame-throwers. We can ban, destroy and even delete user accounts.

share|improve this answer
Interesting. And thanks for the info! (+1) Now where did I put that full-body fire suit? ;) – Avery Payne Sep 3 '09 at 19:37

You must log in to answer this question.

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