As discussed in this question, moderators can now see where they 'rank' relative to the quantity of their peer's actions. This includes actions that only moderators can take, as well as actions that we hope any high reputation user would take. This is great, in theory because it should encourage moderators to do stuff like get out and vote.
However, given the sheer volume of flags, especially when a new data dump is released, I find the red / orange / bright orange bold numbers speak to me in the sense that I'm not doing enough. Additionally, I feel as if they speak to my peers in the same sense about me, and that makes me feel a bit uncomfortable.
I love the new statistics, however, I'm able to tell that I really need to vote on questions more often without a big bold number pressuring me into doing so. I'm posting this as a feature request now, because I actually contemplated digging through my favorite tags to find stuff to vote for just because I found the bold stats a bit embarrassing.
I know it's not supposed to be a negative incentive, but that's how my brain is processing it.
Instead, perhaps we could highlight the 'super stars' in bright / normal green, so we can all aspire to their level of awesomeness when our full time jobs aren't so demanding?
I have the Electorate, Sportsmanship, Copy Editor and Strunk & White badges. I earned them over time, as I had time to give to earning them. I do all of the things that help make the site work, however, flags have to take priority.
Sometimes I take 60 actions in a day, sometimes over 600 (last April 1) - the point is as a moderator I need to make the time that I have available to spend count as much as possible, which usually means addressing stuff that the rest of the community simply can not. If time is left, sure - I can do other things.
I like the stats, but highlighting the lowest cases (to me) would only make sense if everyone that was measured actually committed to some level of performance in those areas. We did not, this is a completely volunteer effort and it does seem very much like negative reinforcement.