Timeline for Questions about the new minimum age for diamond moderators
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 11, 2020 at 13:03 | history | bounty ended | USERNAME GOES HERE | ||
| Dec 5, 2020 at 20:15 | comment | added | Shog9 | The issue there again is that in most of the US, 18 is a "safer" age from a legal perspective for exposing people to certain forms of content, @victor. Never mind that any such material on SO stands a better chance of being seen (and removed) by random users, nevermind the naivete of thinking 17 year olds aren't running into this stuff on a thousand other sites, nevermind the fact that 18 doesn't somehow magically make folks immune to psychological trauma... It is safer from a liability standpoint. | |
| Dec 5, 2020 at 19:09 | comment | added | USERNAME GOES HERE |
@CodyGray There is also the reality that, at least on a site as large as Stack Overflow, an unfortunate amount of the content that moderators are exposed to is probably not something you want children exposed to — do you really think that 17 years old is so different from 18 years old for example?
|
|
| Dec 3, 2020 at 15:26 | comment | added | Shog9 | The exposure of mods - and reviewers - to unsavory content is another sword hanging by a thread, @Cody. I doubt most folks in the company have any real idea of what that can involve at the extremes, and dare not guess at what will happen when they find out. | |
| Dec 3, 2020 at 8:14 | comment | added | rene Mod | @CodyGray I must say that if that reality reasoning had been the driver for this change I wouldn't have written my own answer. | |
| Dec 3, 2020 at 6:53 | comment | added | Cody Gray | You echo my own thoughts on this policy. When first described, I said something along the lines: "...some of our all-time best mods, and some of my favorite human beings, were under 18 at the time of election". On the other hand, I also said that I think the policy is a reasonable one on its face, and, while sad in some ways, it's difficult to argue with its legal merits. There is also the reality that, at least on a site as large as Stack Overflow, an unfortunate amount of the content that moderators are exposed to is probably not something you want children exposed to. Or anyone, really. | |
| Dec 3, 2020 at 0:16 | comment | added | Red | Just sad. Deeply, deeply sad. That's me. | |
| Dec 2, 2020 at 23:19 | comment | added | Ollie | "And they've proven to be as responsible and capable as the adult mods, sometimes even shining above their older compatriots" - that is something I've been looking for, and it's sealed the envelope containing my own two cents, which will hopefully arrive in the form of an answer. Thanks, Shog9. | |
| Dec 2, 2020 at 21:29 | history | answered | Shog9 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |