Timeline for How can I ask a question regarding moderator related issues if I don't have access to the Teachers' Lounge or the Stack Moderators team?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
25 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S May 6, 2023 at 4:06 | history | notice removed | CommunityBot | ||
| S May 6, 2023 at 4:06 | history | unlocked | CommunityBot | ||
| S Apr 29, 2023 at 3:41 | history | notice added | Journeyman GeekMod | Comments only | |
| S Apr 29, 2023 at 3:41 | history | locked | Journeyman GeekMod | ||
| Apr 27, 2023 at 6:14 | comment | added | Cerbrus | And yet again you're just propagating the problem, @αλεχολυτ. If you'd just say if you signed the agreement, and when, there'd be no problem, there'd be no confusion. But you're still being secretive about something this simple... Which leads me to believe you didn't actually sign the agreement. I mean, what other reason could you possibly have to not want to state that you signed it? You are making this difficult. | |
| Apr 26, 2023 at 22:55 | comment | added | Xander Henderson | @αλεχολυτ I don't think that anyone is suggesting that your access to moderator-only spaces was taken away because you had not signed the agreement. Rather, your access was taken away because you would not answer the question of whether or not you had signed the agreement, which created doubt in the minds of a large group of moderators regarding whether or not you should have access to those spaces. When faced with such doubt, the very reasonable default is to assume that you should not have access to those places until someone with greater knowledge and access can handle things. | |
| Apr 26, 2023 at 22:51 | comment | added | αλεχολυτ | @Cerbrus are you confident that I lost access to the chats and to Stack Moderators team because I didn't have signed the Agreement at the time when I got suspended? Do you know the exact time when I signed, and when I got suspended to communicate on chats for entire SE network? What is the source of your information? | |
| Apr 26, 2023 at 22:12 | comment | added | Cerbrus | Okay, just looking at the question, you're being vague about the subject you want to ask about and you're implying you're unaware of why you don't have access, while you're very well aware of why not. That dishonesty alone is reason enough to downvote this. Then, on the very first comment on here, you falsely claim that there is no proof you didn't sign the agreement. A claim you keep doubling down on despite being corrected... | |
| Apr 26, 2023 at 21:50 | comment | added | αλεχολυτ | @Cerbrus Just try asking yourself how the question would score if another user asked it and there were no comments (especially based on speculations). | |
| Apr 26, 2023 at 21:50 | comment | added | αλεχολυτ | @Cerbrus Really, look at the question. What do you see in it? The question of how to ask about something without having the usual access to the tool to ask about it. It is not a question of why that access is restricted now, why it was, who deprived this access, whether it was legally deprived. It all just came out of inappropriate comments and "answers". And what I am seeing now is downvoting the question not for the question itself, but because of comments (not related to the question) and I admit for a personal attitude towards the author. | |
| Apr 26, 2023 at 20:24 | comment | added | Cerbrus | I mean, just look at this question, all of the relevant information he's left out... | |
| Apr 26, 2023 at 20:23 | comment | added | Cerbrus | @ColleenV: He's been throwing around false accusations of power abuse, he's been deliberately rejecting explanations (by co-moderators) because, according to him, it's all just speculation (while mods can see if a mod signed the agreement), he's been passive aggressive, he's been deliberately misinterpreting SE writing... Basically he's been behaving exactly how you'd expect a mod not to behave. This could've been so simple, just a bug report. But no, he had to turn this into a whole "thing". So yea, I'd call it untrustworthy. | |
| Apr 26, 2023 at 19:29 | comment | added | Xander Henderson | By the way, you, @ColleenV, have indicated that trust is important: "Sorry but I do not trust people with access to my PI just because some site elected them." I agree entirely, which is why it was concerning that αλεχολυτ would not answer the question of whether or not they had signed the agreement. Let us presume that αλεχολυτ did not sign the agreement. You seem to agree that, in that case, they should not have access to moderator-only spaces and tools. So, how should the moderator community react? I think that the appropriate action is to remove access. Which is what was done. | |
| Apr 26, 2023 at 19:22 | comment | added | Xander Henderson | @ColleenV Moderation on this site is all about trust. We have been elected by our communities to moderate inter-personal interaction, and have been given access to sensitive information. I would expect that everyone in this community would like the moderators to behave in a manner which indicates that the trust which has been placed in the moderators is well placed. And your comment that "He's clicking on things he's been given access to and asking questions" seems to intentionally ignore most of what I have said. | |
| Apr 26, 2023 at 19:20 | comment | added | ColleenV | He's not attacking the site. He's clicking on things he's been given access to and asking questions. Implying that makes him unfit to handle flags is a bit over the top. | |
| Apr 26, 2023 at 19:17 | comment | added | ColleenV | When did you trusting him become a requirement for being a moderator? I've been a woman in engineering for decades. I know exactly what "Why can't you just behave?" means. What exactly has he done that indicates he's untrustworthy? Have a bad attitude? Use the wrong tone of voice? Make things harder than they have to be for reasons you don't understand? Sometimes finding where things bend and where they break is the point. | |
| Apr 26, 2023 at 19:08 | comment | added | Xander Henderson | @ColleenV Who said that I expected αλεχολυτ to be my friend? I just want him to behave in a way that makes me trust that he isn't going to mess up the site... | |
| Apr 26, 2023 at 18:58 | comment | added | ColleenV | He wasn't elected to be your friend. He has no obligation or duty to behave how you would prefer he behave. Your attitude that somehow people have to do things the "right" way according to you is the problem my second comment attempted to point out. His community entrusted him with their interests, not the mod community's interests. | |
| Apr 26, 2023 at 18:54 | comment | added | Xander Henderson | There are two distinct issues here: (1) the existence of a security flaw (which nearly everyone agrees should be addressed), and (2) the way in which αλεχολυτ destroyed the trust that the rest of the moderator community has that αλεχολυτ will behave in a mature and responsible manner when it comes to the job of moderation. | |
| Apr 26, 2023 at 18:53 | comment | added | Xander Henderson | @ColleenV Your comment seems to betray a fundamental misunderstanding of everything I said. No one is upset with αλεχολυτ for pointing out the existence of a security problem. I think that we all agree that knowing that the problem exists is a good thing. The problem is with the way in which αλεχολυτ decided to treat the community of moderators---had they come into the community and say "Hey, there is a problem here", we all would have been quite happy for the input. The problem is that they didn't do this, and they refused to answer simple questions about their own behaviour. | |
| Apr 26, 2023 at 18:48 | comment | added | ColleenV | I will say this regarding the implications that being "difficult" without breaking the rules might disqualify someone as a moderator. That's rubbish. I understand it's frustrating for people who don't understand why someone is rocking the boat, but in this case it's exposed a serious security problem and the process around onboarding new mods in the future will be better for it. Conforming to expectations is not always a virtue. Nothing that's happened as a result of αλεχολυτ's delaying the mod agreement has caused significant harm. It's just annoying. Let's not overreact. | |
| Apr 26, 2023 at 16:33 | comment | added | ColleenV | Sorry but I do not trust people with access to my PI just because some site elected them. The company should not give people access to anything mod-related until they fulfill all the requirements. Anything less than that is a violation of the published privacy agreement. Whether certain people are being annoying by delaying signing an agreement is irrelevant. | |
| Apr 26, 2023 at 14:05 | comment | added | αλεχολυτ | "SE staff then followed up by further restricting αλεχολυτ's access to these tools and spaces." Are you sure? Do you know it reliable? Who did it and why they did it before checking is there Agreement signed by me or not signed? Just based on the lack of my answer about that in chat? Nonsense! | |
| Apr 26, 2023 at 13:41 | comment | added | Cerbrus | You've put my concerns I mentioned before into words very well... I don't understand how a moderator can be so argumentative over something as simple as signing a moderator agreement. | |
| Apr 26, 2023 at 13:34 | history | answered | Xander Henderson | CC BY-SA 4.0 |