Timeline for Why do mods have unrestricted access to users' followed posts but not saved posts and other private data?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 7 at 10:52 | comment | added | Meta Andrew T. | @HenryEcker btw, your link is about Favorites/Bookmarks/Saves, not Follow. | |
| Nov 5 at 2:37 | comment | added | Henry Ecker | This was requested in the initial announcement or at least the same question was raised: meta.stackexchange.com/a/382021/1099857 | |
| Nov 5 at 2:01 | comment | added | galacticninja | I notice this question is being downvoted. I'm genuinely curious whether this means that the downvoters believe moderator access to followed posts is necessary. If you think it is, could you explain which moderation tasks require this level of access? | |
| Nov 4 at 16:49 | comment | added | MisterMiyagi | FWIW, I would assume cough cough that for certain people following is highly correlate with activities that aren't meant to be accessible to mods, such as voting. | |
| Nov 4 at 9:27 | comment | added | ꓢPArcheon | The somehow creepy interaction you mentioned (and other similar ones I saw in the past) is already a reason mods should have no access to those info. As for WHY they have it... I assume it is a mix of "it is too much work to change it" and a "not worth it - no sensitive data" with a side flavor of "if you don't have anything to hide you shouldn't care" | |
| Nov 4 at 9:05 | answer | added | Shadow Wizard | timeline score: -1 | |
| Nov 4 at 9:03 | comment | added | Tinkeringbell Mod | "In cases of suspected voting fraud, they must escalate the issue to Stack Exchange staff for investigation." > There is some moderator tooling for detecting voting fraud as well, there's no 'must' for moderators to escalate this to staff. If the mod-tooling says you're a sock committing voting fraud very clearly, moderators can take action without staff involvement. | |
| Nov 4 at 7:47 | comment | added | F1Krazy | @Mast I'm a mod and I didn't even realise we had access to that information in the first place. It's certainly not something I've ever needed to check, nor can I think of any circumstance in which I would need to check it. | |
| Nov 4 at 7:25 | comment | added | Mast | For the record, as a mod I'm not aware we ever asked for this. It was just enabled by default when the feature was launched. | |
| Nov 4 at 6:22 | history | asked | galacticninja | CC BY-SA 4.0 |