So the next post in the debacle has landed; Feedback post: Moderator review and reinstatement processes.

I was just wondering, is there going to be a CM Review process coming out at some point?

Hear me out;

Most companies these days have the concept of customer (user) and contractor (moderator), and it's not the 90's anymore, you don't get to treat your customer like king and your contractor like peasant. Contractors will just choose not to work for you if you treat them badly, we can get other work quite easily these days, more easily than you can get good new contractors.

If, as a company, you find many contractors refusing to work with your staff, you need a review process to find out why.

If you are losing the best contractors because your staff are treating them like dirt on behalf of a customer who doesn't represent the majority of your revenue, then you might need to think about how that might impact your business negatively in the future.

You are essentially just a middle man that connects contractor with customer, and the customer gets the product for free and you give the contractor some imaginary points while you utilise the platform's popularity to advertise services for your own products.

Your moderators are your contractors, and you pay them nothing other than dopamine points. Your user's are your customers and your customers will probably try to take advantage of you more than your contractors.

Your business model seems to be more and more based on treating your customers like king and your contractors like peasants and you are pushing this with a "progressive" narrative.

At the moment, the feedback you are getting from your contractors via the medium you have provided them (meta) is largely negative. When are you going to provide a framework for this feedback that you don't just choose to ignore?

  • 2
    The tone of this question is distasteful, care to edit to lighten it up a bit?
    – W.O.
    Oct 23, 2019 at 20:43
  • 2
    Eh....I don't think there can be anything constructive to come out of attempting to whip up a mob against the company. Just like a community doesn't get to oust moderators for making unpopular decisions, neither should we have the ability to stake CMs for their actions. Popularity is an ugly mob to cater to.
    – fbueckert
    Oct 23, 2019 at 20:44
  • 1
    I'm flagging this as off-topic because it appears to be more of a rant than a legitimate attempt to present a solution or solicit discussion or information from the community. Oct 23, 2019 at 20:46
  • @011358smell yeah i am willing, any suggestions? I really feel quite let down reading how the company is treating it's mods, it's hard to express without some distaste. Oct 23, 2019 at 20:46
  • I'm asking if there's any feedback available for how CMs treat mods, I bolded that part, that is the question, and I explained why I think it's relevant in a business setting. Oct 23, 2019 at 20:48
  • @fbueckert hasn't part of our community literally ousted one of our moderators recently for an unpopular decision on her own opinion? Oct 23, 2019 at 20:57
  • 1
    If you're referring to Monica, that wasn't the community, but a unilateral action from SE. If not, I'm not sure who you're talking about.
    – fbueckert
    Oct 23, 2019 at 20:58
  • people in the community influenced the decision of the SE though, it was a decision about whose opinion was correct, made by SE. and yes, they probably made the CM's decision for them, but hierarchy exists in business for a reason, and blame travels up it from the first manager in the process. Oct 23, 2019 at 21:02
  • 1
    people in the community influenced the decision of the SE though That's debatable - the community overwhelmingly downvoted SE's posts regarding Monica's firing and she's still fired. How is this our fault? See also this example of how much the community's opinion matters to SE lately. Oct 23, 2019 at 21:03
  • i didn't say the majority of the community influenced them. Oct 23, 2019 at 21:05
  • 1
    Most of the recent controversial changes (the original CoC revisions, the HMP changes for SO, the firing of Monica) were merely announced to us after the fact with no prior warning or input from the community. They also made it quite clear in many of these cases that no amount of feedback or disagreement from the community would make any difference in their decision. It's still totally unclear to me how the community is supposed to have influenced this. Oct 23, 2019 at 21:08
  • I didn't say "the community", I said "part of the community". Part of the community were involved in the discussions that led to Monica being fired and left another "part of the community" feeling very threatened. I'm a-theist so i'm probably more personally opinionated against the theists, but i'm not okay with us forcing our beliefs downs their throats as much as i am okay with them doing it to me. Oct 23, 2019 at 21:17

1 Answer 1


No, this is wrong. SE as a company has had some major missteps of late, but I don't think that any of them were directly the CMs' fault. Thinking back to some of the most recent controversies (firing of Monica, the new CoC changes, forced relicensing, the HMP issue on Stack Overflow, even the controversial "Time to Take a Stand" post on Meta.SO) were not driven by the CM team - they were forced to be the public face of something that was decided at a higher level.


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