14

RPG just concluded their election, and one of our new moderators is actually an old moderator, nitsua60. The Moderators page in the users tab says nitsua60 was elected in 2017, and links to the 2017 Moderator Election page:

enter image description here

While this is true, nitsua60 was most recently elected in 2021. This field should be updated to reflect that, linking to the most recent election, or alternatively, changing it to reflect both.

12
  • Why did they need to be re-elected? Normally, once you are elected, you can apply for reinstatement at any time, even if you step down. There's no need to run for re-election. Commented Nov 4, 2021 at 19:34
  • 6
    @CodyGray Nitsua explains his motivation in this rpg.meta post Commented Nov 4, 2021 at 19:35
  • 11
    We only have space for one thing and we opted to go with the oldest record so that it's clear that moderators that were recently reinstated aren't necessarily "new" to being a moderator - up until recently, we only showed the most recent event, not the older one. We're in a tough spot because of that - it's not a bug, it's intentional - but we're a bit stuck on having it be a perfect representation.
    – Catija
    Commented Nov 4, 2021 at 19:39
  • 2
    @Catija That text implies, though, that they were elected and continued to serve since that time. I can see some valid cases for it (a mod took a short break, a mod was emergency-removed and quickly reinstated, etc.) but some cases where it's invalid (e.g. ChrisF hasn't continuously served as a mod here on this site since when he was elected SO moderator in 2013). Commented Nov 4, 2021 at 19:56
  • 5
    @SonictheAnonymousHedgehog Understand - but there's only so much we can do without completely revamping that page to have ranges. We are more likely to have this issue with pro-tem mods becoming elected mods than any other example and it doesn't make sense to invalidate (years of) service because the site left beta. :)
    – Catija
    Commented Nov 4, 2021 at 19:59
  • 1
    @Catija I think the best way to fix the issue would be to allow the page to query for all potential valid things to fill in there, and give staff the option to choose whichever is best applicable for each one. This will solve it for all cases, including the edge cases (one that I just thought of is where a staff member with global mod rights ceases employment, and later gets elected on a site they've never been a mod before - the page will show them as "appointed" the day they were hired, not "elected" when they were elected and actually became part of the mod team). Commented Nov 4, 2021 at 20:08
  • 1
    Also, the moderator action review process says that if a mod is removed under that process, their name is removed from election pages - this change would mean that if they later get elected again, their prior record will come back again on site pages. Commented Nov 4, 2021 at 20:09
  • 3
    @SonictheAnonymousHedgehog As to that last thing, we don't do that... we don't remove mods from the election pages who are removed through the action review process. That may have been one of the items in that list but we've never actually done it - it makes no sense to invalidate (potentially) years of service and damage the history of the site because of how that period ended.
    – Catija
    Commented Nov 4, 2021 at 20:12
  • @SonictheAnonymousHedgehog I think there's only 1 mod who ever got removed from the election pages and that's in part due to the account no longer existing. That was Yvette back in '18.
    – Mast
    Commented Nov 4, 2021 at 20:30
  • @Mast I think the page it's referring to is the election index page. Commented Nov 4, 2021 at 21:23
  • Mast's point applies either way, Sonic. Anyway, thanks for the link to the Meta post. I disagree with it, but it's nice to understand. That story involving SevenSidedDie is quite inspiring regardless. As a moderator, I certainly live to burn abusive parasites with fire. :-) Commented Nov 4, 2021 at 22:00
  • 1
    @Mast we have to do something similar every time a former mod deletes their profile. It's rare but it's happened more than once. If we don't, the page breaks
    – Catija
    Commented Nov 4, 2021 at 22:51

1 Answer 1

-2

In the comments, Catija said:

We only have space for one thing and we opted to go with the oldest record so that it's clear that moderators that were recently reinstated aren't necessarily "new" to being a moderator - up until recently, we only showed the most recent event, not the older one. We're in a tough spot because of that - it's not a bug, it's intentional - but we're a bit stuck on having it be a perfect representation.

Here's a suggestion that wouldn't require drastic changes to the layout (I think)...

If a moderator has been elected more than once, replace the elected XXXX link with a button that says elected twice or elected x times. Then, clicking that button would open a popover similar to the one used for the new "history" button under election candidates' statements:

enter image description here

That popover should contain links to each individual election the moderator has been elected in. Something like this:

Ranges No Ranges
enter image description here enter image description here
3
  • Sometimes, when confronted with a problem, a designer will think: "I should hide this information inside of a pop-up!" Now, everyone has multiple problems, which they can't even always figure out how to see. Commented Nov 4, 2021 at 22:01
  • @CodyGray Haha! I'm not a designer though; not even close :-P I do get what you mean but I don't think it hides much, in this case.
    – 41686d6564
    Commented Nov 4, 2021 at 22:04
  • 2
    I'd rather leave the nitty-gritty details of when they served spread out across meta posts rather than visible easily. It can cause some issues. Commented Nov 4, 2021 at 22:08

You must log in to answer this question.

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