My understanding of who has diamonds:

  • All moderators have diamonds on the sites they moderate and their respective meta
  • Stack Exchange employees have diamonds everywhere they're needed

Right now, there are a lot of new diamond moderators across the network, with more being added in the near future.

Stack Exchange has also been doing a lot of hiring lately, which means there are a lot of newish ex officio diamond moderators as well.

I think it would be helpful if there was a way to differentiate between moderators and employees across the SE sites.

A couple of examples of where it would have been helpful:

  • On betas, right after opening: users see people with diamonds and wonder where these moderators came from—it would be clearer if they were easily identified as employees.
  • On MSO, when (for instance) someone responds to a feature request. It's useful to know if that response is from, say, the programmer who's currently working on that exact code versus a volunteer mod who has an opinion that something is/isn't/will never happen.

Suggested solution:
Give employees a different symbol.


Suggested but unusable:

Misc thoughts:

  • The super-coolest kids on the block would be those with both symbols.
  • Someone would need to verify that there are no users on any site whose user name ends with the new symbol (and keep people from changing their user name to have it).
  • While these symbols are all valid Unicode characters, some of them might not be visible on all browsers (IE, I'm looking at you…). Those that aren't visible on all supported browsers should be ruled out.
  • 6
    BTW, I remember seeing two diamonds for site founders on some SE 1.0 sites. Here's one. One diamond = "mod", two = "admin". – ЯegDwight Feb 4 '11 at 9:58
  • 23
    If this gets implemented as a spade, I will endeavor to gain employment at Stack Exchange and change my name to 'Ace' :) – Tim Post Feb 4 '11 at 9:58
  • 2
    @RegD - I figured the powers that be would want to swap a single character for a single character. I was hoping that there was a double-diamond unicode character, but no joy. – Dori Feb 4 '11 at 10:01
  • 7
    I'm in favour of U+2615 HOT BEVERAGE for employees. :) – Pekka Feb 4 '11 at 10:05
  • @Pekka - I was thinking about that one, and also about the $, ¢, and € symbols… but I had to draw the line somewhere. – Dori Feb 4 '11 at 10:11
  • @Dori yeah. Also, HOT BEVERAGE is not really practical as it doesn't render well in small sizes – Pekka Feb 4 '11 at 10:11
  • @Dori, from this I gather I should remove all the symbols I can't see either? – Borror0 Feb 4 '11 at 10:13
  • @Borror0 - go for it (although someone will have to approve your edit, iirc). – Dori Feb 4 '11 at 10:14
  • +1 - for interesting concept, but this adds another section to be included in FAQ for showing which symbol means what. – Sachin Shanbhag Feb 4 '11 at 10:14
  • 3
    @Sachin - I'd rather have one small section in the FAQ versus confusing people, or requiring the same question to be asked/answered on every beta site. – Dori Feb 4 '11 at 10:16
  • the first, second and eight character are not visible on my browser (they show the same as your non supported chars.) – Andy Feb 4 '11 at 10:38
  • 1
    No need to worry about usernames I think - Just tried to add a ♢ to my name: "Display Name can only contain a-z, 0-9, spaces, apostrophes or hyphens and must start with a letter or number" – Blorgbeard is out Feb 4 '11 at 10:41
  • what about U+2122 ™​ trade mark sign? – Tobias Kienzler Mar 11 '11 at 12:08
  • 3
    @RegDwight, as for seeing double diamonds, you are right: Members of the Stack Overflow team used to have stars ★ as their designation. 'Owners' of SE 1.0 sites had double diamonds. ♦♦. The people appointed to moderate by them were single diamond moderators ♦. The single diamond moderator is the only symbol still in use. – Arjan Dec 17 '11 at 11:55
  • @TimPost Now that you've achieved the first half of that, are you going to be the Ace of Diamonds? – Rand al'Thor Apr 14 '16 at 16:23

I kind of agree with badp's answer here -- we are running alongside you, not above you.

We strive mightily to put the very same tools that we have as moderators, in the hands of the community moderators. Obviously there are some unavoidable differences (mostly based on "kind of dangerous even for us developers"), but the general philosophy is this:

power to the people

Therefore, at least in principle, there should be very little difference between my actions and another community moderator's actions.

And I think the visual indicators should echo this sentiment.

| improve this answer | |
  • 11
    My diamond is shinier than your diamond. It's so shiny you can't even see it! – xmm0 Mar 11 '11 at 10:49
  • 22
    Yeah, but on MSO there is a difference, and that's where it really matters. – Gabe Jun 1 '11 at 5:52

-1. While this proposal makes logical sense, it is harmful to the community. The last thing SEs need is more of the "we site vs you owners" feeling. Most of the time, this difference is irrelevant and I'm glad that it is that way.

| improve this answer | |
  • 2
    Interesting point, I'd not thought of that issue. – ChrisF Feb 4 '11 at 12:01
  • 26
    I think every time a new mod is added, all mods get one more ♦. That way we can tell the good mods from the nooooobs. – Will ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ feb 14 at 12:45 – user1228 Feb 14 '11 at 17:45
  • 16
    @Will s/good/ancient/ :) – Michael Mrozek Feb 14 '11 at 19:35
  • 1
    Ahhh memories!! – Lightness Races in Orbit Aug 1 '19 at 13:41

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