114

I am very happy with this. I don't think it's an unreasonable restriction and the net win for the process itself is big. This is supposed to be a fun and exciting time for a site and everyone that participates in the process. I have a couple of thoughts. While it's not an unreasonable restriction, we have to ensure that people anticipate it. I don't want a ...


113

Your paragraph on "be honest" represents quite a departure from the way this was handled in the past by moderators. In most cases, the answer to suspensions has always been "no comment", regardless of the amount of drama a suspension caused. My impression was that most moderators interpreted something into the guidelines from SE on this subject. Making ...


88

I wish we could. The problem is, individuals have to be a certain age to legally give us consent to store their PII (personally identifying information). The age where kids can do this varies (US:13 / EU:16 though not all countries have updated local laws which creates confusion). If you aren't that age, we can't keep your account, because we're not ...


75

The linked question isn't stellar, but I fail to see how it's "made in bad faith". It looks like an application of Rule Zero, to be frank. The community doesn't like subpar questions, but it likes Rule Zero even less, naturally. I'm tired of seeing moderators saying they're improving the Meta by doing this. Moderators need to understand one simple thing: by ...


72

To be completely fair, after my initial investigation into the matter, I was fully prepared to just leave everything be for the remainder of the weekend and finish looking into it the next day. I wasn't even planning to take any action at all, but just to followup and make sure the situation had died down and no one was still arguing. Then she started ...


53

What is considered acceptable feedback? For anything other than trivial "CSS is falling apart", first you have to ask yourself do you feel lucky? It might go right and it might go wrong. This place is a minefield. No matter how careful you are, no matter how good your intentions are, you can still blow yourself up if you make any minor misstep. 1. Good ...


52

It's not your job to punish people; I can't find any other words but those to explain that to you. I am the Director of communities here at Stack Overflow because I quite deeply care about what the site means to, and has done for the world's developers. I care very deeply about how the site is perceived and regarded, which is why I find the events leading ...


52

It seems like you've identified something that may have been the problem. It seems it may have been a reasonable cause for suspension, but we don't know exactly what the issue was, so we have to speculate. You should absolutely be told exactly what caused the suspension. Your complaint (not being told exactly what behavior caused the suspension) seems to be ...


51

In an ideal scenario, two things would happen: The behavior that causes the suspension would be easily collatable and dropped into the mod message automatically (or as part of a workflow) The user would understand that this isn't really a debate. The current wording of the mod templates are designed to say "You did something bad" as gently as possible, ...


50

2018 Update to this, from a personal level: I'm not going to get overly specific, but there were some things going on at the time that prevented me from seeing something that was pretty painfully right in front of us: We (or at least I) assumed everyone involved was a man, except in the case that the user visibly identified as not being a man. Had we not ...


48

I'm going to go with a hard no. SE's power ends at the bounds of the site. Any other interpretation leads to some staggering overreach and an incredible chilling effect. Think about it: if any site (SE or otherwise) tries to enforce its norms of behaviour outside of its own site, how many people would invest themselves into it? Or only post under a ...


46

Note It's very important to see this chat transcript (all of it) for context. I'm going to be posting a follow up answer shortly, we got a few things very wrong when handling this. Please see this updated answer Some things here. Just things everyone can take away so this unfortunate chain of events can bear some moderately useful fruit. although it was ...


44

I was about to ask a similar question. Without going into too much detail, I would slam a big Yes on this first. Though, that's a very quick jump to a conclusion. I give this answer based on the following assumptions and my observations: There are many spammers and random trolls around the Stack Exchange network that get banned or suspended every day. ...


40

There's three common types of irregular patterns that we discourage (and actively detect): Users creating multiple accounts used to vote for one another (sock puppets) Users that consistently vote mostly for their friends (targeted voting) Users that cast down votes out of anger or spite (a form of targeted voting) The first case should seem obviously ...


39

I agree with this. Being a moderator is a higher responsibility than being an ordinary user; it should follow that moderators are held to a higher standard, and that there is an intermediate stage where someone is trusted enough to be a user, but not to be a moderator. But I'd like to propose a tweak (I think I got the idea from Chris in chat): rather than ...


38

Simply put, no this is not possible because regular users don't have easy access to view all the activities between a user and the site. Moderators can see all their deleted posts and all their deleted comments. As well, they are called into situations via flags consistently and are much more aware of situations involving specific users than a community ...


38

Dukeling raises an interesting question: So is that 10% of suspensions in general or 10% of users who actively continued using their accounts post-suspension? It's approximately 10% of users whose suspensions ended who were later suspended. Defining "actively continued using their accounts" is a bit fuzzy, so I'll present some additional numbers... Of ...


37

It's rare, but an account can be suspended for a protracted amount of time when all other attempts at reasoning have failed when it comes to a certain type of behavior. It's not always behavior, though; There's a few things I need to explain to really lead up to a proper answer to your question. My apologies for not being able to make a tl;dr; version, how ...


34

I'm not a fan of this idea because it: Invites needless drama. Probably won't change many suspensions. Every now and then, a moderator makes a mistake when suspending a user. Maybe they misunderstood a situation, or maybe they acted too hastily. Users always have a chance to explain themselves in a private reply to the moderator. They can also escalate by ...


34

One of the main reasons we're in this mess is because SE chose to disregard one of the oldest most cherished rules in the network: we do not discuss the details of moderation actions in public. Can we please try to do better and stop trying to drag all the ugly into the light? A user was given a short suspension by the MSE moderators. The details are ...


34

There's a recommended escalation on suspensions (7/30/365) depending on how many times someone's suspended. This is totally worth a read Once you're done. Lets consider - there's a pattern of different things On Dec 8, 2018, I have plagiarized another user's content to my own post. The plagiarized content was removed, and a moderator has warned me about ...


33

If you're not seeking your colleagues out to specifically vote on their posts, there will be no problem. With as you say hardly any overlap, you're free to vote if you see a contribution of theirs that is worthy of an upvote. The guideline there is, don't target the person but evaluate the post. In the highly unlikely event that you get suspended due to a ...


33

Even back when the Community Team had twice as many people on it, 7-day suspensions were pretty much never investigated. The standard timeline of events was always as follows: User is suspended. User disagrees and submits appeal. Appeal is thrown into the backlog for review. User serves entire sentence and the suspension expires while waiting for review. ...


32

I tend to agree with this. The reason is, unlike content that you contribute to different Stack Exchange sites, the principles of moderation stay the same between them, for the most part. These people should be exemplars of good behaviour within the community, and that includes other SE sites - it most definitely is relevant. When their reputation is ...


32

You don't need all these stats. Coordinated flagging of dubious posts and comments has been done and is still done by at least some of those that watch / visit the Tavern on the Meta. That is nothing new, The Tavern has done that since its inception as far as I'm aware. It's operation is not as codified as it is in SOCVR but I've not noticed that specific ...


31

You asked this: https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/195153/should-so-recommend-alternatives-for-questions-it-doesnt-cover And stated: SO does not accept "tool recommendation" questions. [snip] I shamefully admit there are occasions I go ahead and ask them, even knowing they will be closed, simply because sometimes I still get the answers I need". ...


31

Reputation is recalculated literally at the same time as the suspension is lifted: However, suspensions are cleared once an hour. The scheduler might not run exactly when your suspension is scheduled to expire, which gives the illusion of a delay between suspension expiration and a reputation recalc. An easy way to think about this is "Does the user ...


31

To somewhat play devil’s advocate, I am throwing an alternative into the ring that has not been discussed yet (forgive me if I missed something): TL;DR Let the voters decide, but steer inform them appropriately. Suggestion Do not block anybody from nominating (with the possible exception of currently suspendend users) but show the suspensions big and ...


31

Moderators on Stack Overflow responded to you on multiple occasions about this, frankly many more times than we usually do for voting fraud suspensions. Here's the timeline: On December 29, you were warned about targeting another user with downvotes. A moderator responded to your questions about that warning with detail about the situation. On January 5, an ...


31

We hope that our users are as awesome everywhere else as they are here. I've been an active participant here for over a decade and I've really enjoyed the opportunities I've encountered to do things with Stack folks outside of SE. The quality of people here is something I can't speak highly enough about. We have not considered this question and currently do ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible