New answers tagged

-5

I have to say I think this is a mistake: Protecting user privacy, particularly their PII When users join our sites, they expect us to protect their privacy and the personally identifiable information (PII) we collect about them is a big part of that. We grant moderators access to some of this information so that they can do their work, but we take it very ...


4

You say: "to allow collaboration between mods on the same site..." But you say V2 says: "I will not disclose or share this information with anyone that is not a moderator or employee of Stack Exchange, Inc." Which doesn't make it clear that information can only be disclosed to "co-moderators", as the suggested purpose as it ...


24

I like that it goes two ways now, that is a very clear and welcome improvement. I find the following section to be rather weird, though: I will accept additional guidance given by members of the Stack Exchange, Inc. Community Team and Senior Leadership Team, whether in response to questions, concerns or discussions regarding existing network-wide policies. ...


14

This is designed to keep the scope of this point limited while also giving us the flexibility to add small network-relevant policies that we need moderators to follow without having to update the mod agreement. It's the cynic in me, or isn't this "I'm altering the deal. Pray I don't alter it any further" Darth Vader stuff right here? I'm not ...


2

Thank you for explaining the intent of (v) :— "Accept guidance" means listen to guidance and be open to it. And:— If a moderator is looking to understand how to interpret part of the CoC, we want them to listen to our guidance - they can choose how to act on that guidance, though. That's very welcome: it means that a fair judge of whether a ...


14

Speaking as someone who was pretty disappointed to just barely lose a moderator election last March,* I find the items making up the other half of the "two-way agreement" almost startlingly insufficient. These people are volunteers who by and large are offering its-their-livelihood levels of devotion to help this company keep its public face from ...


38

There are a few parts that have loopholes big enough to drive trucks through; but I expected that given the level of trust the company and moderator community share right now. This agreement, along with the moderator removal and the moderator reinstatement process are the three major ways to show the company is listening and wants to rebuild trust. Keep in ...


14

In my role as part of the proto-pro-tem council - we reviewed this, though I'm under the impression the version we saw already had the rough edges knocked off. Changes were suggested (and I recognise some of the wording as mine and others) and it went through the mod team. There's a few surprises, but none of them unpleasant. Admittedly more eyeballs finds ...


-4

Perhaps this is a little drawn out but... How about if a moderator is accused of harassment, charge them with harassment in a court of law? As I understand it, it is illegal to harass someone in most western common law democracies. Particularly if it can be shown to occur repetitively, over a duration, and despite warnings. Similarly for incitement to ...


71

I do want to bring out something that definitely needs to be brought out. The CM team, especially Catija and JNat, have been working really hard on this new moderator agreement. There were loads and loads of answers, and lots more comments on it when it was first shown to the moderator team (some 60 days back). Cat and JNat did manage to leave a reply to ...


-8

Why has the new agreement gone live without any opportunity for non-moderator users to give feedback? Moderators did have the opportunity to give feedback, but not to discuss the draft agreement with other users on the sites they moderate–why not?


10

Minor nitpick Could point v be adjusted to use unambiguous wording: In the current wording, it's unclear if the specifier regarding existing network-wide policies only applies to discussion or applies to questions and concerns as well. The question clarifies that this seems to apply to all three, but the agreement should not need to rely on external texts to ...


20

As you say in your post: Once the sixty days have passed, any moderator who has either declined the new agreement or hasn’t responded to the notifications to accept the new agreement but who still has their diamond will lose access to PII and some moderator tools. In other words, moderators who haven't accepted the new agreement by the time the deadline ...


27

I will accept additional guidance given by members of the Stack Exchange, Inc. Community Team and Senior Leadership Team, whether in response to questions, concerns or discussions regarding existing network-wide policies. Will this guidance be published for all users e.g. on Meta sites, or given just to moderators, collectively or individually? It would be ...


16

I have one question, it's focused on the precise language used in the agreement. Points (i), (ii), (iii), and (iv) begin with the words: "I will abide by…" but in point (v) the wording changes to "I will accept…” (i) I will abide by the current Code of Conduct […]. (ii) I will abide by the current Terms of Service of Stack Overflow and Stack ...


4

Some concrete suggestions regarding Moderator removal and reinstatement: You have to separate the description of the scenario (= what had happened earlier) and the procedure. This is especially problematic in Scenario 2 - I just don't understand what the procedure is, nor how the bullets relate. (It might not be a bad idea to use a numbered list with "...


14

My complaint about this is the same as it was before: Monica was fired without due process, against the will of the community that elected her in the first place, and for a reason that no longer applies. The reinstatement process doesn't address that case.


9

Traditionally the removal and reinstatement processes were CM lead, and unless the moderator in question made a request to make it public it was not. Right now, with the current checks and balances in place, there's at least 4 different sets of people, CMs, CLT, Mod council and local mods. I believe radical openness and transparency to the parties involved ...


15

Considering the subject matter - I'd like it to be clear that I'm speaking for myself, not the mod council (and should this matter reach them, I'd recuse myself), not the MSE moderators (and I will work with them should we get that far on the best outcome) I'm kinda spread thin trying to deal with multiple people not being all that co-operative and when ...


41

What I gather from these discussions as someone who largely stopped coming here: It may seem silly, but the lynchpin of all of this is that the community wants the company to bindingly cede the decision, be it to a mod council, a vote, what have you. This is the core of that issue and unless the company binds itself to cede the right to have final say people ...


35

Moderators are volunteers not paid employees. They are people who deeply care about their site, who care about the users and ensure standards are upheld and guidelines are respected. The best moderators are loyal to the community's ethos, they are the ones who think twice, and three times, before suspending a user who has a short fuse but will not tolerate ...


13

I submit a frame challenge to this entire political exercise: Formalizing the ways in which the previous mod requesting reinstatement can see the claims against them and be able to respond to them (at multiple points during the process). The fact that this is even a conceivable bullet point is an explicit acknowledgment that the formal policy is to shoot ...


11

Seeing as how removal expungings are now on the table, it should be possible for additional parties to initiate the appeal process for any involuntary removal that occurred before this process was followed. It shouldn't require the former moderator themselves. That is, the Mod Council, the Current Mod Team of the former mod's site, Community Managers, and ...


61

Possible Outcomes There are several final outcomes for each phase in this process. They are: Reinstate with no preconditions - For cases where the former moderator stepped down voluntarily or by inactivity and they have had no concerning behavior in the interim. Reinstate with preconditions - For cases where reinstatement is allowed as long as the former ...


17

So a couple of points. This and the previous iteration of the mod-removal processes are complicated. There's a few checks in this case (Staff, whether in the community leadership team, mod team or the CM team) At least in theory - the "complexity" of the process means it isn't possible to railroad a mod out of office, as has happened in the past, ...


11

Eh, okay I have a problem with this part of scenario 2 right here: Following their deliberation, they agree with the recommendation of the CM team and the CLT. The way this is written makes the Mod Council sound less like a community representative and more like "yes men". What happens if the Mod Council rejects the recommendation of the CM team ...


221

This process is fundamentally flawed because the moderator removal process is fundamentally flawed. We're trying to use a reinstatement and appeals process to clean up issues of a lack of fundamental due process in the first instance. This is not going to build trust; nor will it ensure that the community and the company have a symbiotic relationship. Take, ...


69

What exactly happens in the ugliest possible case, when the moderator council supports/denies reinstatement, and SE overrides that? The moderator council is not allowed to make the details public in that case, and in many cases it would probably be unethical to do that anyway. SE is unlikely to make any details public that would harm their case, though ...


8

The process as written offers the PM multiple opportunities to add context to their request. This is clearly appropriate and necessary to protect the PM from the process, but it also means the process can potentially drag on for a very long time (in Yaakov Ellis's scenario #2, five weeks) as we need to keep going back to the current mod team and asking for ...


11

Scenario 1 seems to cover the most uncontroversial reinstatements, where the Previous Moderator (PM) resigned voluntarily. One of the steps involves "CM1 reaches out to the current Mod team on the site for which PM is requesting reinstatement to see if they have any objections.". What happens if the mod team objects? Does this flip the PM to ...


6

Consider allowing the past moderator to involve the moderator council earlier-on (bypass the first escalation) if they desire to do so. I can imagine cases where a moderator wants to appeal to the moderator council directly instead of first going for a "second run" with the same parties involved. The process for the first appeal seems very similar ...


Top 50 recent answers are included