212

When a moderator resigns, this is an important event for a site. It should have the highest visibility, so it should be featured as long as (or longer than) other posts, I should think.


190

Good news: As of 2020-02-10, the moderator resignation posts follow the same guidelines as any other featured post. Bad news: Very wide criteria for a post to be unfeatured including, but not limited to antagonistic posts, posts having usernames & real names, drawing disruptive behaviour or discussion. Moreover, special attention will be paid to the ...


142

I cannot in good conscience unfeature a post commemorating a member of the community who was a mod or otherwise contributed above and beyond to the community . As far as MSE goes - hopefully there will be no further need for the mod team to feature posts of people leaving. As far as Super User goes I suspect we will discuss this when it comes to it. While ...


113

Featuring announcements and discussion questions for only one day misses the entire point. No one (to within rounding error) will see them. The whole reason we feature these things is to ensure that they are visible to the community at large. Only the most highly dedicated members of our communities visit the site every day. This level of dedication is, in ...


85

Moderators are high-visibility community figureheads. They're usually well-respected, often well-liked, and on some sites are the center of their communities. I've seen it on a number of sites: from Worldbuilding, where the mods grew the community and earned the respect and trust they were given because of it, to Stack Overflow the behemoth, where the ...


83

This should be implemented. Sometimes your opinion changes on a question after seeing the comments/answers or just after going away (outside? is that real? Wow the new cry engine is sooo realistic!) and re-thinking about it. We should not be obliged to wait for an edit to be able to change our voice. Meta is about making the things going on and part of ...


72

Presumably as long as the community thinks that they should be. I am not aware of any SE policy that dictates what or how long something can be featured. I would hope that SE would never be so foolish to try and regulate what content a community wishes to feature* *As long as that content does not violate the CoC and is on topic.


69

As Sam I am notes, it's a judgement call... Meta sites are a perversion of the Stack Exchange model, discussion sites implemented using a Q&A engine. This works surprisingly well, if you keep the limitations of both in mind at all times: Voting isn't limited - you can post an opinion and down-vote a conflicting option. Or upvote it. Or find two ...


63

Yes, please. It's useful to know how your questions/answers are being voted on the child metas. Votes are feedback, and right now, this feedback isn't explicitly shown to the user. If we need to know if some of our posts got voted up/down, we need to visit the user profile and then check the scores. This is pretty annoying. Instead of the reputation change, ...


53

This is how I want to see it. I think votes should be neither green nor red, because they don't affect your reputation. So if you were downvoted, display "-1", if you were upvoted two times, display "+2". Also, "total score" would be great: And highlight achievements indicator, as if you got a badge. Edit: I've made a fine rep tracker, almost ...


44

Lately, we have had an increase of resignation posts that have served to host combative and hurtful words to attack Stack employees, other mods, and teammates. We need to be mindful of this and limit the time the posts are featured. You're doing it ridiculously wrong. Why don't you give up eating because you might choke? So then why are you removing ...


39

It's probably not happening cause... I think we're going back to the bad old days when only SO mattered. Until there's a good replacement for our sites - or SO corp can find a good reason to start killing off smaller communities, we're actually pretty well placed to handle local issues on meta. And that's 'good' since, well, that means less resources need ...


39

Short of SE publicly requiring us to, I can't imagine any reason we would artificially shorten how long a resignation notice is featured.


37

This feature is now live on all meta sites except the international sites (waiting on translations) and Meta Stack Overflow (to ensure that this doesn't cause a lot of undue disruptions on other sites first). Update: This is now enabled on all sites, including Meta Stack Overflow and international site metas.


37

Treating good questions with the appropriate attention is the best way to help people change in the way you want Thanks for this useful guidance, I agree with everything. Except... ...what happens next? There are a zillion good questions, which follow your instructions to the letter, are highly upvoted and they are routinely "ignored". I put that in quotes ...


37

Lately, we have had an increase of resignation posts Hint: great. You identified the most important symptom! You are just one step away from identifying the root cause. As soon as you figure that root cause, you would be able to engage in activities to fix the root cause(s). And guess what: without moderators (and ordinary users) resigning left and right,...


36

This is pretty much answered by the tooltip you get when you hover over the "participation" sort link: Users most active on this site in the last 60 days (combined number of posts, votes, comments and edits). -- that's all it is. Take the sum of those four values and sort the users based on those sums. The only minor details that are not in the tooltip ...


35

Meta review queues should be integrated into the main site's review Low meta participation is a problem. Since a policy is decided in meta, it can be discouraging to discover that people don't know about meta or simply ignore it. But even as a meta-junkie, I was surprised to see that there is a suggested edit queue on the per-site-metas... for tag wikis. ...


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

I will focus here with a heavily-paraphrased and augmented part of my answer in the other thread. If the 24-hour limitation is driven solely by hurtful words and attacks, as per: ... we have had an increase of resignation posts that have served to host combative and hurtful words to attack Stack employees, other mods, and teammates. We need to be mindful ...


32

This is actually something that just came up internally that we've been pondering. We want to have a bit more guidance around these issues, especially for our moderators, to prevent some of the very negative experiences we've been seeing around some particular users over the years that originate around Meta questions. Focus on the problem, not the user. ...


30

This touches on something that's been discussed a lot over the years, both here on meta and internally within the company. It's a complicated topic; it's got layers. I'll try & cover it fairly here before addressing your specific proposal. Problem #1: it's confusing to see what appears to be a normal, low-rep user acting in an official capacity The ...


28

This seems to take care of the 80% use-case (shall we say), but it doesn't seem to address the more long-standing, venerable, and received discussions which... Don't immediately lead to a resolution (not that this is surprising; consensus amongst strangers is tough) (example), Aren't acknowledged as an enhancement (example), or Aren't communicated that this ...


27

Judging by the history of certain policy decisions, consensus is reached when 80-90% of the community agrees on an issue, and one staff member unilaterally decides that all those people are all wrong. Or in more simple terms: Consensus doesn't matter around here.


27

Start with a post on the site's meta. This lets the community weigh in on the request, and also gives a paper trail in the event it is implemented. Figure out both whether this is needed and work on drafting the text for the warning so the CMs have some context and know what wording you think would be good. Once the community has voted on the post and there ...


26

The cat's out of the bag, so may as well post what prompted this here as well. @JuanM posted the following in the moderator-only team yesterday: Moderator resignation announcements have traditionally been encouraged as opportunities for former teammates to say a goodbye and have others wish them well. They are things we want the community to share in and ...


25

This is a result/side-effect of some changes Cloudflare made recently, but the fact of the matter is that we'd run into problems with HTTPS support on child meta sites eventually anyway: you can't have a wildcard in the middle of a cert, so meta.*.stackexchange.com could never be a thing and we're not about to start registering/maintaining 100+ certs. So. ...


24

The current behavior makes it all about reputation, which is stupid and not what it should be about. The really interesting information is that someone voted up (or down) your post, that other people found your post helpful or interesting, agree or disagree with your post. But the supercollider popdown doesn't provide this information, it is obsessed with ...


24

I agree: moderator vacation status on meta should inherit from the status on main. So I'm adding that to my moderator vacation feature request list. The moderator vacation feature is still in the minimum viable product stage. Currently it serves three purposes: Clearly remove a vacationing moderators flag-handling statistics from the rest of the team, ...


23

As far as I know, there are no publicly stated rules regarding this issue (as of the time of posting). As such, the decision to feature or unfeature a post on a Meta site is left entirely in the hands of the moderators of those communities, as far as I know (and ostensibly SE would only have reason to intervene if the site were left with no active moderators)...


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