I just read this on the internet. Definitely true.
6 Likes
We have an opt in category for those that are altered right now, right?
Could there be a similar category for threads that are going to hell in a hand basket but maybe not hit the level of silencing the thread/user? The thought being that the more seasoned users could opt into that category if they want to help and maybe be the change without it making a mess of the forum and scaring off the newbies?
2 Likes
We do have an opt in for people under the influence /Seeking Help.
It is an interesting concept. I was kind of thinking along those lines with the Just For Fun category and the ability to mute categories. Similar…but no help to newbies really.
It seems like it would be added moderator work though…the moving, inviting, still checking in on such a thread…all that in addition to responding to flags and PMs from the thread that would still happen.
1 Like
Yeah, regs can help recategorize too though.
But, @DowntroddenGoat, I’d like to think a simple mod warning or “hey, chill out” would be enough.
Like to.
3 Likes
Maybe for normies…
2 Likes
+1 to this! Just too complicated.
I messaged this to @SassyRocks already but my thoughts on what might be helpful to think about (with the caveat that I don’t know what goes on behind the scenes and some or all of this may be unworkable)
- More mods and maybe mod status could work like regular, you lose if you don’t have certain activity stats. Activity stats should be forgiving to account for life etc but it could give a heads up/early warning system for when new mods might be needed or prompt mods to review their commitment.
- Review the rules - are they fit for purpose? Any clarification needed?
- Review flag process - is the right information being captured at point of flag?
- Review moderation/escalation process, e.g. step 1 post forum rules after accumulation of xx flags on thread, step 2 message individual, step 3 silence individual, step 4 close thread… Or whatever makes sense. I don’t know if it’s possible to standardise it quite this much!
- Think about how to balance mod authority with community democracy, privacy and transparency. Maybe an appeals type feature? E.g. a member asks to have a second mod opinion.
- Look at how moderators support each other e.g. assigning responsibilities, assigning individuals if it is getting personal or difficult with someone (although maybe with enough active mods this becomes intuitive)
Haha I like developing processes, can you tell 
I think there is also something to be said for accepting that it will go loopy here at times. Lots of people struggling with lots of things on top of the nature of online communication and how easy it is to become volatile.
Sassy commented that, re point 4, sometimes things escalate quickly and there may not be time to go through a process. In these cases silencing a user or temporary thread closure may be more appropriate.
8 Likes
More mods are needed simply to halve some of the burden the seemingly single mod has to encompass.
Regulars should use their earned reputation to keep things civil. If you see something, say something, in respectful/golden rule type of fashion. No reason issues can’t be hashed out.
Aside from that, this forum isn’t much different than any other place where people congregate. Not everyone agrees on shit, such is life.
8 Likes
Amen to that 
I’m triggered.
Hold me closer Tony Danza
Are you lot suggesting more “moderation” in sobriety 
8 Likes
I was going to crack a joke about that after I posted earlier. I love that we are debating moderation!
4 Likes
It’s funny 
But we all know the only moderation we need is on this forum
#teamabstinence
I understand, I like to think that too, which is why I do it. But often my message is met with defensiveness or why are you picking on me. One can hope tho.
With more mods, maybe a 2 step review process would protect the users. 2 mods must review flags, etc. This would require there to be multiple mods that are semi active.
2 Likes
It is weird this is going on for days. Im assuming its because @robin is the only one who can make a decision and he appears once a year. Maybe we should just close this thread since at this point its just beating a dead horse.
2 Likes
I must admit I was thinking why @robin hasn’t been in any discussions tbh,this whole debate has gone in so many direction’s I’m dizzy.
1 Like
I always get a little tongue tied when reading and Saying in my head your screen name, I used to see it a lot when reading through old threads. I believe you were even nominated for president in one of them 
1 Like
Haha yea I was a favorite around here…until the incident.
I pmd with Robin recently about some moderation, so yes, he has been around. My understanding of many Discourse forums is that the creator/admin often is not an active member or moderating force. What Robin’s involvement is, is his decision. Frankly, there are days of things for him to read thru, logs and messages to him and threads and such. Daunting.
Do I think more moderators would help? Idk. It would be nice to have others to bounce stuff off and to leave stuff to when I am busy or just tired of dealing with it.
More moderators won’t change people’s behavior though. Personal responsibility is needed there.
5 Likes