Return to Answer

added 66 characters in body; added 16 characters in body

Source Link

edited Nov 28, 2022 at 22:22

96.6k
17
193
413

Chat moderators

I've long been in favor of this past request to have a set of users whose responsibility is to moderate the chat sites in addition to the site moderators, rather than completely having this responsibility fall on the site mods.

Now, all of these problems, I believe, stem from one main issue: We expect the [site] moderators to moderate chat.

Now, at a certain level, this makes sense. They are the people we elected / appointed to moderate the main sites, and chat is an extension of the main site. It makes sense to have the same people in charge of moderation.

However, this doesn't work. The site moderators have been elected / appointed for their skill in moderating a Q&A site. The skills required for effectively moderating a Q&A site are, if not totally different, largely different from the skills needed to moderate a chat room / server. It's a different skillset to moderate a live chat vs a Q&A site. Some of the moderators on the sites have those skills. Others... don't.

A lot of moderators don't use chat in the first place. They are not required to use chat and shouldn't be required to use it. We therefore cannot depend solely on these site moderators to moderate chat, because they have no responsibility to do so, may not have the skills needed to do so, and that is not what we ask of moderators when we elect / appoint them. There are also too many moderators, to the point where they occasionally need moderation themselves.

The main problems pointed out in that post are:

The skills needed to moderate a chat site are different from those needed to moderate a Q&A site. Some moderators may be skilled at moderating a Q&A site, but not at moderating a chat site.
Moderators are primarily elected (or appointed) for their ability to moderate a Q&A site, not a chat site. Moderating chat is not explicitly part of the responsibility given to moderators when they are given their diamonds.
Not every site moderator is active on the chat sites. Some don't even use chat at all.
Related to the above point, in some cases, there may not be a moderator around to curtail disruption that goes beyond what a room owner can handle (such as an issue spilling into different rooms).

To summarize, relying on site moderators to also moderate chat doesn't work because it's not part of their responsibility and many may not have the skill or will to moderate chat.

My proposal for a role would be the chat moderator role. These moderators would be placed into the role based on their experience moderating chat sites (either as a site moderator, a room owner, or moderator of an external chat site) and would have the explicit responsibility to moderate chat. Site moderators would continue receiving chat moderation privileges as they do now, but these chat moderators would also be appointed on top of those. They would also be a rank above normal site moderators, to address other issues pointed out in that post.

Chat moderators

Now, all of these problems, I believe, stem from one main issue: We expect the [site] moderators to moderate chat.

Now, at a certain level, this makes sense. They are the people we elected / appointed to moderate the main sites, and chat is an extension of the main site. It makes sense to have the same people in charge of moderation.

However, this doesn't work. The site moderators have been elected / appointed for their skill in moderating a Q&A site. The skills required for effectively moderating a Q&A site are, if not totally different, largely different from the skills needed to moderate a chat room / server. It's a different skillset to moderate a live chat vs a Q&A site. Some of the moderators on the sites have those skills. Others... don't.

A lot of moderators don't use chat in the first place. They are not required to use chat and shouldn't be required to use it. We therefore cannot depend solely on these site moderators to moderate chat, because they have no responsibility to do so, may not have the skills needed to do so, and that is not what we ask of moderators when we elect / appoint them. There are also too many moderators, to the point where they occasionally need moderation themselves.

The main problems pointed out in that post are:

The skills needed to moderate a chat site are different from those needed to moderate a Q&A site. Some moderators may be skilled at moderating a Q&A site, but not at moderating a chat site.
Moderators are primarily elected (or appointed) for their ability to moderate a Q&A site, not a chat site. Moderating chat is not explicitly part of the responsibility given to moderators when they are given their diamonds.
Not every site moderator is active on the chat sites. Some don't even use chat at all.
Related to the above point, in some cases, there may not be a moderator around to curtail disruption that goes beyond what a room owner can handle (such as an issue spilling into different rooms).

To summarize, relying on site moderators to also moderate chat doesn't work because it's not part of their responsibility and many may not have the skill or will to moderate chat.

My proposal for a role would be the chat moderator role. These moderators would be placed into the role based on their experience moderating chat sites and would have the explicit responsibility to moderate chat. Site moderators would continue receiving chat moderation privileges as they do now, but these chat moderators would also be appointed on top of those. They would also be a rank above normal site moderators, to address other issues pointed out in that post.

Chat moderators

Now, all of these problems, I believe, stem from one main issue: We expect the [site] moderators to moderate chat.

Now, at a certain level, this makes sense. They are the people we elected / appointed to moderate the main sites, and chat is an extension of the main site. It makes sense to have the same people in charge of moderation.

However, this doesn't work. The site moderators have been elected / appointed for their skill in moderating a Q&A site. The skills required for effectively moderating a Q&A site are, if not totally different, largely different from the skills needed to moderate a chat room / server. It's a different skillset to moderate a live chat vs a Q&A site. Some of the moderators on the sites have those skills. Others... don't.

A lot of moderators don't use chat in the first place. They are not required to use chat and shouldn't be required to use it. We therefore cannot depend solely on these site moderators to moderate chat, because they have no responsibility to do so, may not have the skills needed to do so, and that is not what we ask of moderators when we elect / appoint them. There are also too many moderators, to the point where they occasionally need moderation themselves.

The main problems pointed out in that post are:

The skills needed to moderate a chat site are different from those needed to moderate a Q&A site. Some moderators may be skilled at moderating a Q&A site, but not at moderating a chat site.
Moderators are primarily elected (or appointed) for their ability to moderate a Q&A site, not a chat site. Moderating chat is not explicitly part of the responsibility given to moderators when they are given their diamonds.
Not every site moderator is active on the chat sites. Some don't even use chat at all.
Related to the above point, in some cases, there may not be a moderator around to curtail disruption that goes beyond what a room owner can handle (such as an issue spilling into different rooms).

To summarize, relying on site moderators to also moderate chat doesn't work because it's not part of their responsibility and many may not have the skill or will to moderate chat.

Source Link

created Nov 28, 2022 at 22:13

Sonic the Anonymous Hedgehog

96.6k
17
193
413

Chat moderators

Now, all of these problems, I believe, stem from one main issue: We expect the [site] moderators to moderate chat.

Now, at a certain level, this makes sense. They are the people we elected / appointed to moderate the main sites, and chat is an extension of the main site. It makes sense to have the same people in charge of moderation.

However, this doesn't work. The site moderators have been elected / appointed for their skill in moderating a Q&A site. The skills required for effectively moderating a Q&A site are, if not totally different, largely different from the skills needed to moderate a chat room / server. It's a different skillset to moderate a live chat vs a Q&A site. Some of the moderators on the sites have those skills. Others... don't.

A lot of moderators don't use chat in the first place. They are not required to use chat and shouldn't be required to use it. We therefore cannot depend solely on these site moderators to moderate chat, because they have no responsibility to do so, may not have the skills needed to do so, and that is not what we ask of moderators when we elect / appoint them. There are also too many moderators, to the point where they occasionally need moderation themselves.

The main problems pointed out in that post are:

The skills needed to moderate a chat site are different from those needed to moderate a Q&A site. Some moderators may be skilled at moderating a Q&A site, but not at moderating a chat site.
Moderators are primarily elected (or appointed) for their ability to moderate a Q&A site, not a chat site. Moderating chat is not explicitly part of the responsibility given to moderators when they are given their diamonds.
Not every site moderator is active on the chat sites. Some don't even use chat at all.
Related to the above point, in some cases, there may not be a moderator around to curtail disruption that goes beyond what a room owner can handle (such as an issue spilling into different rooms).

To summarize, relying on site moderators to also moderate chat doesn't work because it's not part of their responsibility and many may not have the skill or will to moderate chat.