[Meta] /v/Conspiracy Community Discussion: Moderation (Conspiracy)

submitted ago by Mumberthrax

Hey folks, Mumberthrax here again with another meta-post about our subverse seeking input from you all. This one is about moderation and moderators.

As some of you may know from my introduction post a bit ago, I'm the new level 1 moderator on /v/conspiracy, thus I have the ability to add or remove moderators here. It is a responsibility I do not take lightly. There has been some discussion throughout the life of this subverse about moderation, some happy and some not so happy with the current arrangement. I'd like to offer this post as an invitation to sit down and get everything out on the table and see what people think is an appropriate way of handling things.

Moderators on voat have a few technical abilities granted by the site. They can:

  • remove posts and comments
  • change the appearance of the subverse through CSS and editing the sidebar
  • feature posts by sticky-ing them at the top of the subverse
  • distinguish their comments to show that they are moderators and are speaking in an official capacity
  • ban/unban accounts from posting/commenting
  • create and apply text flair on submissions
  • set the sub as private, NSFW, anonymous, or excluded from /v/all
  • require a certain amount of CCP in the sub for a user to be able to downvote

These tools can be used for good or ill, either overtly or subtly.

So, some topics I'd like to hear from you all on:

  1. Responsibilities of moderators:
    What should moderators of /v/conspiracy be responsible for? What is appropriate conduct? What is inappropriate conduct?

  2. Moderator Activity Levels:
    How active should moderators be? Should mods who are inactive for a given period of time be spoken to and/or asked to step down, or be removed? What constitutes activity/inactivity?

  3. Transparency and Accountability:
    What should be public? What should be mods-eyes-only? How might mods be held accountable for misconduct?

  4. How moderators are added:
    How should mods be chosen? Popularity contests? CCP scores? Random selection? Selection by existing moderators? Something else entirely?
    Additionally, how long should people be moderators for?

  5. Should any changes be made to the mod team right now?:
    Should any moderators be added? Should any be removed? If any should be removed, why?

I've got opinions and thoughts on each of these, but it would not be appropriate for me to share them in this post, so I'll likely do so in the comments.

If you have any opinions or thoughts on these, whether you are a regular or a newcomer, a skeptic or a true believer, a moderator or non-moderator, subscriber or here from /v/all, I invite you to join in and let others know what's on your mind. If you don't want to comment here, and would rather make your own post, please feel free to either post to /v/conspiracy or /v/conspiracymeta.

I'll be stickying this post for one week (2015/6/9 to 2015/6/16) to make sure any regulars are able to see and comment on it, and be heard. I'm not yet sure what will happen after that, my plans with regard to this are dependent upon what comes up in this discussion. Regardless, I'll post a followup of some sort of another within a week of this one being unsticky'd.

Edit 2015/6/16: I'll be extending the duration this post remains stickied by two days due to the extended downtime Voat endured over the past week. It will be unstickied on 2015/6/18.

Edit 2015/6/18: Unstickying this post now so it won't be an eyesore any longer. I will post a followup within the next week.

Edit: Followup post: [Meta] v/Conspiracy Community Discussion on Moderation: Followup

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

PrivateJoker ago

I'm all about relatively hands-off moderation and letting the community dictate via up and down voting what they deem appropriate. Mods should be here to assist users, not control them or the narrative. There should be minimal rules and those should revolve around maintaining an atmosphere conducive to discussion and not derision or derailing. If people are here to simply call other people names and add absolutely nothing to the sub, they're the ones i'd boot.

I've been here for almost a year now and have seen Voat grow and mature. I'm surprised that it's still relatively untouched by "cancer". Being of a conspiracy mindset, (and I've told you this personally), I seriously questioned the process that led to your modship here just because no one knew who you were and there have been MANY attempts in r/conspiracy to obtain a mod position through unscrupulous means and figured this was another one of those. You seem like a good guy, but i'm still on the fence.

That being said, I say the community should decide who mods here once it reaches a point where it's needed. I think term limits should be set and new mods voted on every x period of time. Modship shouldn't be a permanent thing, because that's what destroyed reddit. It should be a democratic process and fully transparent. There should be no levels of modship either because once that happens, you open the door for dictatorship.

I think a courtesy message should be sent to the mods here and give them X amount of time to reply. In their defense, not much has gone on here up until relatively recently. I still visit daily but there was a period a few months ago where i probably missed a few weeks here and there just due to lack of activity. I think they should be given a chance to realize it's picking up steam and come back.

Other thoughts, we need to work on AMAs once we grow a little more and having events that bring the community together...be it a featured movie/book and subsequent discussion or something like that.

Mumberthrax ago

You seem like a good guy, but i'm still on the fence.

I'm relieved you think I seem like a good guy, and I think you're justified in being skeptical - I hope that even if you decide that I'm not a bad guy that you continue to keep a critical eye on me. As I said before, I don't think there's any way to convince through my words that my intentions are good, and it's my hope that I am judged by my actions. I did make a mistake in not messaging you or the other mods when Atko added me here. I'm sorry for that. I made a mistake too in making these brainstorming posts and stickying things without speaking to any of you about it beforehand. I hope that you, axlotl, pegilus, and any other mods who are active can forgive me for that. If the outcome of the discussion on this post is not that the community wants me gone, then I'll try to do better.

There should be no levels of modship either because once that happens, you open the door for dictatorship.

I am not certain I agree entirely. For one thing voat is currently configured such that only one moderator has the ability to add or remove other moderators, thus creating by the nature of the site two different "types" of mods. I suppose the alternative is to have it setup like on reddit where there is a sort of hierarchy of seniority, but I hate that kind of crap... I guess I feel that as long as the person with that ability to add/remove other mods is a benevolent dictator, then its a necessary evil. Perhaps so long as the community is involved in keeping that mod, as well as the others, accountable somehow, then it might be ok. I know there was talk about finding ways to improve voat to prevent the kind of mod tyranny like what we see on reddit, and I'm not sure that anything has been done toward this end yet apart from the rule about mods needing to post at least once a month on the subverse to start discussions. I don't like calling myself a "level 1 mod", but it is the description given on the page where I am able to add/remove other mods, who are labeled as "level 2". I do very much like though that on the whole on voat, the mods are all equal.

I think a courtesy message should be sent to the mods here and give them X amount of time to reply.

I sent all of the current moderators a message after posting this inviting them to share their thoughts here. I agree that contacting them explicitly to find out what their current level of interest is would be appropriate as well.

Other thoughts, we need to work on AMAs once we grow a little more and having events that bring the community together...be it a featured movie/book and subsequent discussion or something like that.

I agree entirely. Some similar ideas were expressed in the brainstorming discussion threads that I think are worth looking into, maybe putting together some outlines/plans for, and seeking specific community feedback on prior to trying on an experimental basis. I think this is something that moderators should take initiative on, these sorts of projects - or at the very least should provide facilitation for if they are entirely run by non-moderators.

the community should decide who mods here once it reaches a point where it's needed.

How do you think it would be best for the community to decide that? Do you think people should nominate themselves or others and we have a popular vote? I suppose as long as there is a way to keep things transparent and keep mods accountable, it'd be ok... but the community would need to not only be actively involved in that voting process but also in monitoring the mods' conduct to ensure they're doing what they said they would - and there would probably need to be a way for the community to remove mods consistently doing things the community doesn't want, or at least to correct those specific actions.

PrivateJoker ago

Sorry, i'm pressed for time right now but as for mods. It's easy enough to talk to Atko about moderation levels and get them changed. Maybe have a "representative" or something with no other mod powers be responsible for it. Or Atko himself. I disliked the Reddit setup also with seniority. I just think, especially on a conspiracy forum, everything should be transparent and democratic. If the levels stay as is, make it so that a level 1 mod has to track everything he does that can be accessed by any subscriber.

Also, rule changes should be similar. No waking up one day and deciding "you know what, i hate memes so they're now against the rules here". There should be minimal rules and those that are in place should be voted on and majority decides.

I also wouldn't mind seeing a time period installed where new subscribers have to wait X amount of time or posts in order to vote/make threads.

Sento_Fernner ago

One thing I think we should keep in mind when talking about changing Mod levels is the possibility of a hostile take over. I'm not sure about how easy it would be to get Atko to change the way that verses work, but it would hurt to ask. Not implying that you are wrong or mistaken, I just wanted to point out these concerns of mine.

PrivateJoker ago

That's what i'm worried about right now as well. No offense taken, I appreciate it.