There is some back end discussion on moderation. We’d like feedback on aspects of it.
From time to time, people have asked who or how moderation decisions are regulated or managed. The short answer is that they aren’t.
A proposal to address that was first drawn up some three years ago. That proposal was supported. And then it was forgotten, and never actioned
Briefly, the idea is that site wide bans over a given length of time will be automatically subject to a quick and simple “review” process that all authors, editors and admin can easily and quickly contribute to. As at present, any author can ban any commentator from their post – or all of their posts of they want to – and that decision remains entirely up to them.
The original suggestion set a two day upper limit on site wide bans that continue to be the sole responsibility of an individual moderator. Those short duration bans will not be subjected to any automatic review
Any site wide ban of over two days duration will not carry a moderators name and, if altered (ie – reduced), notification will be given at the bottom of a following day’s Open Mike.
To illustrate. On Monday a ten week, site wide ban is handed down. As has been happening for the past two years or so, that’s recorded on the dedicated “Moderation Notes” thread in the back end. What’s new is it being automatically subject to review.
If that ban is lessened, then that will be notified at the bottom of Open Mike on Tuesday or Wednesday or (at the latest) Thursday.
Changes will be made to the Policy to accommodate changes in how things are done.
The system isn’t perfect, but hopefully it will calm down a lot of the angst that can get thrown up in the comments section following some moderator decisions. And reduce stress levels all round. It should also bring a semblance of consistency to ban lengths.
Authors, editors and admin have access to the more detailed discussion elsewhere, so this post is more or less entirely yours to comment on.