Their comments are certainly rude, but I didn’t see anything that I’d characterize as disgusting.
U/nuke erroneously believed that Ada was deliberately removing many of the posts from NCD, but it was actually because u/CDRMITTENS had been banned from blahaj.zone months ago and was one of their most prolific posters. Despite this misunderstanding, the fact remains that blahaj.zone can and does selectively remove content from NCD on the basis that it constitutes political extremism.
Nuke was overly rude and aggressive in their behavior, but this isn’t really a case of mod abuse. They informed their subscribers that some community content is being removed by admins from a particular server, which is true and serves the community. Then they removed a bunch of comments for brigading and criticizing them, which was maybe a bit over the top.
This is not an ideal situation and better communication could have prevented it, but it’s ultimately a minor issue. A more senior NCD mod has since restored many of the comments and reverted bans. Also, they have refederated with blahaj.zone already. Thank you to u/Shit for helping to resolve this issue.
PTB is a community term, they’ve got initialisms similar to Am I the Asshole on Reddit (and I’m the asshole for referencing that awful place), it means Power Tripping Bastard.
I’m extremely tempted to go to the Agora and propose de-anonymising the moderators names in the mod log but I really don’t have time in the next few days to deal with the possible drama of that, lol.
Moderators of the community can see what mod did what action. I don’t think users can. It should at least show the user that was “moderated” what mod did the action so they know who to complain to first.
Yeah I guess. I just feel like a user complaining directly to the mod who removed their post is unlikely to have a productive outcome. It’s not likely that the moderator is suddenly going to change their mind and restore it, nor is it likely that the user is going to suddenly decide that the removal was justified. You’re probably gonna need a third party to arbitrate anyway.
But I also don’t totally disagree, it’s definitely worthy of discussion.
I was thinking more along the line of user bans. Usually from what I gather they end up mailing all the mods to figure out why they are banned. It creates extra work that could probably be avoided.
Unbanning users from a community is a whole process in itself as well since you have to find a post they made.
Yeah, I’d have to oppose you on that suggestion. Vigilante justice is rarely effective. It’s perfectly functional as is, where users can identify anonymous mod actions that they disagree with, and then raise the issue with other moderators/admins, who can deal with the issue.
Even if users could publicly see the mod names, the proper response is still to contact the admin if you believe the mod is abusing their power. Which you can already do right now. So the only change would be that users would start DMing mods abusively and making meta posts about mod decisions that would ultimately be far more dramatic and far less effective than simply reporting the behavior to the relevant authority (admin or senior mod) and letting them deal with it internally.
I think that it would make sense to deanonymize them and allow users to look them up in the modlog, this is because the data on who did what is still shared with other servers, so even if we don’t choose to do it, they still have and it doesn’t really make sense to hide who did it on our frontend when it can still be seen plain and publicly. It is beneficial though for users to be able to look up the mod actions of a specific moderator from the frontend. They can then confirm the suspicions that a specific mod is abusing their power. That’s not vigilante justice, it’s just making people more aware of the facts, and possibly being aware to avoid communities modded by those specific people.
These are some good points, I can’t really disagree with them. Transparency and equal access to information is usually a worthwhile goal.
It’s possible that I may be coming from a biased perspective as an admin who can already view modlog and sees this causing plenty of drama down the road, as opposed to purely looking at the pros/cons for an average user. I’m interested to see how the Agora discussion goes.
It means Power tripping Bastard, means that the mod is power-tripping abd abusing their power as a mod to silence dissent or criticism, in this case their approval of racist memes conflating Palestinians and Hamas as the same thing.
Post Edit: I thought I was replying to a different thread so I wrote a hasty incorrect correction which was wrong because I thought my brain farted while I was writing my original comment.
What does this mean?
Their comments are certainly rude, but I didn’t see anything that I’d characterize as disgusting.
U/nuke erroneously believed that Ada was deliberately removing many of the posts from NCD, but it was actually because u/CDRMITTENS had been banned from blahaj.zone months ago and was one of their most prolific posters. Despite this misunderstanding, the fact remains that blahaj.zone can and does selectively remove content from NCD on the basis that it constitutes political extremism.
Nuke was overly rude and aggressive in their behavior, but this isn’t really a case of mod abuse. They informed their subscribers that some community content is being removed by admins from a particular server, which is true and serves the community. Then they removed a bunch of comments for brigading and criticizing them, which was maybe a bit over the top.
This is not an ideal situation and better communication could have prevented it, but it’s ultimately a minor issue. A more senior NCD mod has since restored many of the comments and reverted bans. Also, they have refederated with blahaj.zone already. Thank you to u/Shit for helping to resolve this issue.
PTB is a community term, they’ve got initialisms similar to Am I the Asshole on Reddit (and I’m the asshole for referencing that awful place), it means Power Tripping Bastard.
I’m extremely tempted to go to the Agora and propose de-anonymising the moderators names in the mod log but I really don’t have time in the next few days to deal with the possible drama of that, lol.
I agree the mod log for communities should be public or at least have the option to make it that way. More transparency is always good.
https://sh.itjust.works/post/27585191
You need to put
[Discussion]at the beginning of the post title.Are moderators able to see the public modlog for their own community? Or is the modlog totally anonymous for everyone besides admins?
I’m not sure what the case is, I expected that moderators would be able to view the identity of mod actions in their own communities.
Moderators of the community can see what mod did what action. I don’t think users can. It should at least show the user that was “moderated” what mod did the action so they know who to complain to first.
Yeah I guess. I just feel like a user complaining directly to the mod who removed their post is unlikely to have a productive outcome. It’s not likely that the moderator is suddenly going to change their mind and restore it, nor is it likely that the user is going to suddenly decide that the removal was justified. You’re probably gonna need a third party to arbitrate anyway.
But I also don’t totally disagree, it’s definitely worthy of discussion.
I was thinking more along the line of user bans. Usually from what I gather they end up mailing all the mods to figure out why they are banned. It creates extra work that could probably be avoided.
Unbanning users from a community is a whole process in itself as well since you have to find a post they made.
That’s definitely fair. Thanks for starting the Agora thread
Thanks.
Yeah, I’d have to oppose you on that suggestion. Vigilante justice is rarely effective. It’s perfectly functional as is, where users can identify anonymous mod actions that they disagree with, and then raise the issue with other moderators/admins, who can deal with the issue.
Even if users could publicly see the mod names, the proper response is still to contact the admin if you believe the mod is abusing their power. Which you can already do right now. So the only change would be that users would start DMing mods abusively and making meta posts about mod decisions that would ultimately be far more dramatic and far less effective than simply reporting the behavior to the relevant authority (admin or senior mod) and letting them deal with it internally.
I think that it would make sense to deanonymize them and allow users to look them up in the modlog, this is because the data on who did what is still shared with other servers, so even if we don’t choose to do it, they still have and it doesn’t really make sense to hide who did it on our frontend when it can still be seen plain and publicly. It is beneficial though for users to be able to look up the mod actions of a specific moderator from the frontend. They can then confirm the suspicions that a specific mod is abusing their power. That’s not vigilante justice, it’s just making people more aware of the facts, and possibly being aware to avoid communities modded by those specific people.
These are some good points, I can’t really disagree with them. Transparency and equal access to information is usually a worthwhile goal.
It’s possible that I may be coming from a biased perspective as an admin who can already view modlog and sees this causing plenty of drama down the road, as opposed to purely looking at the pros/cons for an average user. I’m interested to see how the Agora discussion goes.
Yeah, I just commented in the discussion on my other account.
It means Power tripping Bastard, means that the mod is power-tripping abd abusing their power as a mod to silence dissent or criticism, in this case their approval of racist memes conflating Palestinians and Hamas as the same thing.
Post Edit: I thought I was replying to a different thread so I wrote a hasty incorrect correction which was wrong because I thought my brain farted while I was writing my original comment.