Timeline for Inactive mods on SF - Or are they?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 2, 2015 at 23:34 | comment | added | peterh | @Zoredache ...and only a step from this if mods wouldn't be elected, but it would be a privilege by reputation. But I don't think it would be useful, because I don't think there wouldn't be enough mods around. | |
| Dec 13, 2011 at 19:19 | comment | added | Zoredache | I always have wondered if they should implement some kind of cap for community moderators. Just like regular users have caps on casting close votes/flags. We really don't want a single individual to have to deal with a huge number of moderation activities per day. Lets say you limit a moderator too 100 moderator actions, if moderators are regularly getting close to that limit, then shouldn't we be getting more moderators? | |
| Dec 13, 2011 at 17:03 | comment | added | Tablemaker | Aye, as I said in my answer, I mean no offense to anyone and I know some of the mods that I don't see are active. Those are the ones that shouldn't have anything to worry about :) | |
| Dec 13, 2011 at 16:45 | comment | added | MDMarra | @Shads0 In defense of some of the others, Mark H is in Australia, Splattne is in Italy, and a few others are in the UK. The time zone difference means that they may participate a bit more than we think, even if it's not on meta. I know that Mark H is also very active, just when I'm fast asleep. Chopper is a good example of how active mods should be, but he isn't the only one doing his job. That said, there are at least one, possibly more that seem to be occupying a diamond without doing much that us plebs can see. | |
| Dec 13, 2011 at 16:42 | comment | added | Tablemaker | The problem is is that even if those mods are active 24/7 doing moderater-y stuff, we have no clue that they are because all we see is the site. Sitting idly in chat like @KyleBrandt does is enough to me that they at least see a ticker popup from the m.SE feed (someone mentioned that this stuff goes into their inbox anyway) and can read chat notifications and respond. The silence of the mods aside from Chopper scare me in that maybe they're not doing anything at all. | |
| Dec 13, 2011 at 16:09 | comment | added | random | You're right in that moderation and participation are not mutually exclusive. But that participation may be taken up more in how they moderate. If they're drowning, the next round of elections (usually a yearly thing now dependent on site growth and numbers) will help that @mar | |
| Dec 13, 2011 at 16:01 | comment | added | pauska | The point here is that we want mods who do it all (like Chopper3). We want them to answer questions, give out helpful comments, participate in the chat and on meta, and moderate the site. This is why we think that we need more mods, instead of a few who doesn't do anything other than respond to flag alerts. | |
| Dec 13, 2011 at 15:56 | comment | added | MDMarra |
Reputation from answers isn't the only indicator of what makes a highly respected member of the community. - One mod hasn't answered anything since July and hasn't asked anything since 2009. I'm not saying that people should have to answer stuff every day, or even every week, but I feel that for a moderator to effectively police a community, they should be a reasonably active member of that community.
|
|
| Dec 13, 2011 at 15:54 | comment | added | MDMarra |
But if you notice a mod answering plenty and hanging out on chat all day long, then you'd be asking if they were even doing anything in mod capacity with all the time they have to chit-chat and post. - I strongly disagree. We all see Chopper closing everything in his wake, as well as answering and being available in chat. Participation and moderation are not mutually exclusive.
|
|
| Dec 13, 2011 at 15:52 | history | answered | random | CC BY-SA 3.0 |