Timeline for Abrupt change in moderation staff?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
35 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:14 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://serverfault.com/ with https://serverfault.com/
|
|
| Mar 20, 2017 at 10:32 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.stackexchange.com/ with https://meta.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Mar 17, 2017 at 10:13 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.serverfault.com/ with https://meta.serverfault.com/
|
|
| Nov 11, 2016 at 12:12 | comment | added | Shadow Wizard | @Reaces comments are meant to be temporary, their purpose is to make the post better. As far as I can see it worked here, the answer makes lots of sense in my opinion, so no need to go over its comments. I must admit, I don't envy Shog... Managing the moderators is surely not an easy task. | |
| Apr 15, 2015 at 7:56 | comment | added | Reaces | The updates here coupled with the whole slew of comments make this answer seem like two separate ones. And it might confuse people in the future who read them and try and make sense of the comments. | |
| Apr 15, 2015 at 3:22 | history | edited | Shog9 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 9949 characters in body
|
| Apr 13, 2015 at 15:03 | comment | added | Shog9 | The tag thing is tangentially-related, @bighomie, in that the question cleanup should've been done before those were removed. But this wasn't directly related to that, and I'm somewhat hesitant to lump in questions that were closed or deleted as part of that - as I said above, that sort of large-scale activity is expected, and thankfully it was reasonably well documented here. [edit: ok, actually looks like this was a lot more related to the tag cleanup than I realized, and wasn't very well documented. I'll post my full analysis soon; need to have another look at this. ] | |
| Apr 13, 2015 at 12:26 | comment | added | MDMoore313 | and he mentions closing 800 questions in a week, far steeper slope than the 500 in two months that has happened here. It seems that is really where it all started. Can you include the difference between what happened then and what happened last week in your post mortem? I just want to make sure in the future, if anyone wants to do something similar, they know what they should do. | |
| Apr 13, 2015 at 12:26 | comment | added | MDMoore313 | @Shog9 You two had dialog about this tag a couple of months ago, is the tag cleaning here not related? He had to clear the questions out of off-topic before deleting it, b/c of a tech error it ballooned to 10.8k, | |
| Apr 13, 2015 at 11:00 | comment | added | BlueCompute | So N00b has been closing lots of crappy, off-topic questions? And 500 over 2 months is a sudden avalanche that implies he's been somehow too trigger happy? I'm not seeing it. | |
| Apr 12, 2015 at 1:16 | comment | added | Shog9 | Monday should be feasible, @BigHomie | |
| Apr 11, 2015 at 19:15 | comment | added | MDMoore313 | @Shog9 thanks, so when can the community expect a post mortem? | |
| Apr 11, 2015 at 1:45 | comment | added | Shog9 | This is the most complete list of closed questions I have right now, @BigHomie; it goes back to late December. Most of the early ones seem pretty cut-and-dried off-topic - I suspect those were part of the tag cleanups prior to the tag-merges. Later questions have a lot more Kloxo and CentOS stuff, mixed with... not sure yet. Some of the mods have been going through this a bit more carefully. | |
| Apr 11, 2015 at 0:27 | comment | added | MDMoore313 |
the majority of those I checked made no mention of such tools. Can we have a list of those questions? I've seen 5 from AndrewB, but are there more?
|
|
| Apr 10, 2015 at 21:37 | comment | added | Shog9 | No one thinks too hard about tags until something bad happens and you need to decide if it's worth pulling backups, @Sven. Not the first time a moderator screwed that up; I guess it's time we took a hard look at those tools & ask whether anyone should have access to them. | |
| Apr 10, 2015 at 21:18 | comment | added | Sven Mod | I agree that a bit of oversight is necessary, but honestly, I was a bit shocked when I started to make sense of the whole story after the drama already unfolded. I admit to have mostly ignored the tag-removal episode (I don't see so much value in them and in the matter of which stays, which gets removed and which is created). | |
| Apr 10, 2015 at 21:01 | comment | added | Shog9 | You're volunteers and you're doing this of your own free will, @Sven. We've built extremely powerful tools for y'all to use in service to the community here... Tools that can do a great deal of damage if abused. You're free to not use them, but if you do then you should expect - heck, you should demand - some amount of oversight. This is the second time in two months I've had to clean up after reckless, uninformed use of these tools with no attempt made to communicate with the public or even with the rest of the mod team. I was very polite the first time, but this isn't a PR problem anymore. | |
| Apr 10, 2015 at 20:33 | comment | added | Sven Mod | I don't agree with at least a part of the closures, they where overzealous and indeed, the whole "project" could have been much better communicated. Anyway, frankly I think the way you handled this is just terrible. Maybe it's a language thing, but from my understanding of the english language, a command(!) like "Explain this." paired with repeated complaints to not have received an answer after a short time is completely inappropriate. You are not our boss, we are doing this mod thing for free, in out spare time. In the other question, you even named HopelessN00b a liar. That's insane. | |
| Apr 10, 2015 at 19:21 | history | edited | Shog9 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 973 characters in body
|
| Apr 10, 2015 at 18:25 | comment | added | Wesley | I took away from that post that there was indeed going to be a conflagration of bad, off-topic Q/As. I dunno what other conclusion could be made. We're supposed to discuss cleanups and mass closures / migrations, we discussed it out in the open, boom. Let's get back to question closin'! | |
| Apr 10, 2015 at 17:36 | comment | added | Shane Madden StaffMod | @JennyD That tag cleanup was a different effort which was completed months ago - and the highest voted answer on that question, Michael's, implies that if we were to do a cleanup campaign we'd have some legwork to do to determine which questions were worth sending to webmasters. I'm not saying a cleanup wasn't warranted or due, I'm saying that the right way to do it is to discuss in meta first. | |
| Apr 10, 2015 at 17:31 | comment | added | Jenny D | @ShaneMadden You mean a meta post like meta.serverfault.com/questions/6538/… ? | |
| Apr 10, 2015 at 17:19 | comment | added | Shane Madden StaffMod | @BigHomie The topicality of these kinds of questions has definitely been discussed at length, but a cleanup campaign has not been - when we've done those in the past, a meta post lets other people weigh in on the criteria we use to evaluate what gets closed/what gets edited and improved/what gets migrated to a site that wants them, lets people scan the tag for anything they think can be salvaged or that doesn't fit in the criteria, and communicates to everyone visiting the site (including community managers) what's being done by the community (instead of by a single moderator). | |
| Apr 10, 2015 at 15:27 | comment | added | TheCleaner | @Hyppy - I would actually concur with that last sentence. I know N00b can be course and swift in his dealing with questions/users. I've never seen him do it as a moderator based strictly on his own opinions though, but based on the guidelines (whether written or tribal knowledge) of the SF community. He's VERY active since being moderator, which I saw as a good thing, but maybe moderators aren't supposed to be seen by the general public overall. Regardless I guess it's Shog's/SE's call to do what they feel is best for the community/site/SE. | |
| Apr 10, 2015 at 13:38 | comment | added | Hyppy | Web panels are off-topic, period. This has been discussed every few months for as long as I can remember. The community consensus has always been to remove them with extreme prejudice. This seems like it's less of an effort to reign in a "rogue moderator" and more like an effort to influence the community's standards for professionalism. | |
| Apr 10, 2015 at 12:57 | comment | added | HopelessN00b | @shog9 While I would not be opposed to grepping for the names of administration panels and closing every result programmatically, I actually read every question I closed, and selected what I believe to be the most specific, unambiguous reason, which was usually that custom one. This does not mean, or imply it's the only reason, as for example, with this question. I closed it yesterday with the administration panel reason (cPanel), but it is also off topic for at least 3 other reasons, and has already collected 2 close votes as of the time of this comment. | |
| Apr 10, 2015 at 12:17 | comment | added | MDMoore313 | Actually, dialog was had on this Months ago | |
| Apr 10, 2015 at 12:03 | comment | added | user9517 | Is this what you missed meta.serverfault.com/questions/6538/… ? | |
| Apr 10, 2015 at 11:49 | vote | accept | EEAA | ||
| Apr 10, 2015 at 3:16 | comment | added | voretaq7 Mod | While I'm not opposed to Bulk Closing & other cleanups, that's usually something that gets brought up on Meta (to provide a lasting record of the rationale, discussion, and consensus). While we've traditionally coordinated the cleanup efforts through chat they are documented on Meta. | |
| Apr 9, 2015 at 23:26 | comment | added | EEAA | @Shog9 Hah, that's not a bad idea. :) | |
| Apr 9, 2015 at 23:13 | comment | added | Shog9 | Determining topicality via grep isn't controversial here, @EEAA? Ooookay. In that case, I can solve all of your moderation problems in 5 minutes - just give me a list of keywords and we can all go home. | |
| Apr 9, 2015 at 23:01 | comment | added | EEAA | Why were the actions controversial? Controversial in terms of the user whose question is closed? Yes, these were indeed. But controversial in terms of the stated topicality of SF, I'm not seeing it. | |
| Apr 9, 2015 at 22:43 | comment | added | HopelessN00b | Actually, if you search the body of those questions, you will find an admin panel in every one of them. Though often not explicitly stated in the question, a path which betrays the existence of the administration panel can be found in the posted configs or console messages. | |
| Apr 9, 2015 at 22:21 | history | answered | Shog9 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |