Welcome to Codidact Meta!
Codidact Meta is the meta-discussion site for the Codidact community network and the Codidact software. Whether you have bug reports or feature requests, support questions or rule discussions that touch the whole network – this is the site for you.
There should be a full moderation log visible to everyone
Each site should have a page that shows the full history of all moderator actions (such as closes and deletes). This should be visible to everyone, even users who are not logged in. To protect the privacy of moderators, the names can be anonymized to something like "Moderator 1", "Moderator 2", etc. when viewed by users who do not have sufficient privileges themselves. Timestamps can be fuzzed as well, so that instead of exact time only an approximate form (eg. "3 weeks ago") is shown to low-level users.
The benefits of this are:
- Checking on moderators is crowdsourced - the entire userbase can check their work instead of just a handful
- Discussion of moderator activity can be based on fact - people can link to the specific actions they mean
- Protects users from bad moderation
- Gives users confidence that the moderation is consistent and not arbitrary
- Provides a way for users to learn de facto site rules and culture, in addition to the de jure one
I think that currently, you can see various information about moderator actions if you have enough related privileges yourself, however, the "average user" cannot see all of this. Also, I suspect that it is built towards looking at the history of a particular post, not seeing "what the moderators have been up to lately".
2 answers
You are accessing this answer with a direct link, so it's being shown above all other answers regardless of its score. You can return to the normal view.
First, I'm a moderator on EE.
I agree that moderator actions should be publicly visible to "real" users. I wouldn't want any search bot out there being able to access the data. You'd have to be a real user that's been around a while and has shown enough activity to have some track record of not abusing the site.
One reason for this is that you have to understand the site before you are in a position to judge how it is run. I don't want to deal with endless objections to simple moderator actions where someone just posted their first question and something didn't go as expected.
Other than the above, everything should be out in the open to the extent possible.
Now I'll address some points brought up in other answers.
Moderators are human, and can make mistakes, and have biases and conflicts of interest. It should not be assumed that every moderator always makes the best decision.
Right. We all make mistakes. If you can't handle occasionally getting caught making a mistake, you don't belong on the internet, or most other places in life for that matter. That's how the world works.
Most likely the real issues is that one person's mistake is another's wise choice. Moderators outright screwing up is really rather rare, and easy to address. Most "mistakes" will be disagreement on policy.
Hiding official actions to avoid embarrassment of the officials is a smokescreen for avoiding accountability, a universal tool of all despotic regimes.
Some moderator actions involve personally identifiable information.
Those are really rare (I don't think I've had one yet on EE), and can be dealt with differently. Personally, I think that if you do anything on a public internet site, you shouldn't expect any privacy, but I understand there are some rules like the European GDPR that must be abided by in many cases.
A user who has caused problems in the past but is now contributing positively would have a permanent public record of the measures taken against them and reasons why.
As there should be, since they actually did it. Everyone should be allowed to form their own opinion of how relevant some action is after time has passed.
If I'm comparing two candidates for a job, one has a clean record and the other was convicted of stealing 10 years ago, I want to know about it. Maybe the second one has turned his life around, and will be an even better employee than the first because of it. Maybe hiring the guy with the clean record is missing out on someone who would be extra loyal for the opportunity. On the other hand, maybe the thief is still at it, just more careful to not get caught.
In any case, these are facts I want to know. What I decide to do with them should be MY call, not some record-keeper that decides to withhold true facts.
Similarly a moderator who has made a bad decision in the past which has since been dealt with appropriately would have a permanent public record of their mistake.
As it should be. If you have a problem with that, you've got no business being a moderator.
Some moderators have to deal with offensive or threatening content, which I would not want to see displayed publicly (even with parts redacted).
Then don't look. The world isn't always neat and pretty. If you can't handle that, don't go poking around where the nasty stuff could be.
Besides, someone being offensive isn't on the moderator. How they deal with it is. I think people would be more likely to react "Wow, look how the moderator handled that jerk. Nice job. I didn't know stuff like that was going on behind the scenes.".
that solution would need to be applied on a new website with a new set of moderators who have been informed in advance that their actions will all be public. Codidact is not that place.
I don't remember being promised that all my mod actions would be hidden. I stand by everything I've done, and would have no objection to everything being visible retro-actively.
Besides, this is easy to address. You announce that all actions going forward will be public. The publicly-visible logs start at that time. We lose the openness of past actions, but at least we'd be more open going forwards.
0 comment threads
Moderators are flawed
These volunteers give their time freely and deal with more difficult situations behind the scenes than most users realise. However, as much as I respect and deeply appreciate the work the moderators do, naturally everyone makes mistakes.
Moderators should be held accountable. Moderators are human, and can make mistakes, and have biases and conflicts of interest. It should not be assumed that every moderator always makes the best decision.
I don't like this approach
I am opposed to this particular method of holding moderators accountable. While information should be recorded that can be audited, it is not appropriate for all of this information to be public. There are several reasons for this, including:
- Some moderator actions involve personally identifiable information.
- A user who has caused problems in the past but is now contributing positively would have a permanent public record of the measures taken against them and reasons why.
- Similarly a moderator who has made a bad decision in the past which has since been dealt with appropriately would have a permanent public record of their mistake.
- Some moderators have to deal with offensive or threatening content, which I would not want to see displayed publicly (even with parts redacted).
Hiding identity and exact times
The idea of replacing usernames with placeholders and adding random noise to times is appealing, but neither approach is a good protection of privacy, especially long term. I would rather true usernames and exact times be used than give a false impression of protection that can lead to complacency.
For example, a moderator referred to in the log as "moderator2" may remain unidentified until some point in the future when a known interaction is cross referenced or their particular style of writing gives them away, at which point all of their past actions become publicly linked to their true username. By accepting that identities cannot be reliably hidden this way, and using true usernames in the log, it remains clear which actions should not be shared publicly, rather than them becoming public later accidentally.
An alternative place with full transparency
Even if someone could find a way of dealing with these objections, that solution would need to be applied on a new website with a new set of moderators who have been informed in advance that their actions will all be public. Codidact is not that place.
Here in the Codidact communities, I want the volunteer moderators to have privacy, and for their mistakes to be mostly dealt with in private. I believe that the majority of mistakes they make are well-meaning, and I'm not arguing for automatic protection in other cases.
0 comment threads
0 comment threads