2019 Role-Playing Games Moderator Election Chat

william porter

00:00

I guess we'll whittle em down somehow

Maybe we could force em all to fight over lava pit, in a true winner takes all manner.

V2Blast

👀

Novak

00:17

Please. We're only halfway to the point where we would even need to have a primary. Many of the candidates we have are good, but that's not the same as saying we have many good candidates. Don't make us draft you @KorvinStarmast.

(I jest. That would be quite rude, really.)

Isaac Reefman

@KorvinStarmast Pleasure. Not trying to convince you to change your position (i think) but even given the state where your 'time is less free' I'm impressed and grateful for the time you do give to this community, even as a non-mod user, evidenced by the depth of your contributions to meta, for one. On more than one occasion you've renewed my appreciation of this site in general.

KorvinStarmast

@IsaacReefman Thanks again. Contributing to a site that has helped me reconnect with a hobby I'd not partaken in for over a decade for IRL reasons. Glad to contribute, and hopefully be helpful.

linksassin

00:52

@Rubiksmoose Absolutely fine. Mainly I don't like that "fit the model" is such a strong criteria for whether we keep a topic or not. I would prefer that topics be more based on popularity and overall effect on the site. Why ban things that cause no harm and some users enjoy?

Rubiksmoose

@linksassin Is there a particular topic that has been banned (for lack of a better term) here that you would posit as an example of one that you disagree with in particular?

linksassin

@Rubiksmoose Mostly the current arguments against homebrew-review questions. I don't think any topic has been banned solely for that purpose, but it has definitely been a contributing argument and I'm not sure it should be.

Rubiksmoose

@linksassin ah ok, I thought that might be the one foremost on your mind.

If I might offer a suggestion: adding to your answer that you don't disagree with any of the topics that have been banned in the past just some of the reasons for why might make that opinion seem a little bit less out of the norm.

BESW

"Doesn't fit the model" is always shorthand for "we tried for years to make this work but the coded-in structure of the site fights us at every turn and we've run out of tricks to fight back."

linksassin

@Rubiksmoose I will admit it has been my main bugbear recently. I included it because I feel that is the strongest argument to remove it, and none of the detractors have actually come up with a reason they cause harm other than that.

@Rubiksmoose Thanks for the advice. I will adjust accordingly.

BESW

01:02

It's not indicative of a passive might-as-well-give-up attitude in any of the cases I've seen it used.

In many cases, "harm" can mean "requires an unreasonable amount of active intervention every time the topic comes up."

Rubiksmoose

@linksassin I honestly think that "causes harm" might be an interesting take on a metric though I think you may find that many of the underlying causes of "not fitting the model" will also probably be argued to "cause harm".

Though I don't think here is the time or place to argue that. I think it is good that you are thinking it and good that you are bringing it up.

linksassin

@Rubiksmoose Many yes, but I don't think it will be all. I would like to see stronger evidence more akin to the arguments that were made to remove RAW which actively hurt the site and users.

@BESW And if that is the case I would accept that as an argument. Shortening it to "doesn't fit" is much less compelling an argument to me.

Rubiksmoose

I think this is a very intriguing proposal and I would encourage you to develop it and see where it goes and how the community finds it, no matter how the election goes.

Thank you for the clarification though. It eases my mind a bit because there are some very problematic topics in the past that would be back in play if we were to throw out entirely the reasoning (shorthand) of "not fitting the model".

linksassin

@Rubiksmoose Thankyou, TBH I don't like my chances anyway. I think yourself and V2 are likely better choices than me. But this will be a valuable experience for me anyway. And maybe I'll have a better chance next time around.

Rubiksmoose

@linksassin Hey, I'm very happy you are running and honestly I am just as unsure of my chances as I would imagine you are. Your answers were great and you have presented yourself very well :) Don't count yourself out.

V2Blast

01:09

> honestly I am just as unsure of my chances as I would imagine you are

same

Rubiksmoose

And we still have 4ish days of nomination left! Who knows who else might enter the race and shake things up.

I'm just happy that the field is strong enough that I'm more than confident we'll be giving good people diamonds in a short time.

V2Blast

💎

Novak

01:50

Actually, @linksassin I thought your "don't fit the model" comment was the strongest part of your answer, and one of the strongest parts of all the answers combined.

linksassin

@Novak Thanks for the support. I haven't removed it, simply clarified.

Miniman

03:00

@BESW Personally, I think "doesn't fit the model" in this case, as with game-recs, is shorthand for "we are doing querents a disservice by pretending this is a thing we do well".

BESW

agreed.

Miniman

SSD really turned me around on that one, and it's an argument I keep coming back to.

BESW

I think it usually also includes "and we h*cking TRIED to be good at it, for long enough that the trying also became a problem."

Almost every example of systemic "being brusque with new users" is associated with the latest in a long line of attempts to improve our doing of a thing we don't do well.

linksassin

@Miniman The ambiguity of the statement alone should be enough reason to show that it isn't a good argument. A "pretending this is a thing we do well" answer would need to support their view that we do it poorly. Too often "doesn't fit" is used without supporting evidence. That is what I would like to see change going forward.

@BESW If dealing with a topic is frustrating to the point that you can't obey the "be nice" policy. Stop dealing with the topic, add it to your ignored tags and let others who aren't burned out deal with it. Personal frustration should not mean removing content unless the community agree that the topic is doing more harm than good.

BESW

@linksassin That's... got nothing to do with this.

I'm talking about cases where the policies we've built up around a topic, to keep it workable for the site, have become burdensome and off-putting for new users to navigate.

2

Give me the benefit of the doubt that I know the difference between a few people getting snippy, and a systemic problem.

linksassin

03:09

@BESW Apologies, I might have read too much into your "being brusque with new users" comment.

BESW

9

Q: What is the correct way to treat new users of the site?

The reason I posted the https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1590/then-dd-is-not-the-game-for-you question rather than as a comment, or flag on the comment as I saw this as indicative of a general problem. As background, I have been a moderator. OK only of the ACCU General emailist and I...

11

Q: Should a new user be welcomed before the new user's question is closed?

Recently, I was fifteen seconds into a welcome comment on a new user's first question on which no comments had been made when the question was closed—without comment—as a duplicate. I posted my welcome comment, but the event left me uneasy. Closing the question as a duplicate is absolutely not t...

discussion closing-questions new-users

etc etc etc the site has a long long history of policy enforcement being off-putting without it being an individual problem.

We are brusque with new users. This is not a personal problem, it's the nature of the Stack Exchange's philosophies and it's hard-coded into the site's design.

Miniman

@linksassin Ok, nice, simple evidence. We're giving them exactly the same feedback they'd get if they posted on a forum. No one's playtesting, there's no Good Subjective happening here.

The difference is, when they say "how about if I change it like this", we say "no you can't do that" instead of answering them. The forum just answers them.

It's an iterative process, and we don't do iterative processes.

linksassin

@Miniman This is not the place to discuss this topic. I have made my view on this clear in the relevant meta. Please take it there.

BESW

On RPG.SE we tend to make a very hard effort to offset that with personal compassion. Sometimes though, our attempts to be kind and inclusive mean trying to accommodate topics that the site's structure make difficult to accommodate. So we build higher than higher towers of exceptions and edge case rules which let us technically allow the topic but in practice create a hostile experience for those who are trying.

Miniman

@linksassin Of course it's not the place to discuss this topic. But then, you were fine with discussing it for the last few hours.

linksassin

03:16

@Miniman I was not discussing homebrew. I was discussing part of my answer to the moderator questionaire as requested by Rubiks. This topic was only brought up as an example.

Miniman

@linksassin Okay, let me put this differently. If you wanted to say "we're not talking about this here", you should have said it here instead of talking about it yourself. Don't make your points and then say this isn't an appropriate place to discuss them as a way to dismiss others.

I'll happily drop this, because, as you say, this isn't an appropriate place to discuss it.

linksassin

@Miniman You are confusing two different topics. Here we are discussing how we talk about whether a topic is good or not. The post I said this was not the place for was a specific argument about homebrew.

Miniman

@linksassin Ah, so you're making a distinction between talking about homebrew review, and talking about talking about homebrew review?

linksassin

@Miniman Correct. One is about a specific topic. The other is about site moderation policy and is something I mentioned in my answer which Rubiks asked me to clarify.

@Miniman Additionally it is "talking about talking about X" where X could be any topic. Homebrew review just happens to be the current example.

Miniman

@linksassin It's disingenuous to say that talking in general about X, using Y as an example, isn't talking about Y, but sure.

linksassin

03:28

@Miniman If anything I have said comes across as arguments for Y, I apologise as that was not the intention. I am certainly not trying to shutdown other voices but instead encourage better discourse in the correct forums.

Miniman

As a side note, to whoever starred my earlier message, I appreciate the support, but it's really not a good thing to have in the starbar.

@linksassin Thank you. And sorry, because I did read that as an argument for homebrew review. Also, I apologise for coming across so strongly.

(This is one of the reasons I'm not running for moderator.)

linksassin

@BESW Part of my nomination post states that I am doing everything I can to change that. Openly discussing topics like this is one step on that journey. As someone who was a new user more recently than some others. I feel I have a good insight into how we currently treat new users, from both sides (new user and experienced). I hope I can use this to be a positive influence on the site.

vicky_molokh

06:33

Regarding being off-putting for newcomers, both based on my own experiences some time ago, and on some of the comments on closed questions or disappearances without comment after them, I find the policy of quick and strict closures to be a major contributor to the negative impression.

I know, I know, there are logical reasons why the policy is set this way. Still, this seems to be a matter of what people do and not how the site is designed, and these actions cause negative impressions.

Carcer

07:19

@linksassin I think BESW's jaded argument is that there isn't a way you can change that, moderator or not, because the root of the the problem is outside the domain of your power to change

linksassin

@Carcer I agree that is what they are saying. And I understand where they are coming from, most if not all experienced users would likely agree. I'd like to believe that it is still worth the effort to try though.

Maybe it will burn me out. Maybe in time I will become equally pessimistic about our ability to improve. But I won't know until I try.

V2Blast

I wish you luck. :)

Akixkisu

12:22

I believe this topic of new-user-treatment is quite important and is one of the most relevant tie-breakers in voting for new moderators for a user such as myself.

This is closely tied to the conduct of moderators which, by hierarchy, I regard with more scrutiny than that of any other users. Note that I also view them as a group entity (of authority), so all as negatively perceived conduct is something I extrapolate to the entire group (of moderators, and further ex-moderators).

I think there is more room for discussion about the conduct of future moderators specifically towards new(er)-us…

nitsua60

13:32

@Akixkisu I'll raise my hand to say that I'm a person, and I hope that those who interact with me can manage to hold two notions in their minds: I am an individual with thoughts and feelings and experiences, and I belong to an identifiable (and identified) group.

BESW

I think a lot of the questions being posed to the moderators show a fundamental misunderstanding of the roles and capacities our Stack Overlords bestow upon elected moderators. I know I used to have a lot of the same misunderstandings. There's a lot of things which are just irrevocably outside the scope of moderator influence, much less authority, and most of the things moderators can influence are equally within the reach of other users.

nitsua60

@BESW Makes me wonder if a "what can moderators do?" meta would be good to have out there as a reference. (Not what should we do, but an actual enumeration of the things we can do.)

BESW

As regards many of RPG.SE's concerns, we the users give the ~~blue~~ green diamond a lot more authority than the Stack Overlords do.

2

Rubiksmoose

@Akixkisu if you had any specific questions that you wanted to ask such that we could clarify feel free to ask them. I know I mentioned the topic several times at various levels of detail in my answer but I'd be happy to be more in depth.

BESW

@nitsua60 An understanding of this subject is definitely something I look for in a moderation candidate.

nitsua60

13:37

Off the top of my head: delete comments, unilaterally close/open, migrate questions, lock posts, unprotect questions (I forget if when a 10K+ protects they can then unprotect?), move all comments to chat, send private messages to users (which are copied to staff and we're told are only for serious infractions), suspend users, engage SE staff in conversation pretty readily, use the "featured" tag on meta, inspect cross-voting statistics, inspect some IP details.

BESW

(And of course, just because authority is granted by the community rather than the site owners doesn't mean the authority doesn't exist. But it's a very different kind of authority.)

nitsua60

Oh, yes. Very much so.

vicky_molokh

At a minimum, I think there's a certain perception of 'A moderator did it, so the people cannot argue against it on main by countervoting, and at best must raise a meta'. I'm not sure how widespread it is, but I saw some evidence of this perception existing (e.g. people stopping the lock-unlock cycle after a mod unilaterally locks or unlocks a thread).

David Coffron

@vicky_molokh Well typically that specific situation (a lock-unlock cycle) is grounds for a meta anyway

Rubiksmoose

@Akixkisu For what it is worth: the primary thing I know I can do to help new users integrate into the site is simply to talk to them. I feel that human interaction is inherently friendlier and further removed from the cold mechanics of the site and that engaging a confused and/or upset user with tailored words is better than relying on closure notices and help articles. If course this is something I already have been doing and continue to strive to be better at (and other people have too!).

nitsua60

13:40

@vicky_molokh So I'd be curious for some honest feedback: I did this a while back and immediately raised the meta to ask people to hash it out with words rather than votes. Does it seem like that worked, or was appropriate, or like I should have just let it alone?

(Also, I recall your recent flag on the post I'm talking about, and if you're curious about how I handled it I'd be happy to talk--maybe the NAB?)

vicky_molokh

Maybe no need to move it if we keep it in the context of the upcoming election?

nitsua60

(Here's the post I'm talking about, for any who might not remember:

14

Q: Should this dice question be open or closed?

This meta is about the mainsite question How I can I roll a number of non-digital dice to get a random number between 1 and 150? It was closed by five users, then reopened by five other users. (Many of these first ten users are very high-rep and -experience users--you can see them all in the r...

discussion specific-question close-reasons

vicky_molokh

@nitsua60 Well, regarding that question, I saw the situation with it as specifically an example of how mods differ from regular users: the unilaterality of mod power was moved from a close to a lock, overruling community disagreement.

(Until the unlocking, of course.)

Just to clarify, this is meant to be a comment on the powers of mods, and isn't meant to be read as a downvote of @nitsua60's moderatorability!

Rubiksmoose

@vicky_molokh I find this point particularly interesting as well. And my own views on the matter have shifted since I joined the site.

nitsua60

@vicky_molokh (And even if it were, that'd be fair!)

David Coffron

13:48

@vicky_molokh In accordance with that (consdiering your revelation of what a mod can do), I think an enumeration of what exactly mods are able to do might benefit the site

I found this blog post an interesting read on how the stacks approach moderating

(but I don't know if the powers it lists contain all of the ones mods currently have)

vicky_molokh

> Moderators are human exception handlers, there to deal with those (hopefully rare) exceptional conditions that should not normally happen, but when they do, they can bring your entire community to a screaming halt — if you don’t have human exception handling in place.

I find the above paragraph unrealistically idealistic.

I mean it's a great ideal to aspire to, but it's not the impression I had of what mods actually are like on the site.

Rubiksmoose

@vicky_molokh I mean it is an article about the theory of how moderation should work on the site right?

I'm curious though, how do you see moderation departing from this?

vicky_molokh

@Rubiksmoose Yes, but what I'm saying is that, much like 'we do not enforce style' and 'titles need not be questions', it doesn't feel that way in practice.

I'd say that most of the cases I witnessed so far of moderator power in use (both elected and just many-K-rep), only a minority either exceptions that cannot be handled by the community or 'brought the entire community to a screaming halt'.

nitsua60

@DavidCoffron It's pretty accurate. The things I'd add to that list are things that have emerged over the years, such as the relationship we have with our Community Manager giving us an insight into SE practices/workflow, or the broad network of hundreds of mods' experience we have to draw upon.

Rubiksmoose

@vicky_molokh For sure and I wasn't disagreeing with your assessment (nor agreeing with it) :) It was more a perhaps poorly phrased request for more information on your thoughts about it.

vicky_molokh

14:02

@Rubiksmoose Perhaps the most common example, unilateral closures mostly aren't used for exceptions that are likely to harm the whole community and/or cannot be handled by the community, but rather much in the same way as the community uses normal votes.

Now, I must point out not all uses are like that. But the majority seem to be.

Rubiksmoose

@vicky_molokh Indeed. And I think that might come down to the differing views on what constitutes a mod acting as a moderator (as linked in a meta way up in this chat room by Nitsua60).

47

Q: “Is something wrong?” Yes: Too much moderation

RPG's users and moderators have a number of problems as summarized in this question's answers. However, several mods have said that they can't accept meta feedback in the form of anything other than individually-separated questions. While I think that's unreasonable and contrary to common meta pr...

discussion meta

(and the linked discussions)

vicky_molokh

@Rubiksmoose Well, 'acting as a mod' can probably be separated into two subtypes: (a) explicit mod power - using abilities that are explicitly unavailable to users lacking a diamond and/or lacking 10k rep and (b) soft/implicit mod power, such as 'a mod said so, so the public should listen'.

Rubiksmoose

Sure, which I think from a high altitude view could also be rephrased as (a) power given to mods by the SE system mechanically and (b) power given to the mods by the community (implicitly or explicitly)

Akixkisu

@BESW yikes. I'm not sure if you are trying to sound condescending or if that is normal in your culture-group. I think you are "fundamentally misunderstanding" the intention of those questions. The discernment of reality as perceived by users and the rules and guidelines as established by the site are different. There are emotional and rational parts to users. Honestly please do not try to invalidate our questions.

Rubiksmoose

@Akixkisu for clarity, was that in response to this message?

vicky_molokh

14:10

@Rubiksmoose Yes, but there's an important part about b: it can be a result of misconceptions, such as of mistaking a mod's opinion for site/community policy when reading it. This can happen for all sorts of reasons, and not necessarily intentionally on anyone's behalf.

Akixkisu

Yes. @Rubiksmoose

nitsua60

It might be of interest to this discussion that one of the most-requested "powers" by moderators is to be able to cast a regular vote.

353

Q: Add a way for moderators to cast a normal, non binding close/open vote

I think moderators should have the ability to cast a normal, non binding close and open vote like they were a normal user (while of course retaining their ability to cast a binding vote where necessary). This can be used in "grey areas" where a moderator can choose to give his or her opinion, bu...

feature-request status-declined moderation moderator-abilities binding-vote

Rubiksmoose

@vicky_molokh Yeah I think moderators have to walk a fine line and be clear when they are wearing their "moderator representing the community" hat and "moderator being an individual member of the community and having their own thoughts/opinions" hat

nitsua60

(It's the single highest-voted post having to do with moderation on meta.SE. And one of the top declined requests.)

Rubiksmoose

I occasionally see diamonds say in chat or in comments and even in meat something to the effect of "saying this as a personal opinion not as a diamond moderator"

mxyzplk

14:14

Yes, but you should also read my answer in the "too much moderation" meta specifically about that non-binding vote thing - Jeff Atwood, Shog9, etc say that is bad and an abdication of mod responsibility. Basically by being elected your opinion is given 5 vote-weights and you're expected to use it when you would have vtc'ed otherwise.

nitsua60

Yup.

mxyzplk

So while we do try to build consensus, we also are not reluctant to cast our mod-vote when we feel like something needs to be closed. If 5 other people reopen, we don't (unless it's a real extreme thing) re-close. (though another mod might)

We may be the site janitors, but we don't ask everyone over and over if we should take their trash out, we just do it.

Rubiksmoose

I was never around when either of you were normal users. Have you found that your voting habits have changed since moving to a moderator? I find it hard to fathom that they could remain completely unaffected, personally.

@mxyzplk In response specifically to "when you would have vtc'ed otherwise"

mxyzplk

Voting? Not really. Though through long site use I am willing to downvote e.g. Bad Subjective answers but that's just learning over time'

or do you mean vtc

nitsua60

Up-/downvotes no change. Though my activity is a bit lower mainsite, so numerically it's probably down.

Rubiksmoose

14:18

@mxyzplk Yeah sorry I did mean VTC. (poor word choice)

mxyzplk

Yes, I mean, based on community feedback over time (like that "too much moderation" meta) we do try to encourage community members to do it by being slower on the draw

I'm more liable to throw my vtc if it's arguable if there's community vtcs

nitsua60

Close/reopen, yes, I refrain quite a bit when I would have otherwise. That's a place where I think the stated role of moderation and the tools we have clash.

From the help center: "special abilities necessary to handle those rare exceptional conditions:

Moderator votes are binding. Any place we have voting — close, open, delete, undelete, offensive, migration, etc — that vote will reach the threshold and take effect immediately if a single moderator casts a vote."

I read that as saying the reason I have a supervote is so that I can step in when necessary.

mxyzplk

but on the other hand, we don't have unlimited time to hover over each question day after day; we are all busy professionals with families etc. so if we need to do the right thing and move on, we do the right thing and move on. meta's always there for exception handling; more than a certain amount of time hand-wringing over a given decision is a net negative for everyone

nitsua60

On the vast majority of questions where I would have VTC'ed before, it's not necessary that it be closed right now. So I usually leave it to the community.

2

(Because I'm not allowed, status-declined, to cast a non-binding vote.)

mxyzplk

Like that current D&D vs monotheism question, I knew it was going to suck the second I read it and then started getting the auto-flags on 10+ answers/20+ comments, but I gave it a couple days and close/open cycles before closing myself

nitsua60

14:22

@mxyzplk ditto. Seeing a (3) or (4) there makes it real easy.

mxyzplk

but I'm also not going to wait forever, at this point it's clear it needs intervention so I intervened without giving it more runway

Carcer

I think there's a fundamental problem with a system that requires the most active and helpful members of the community to do less in order to preserve the balance of perspective, but it ain't a problem we're gonna be able to fix here

nitsua60

@Carcer Hey, the God-Emperor of Dune had to deal with it, so can we =)

mxyzplk

Building up good judgement about this is the main thing you develop as a mod. Everyone comes to their own balance between the very real need for intervention and coaching from SE community leads you should not hesitate and the need for the community to take the lead and fel good about things

nitsua60

^^

Rubiksmoose

14:25

That makes a lot of sense. It sounds like, in the long run you've got to feel out a balance between what the community wants/needs, how timely you see the problem being, and how strongly you feel about the question needing to be closed in general? Is that about right? I'm guessing this is something that you just have to get a feel for once you get the diamonds.

Carcer

@nitsua60 I'm confident you can deal but it's still a poorly engineered situation to be in to begin with

mxyzplk

Well, so I used to think that too Carcer. From one perspective, when you get feedback that "well... it's not that you did the wrong thing... it's just you DID something with your POWER and I think that's MEAN" - it's easy to say that's snowflake whining with nothing actionable about it. I felt that way for a long while.

But from a servant leadership perspective, and trying to build community members into leaders of their own (as they can do most of what we can as they get rep), an inverted approach is needed

nitsua60

Unsurprisingly, like most human-centric things, I think most of our mod-calls are (a) rarely "right" vs. "wrong" as much as weighing two competing goods; (b) strongly context-dependent, both in execution and reception; (c) in response to situations that change all the time. So the "right" call for one person one day is likely to be "wrong" to someone else or later on. All for good reasons!

Carcer

@mxyzplk I must admit I'm not sure that I follow what you mean here

mxyzplk

where we empower the community to do most things, and some of that is "dancing around the feelings," like it or not. The book "Turn This Ship Around" is a good work on how to build leaders instead of taking an authoritative stance

Carcer

14:29

oh, I think we've crossed wires a little.

nitsua60

@mxyzplk This bit is why I think I'm intrigued by a local meta post enumerating mod-powers. Both to rein in expectations of what we can effectuate, to make clear what we can do (with redactions for Harm to Ongoing Matter, Sources and Methods, and National Security), and to make clear how much of what we can do can also be done (and is properly done) by the whole high-rep population.

Carcer

I was stating that the SE design where elected moderators cannot take certain actions without it being binding anymore is bad; I am not complaining about users complaining due to perceived authoritarian moderation

Rubiksmoose

@nitsua60 I'm honestly pretty interested in the potential of such a meta to be helpful.

Carcer

I'm fully on board with moderators needing to understand how to strike a balance between when they should and should not act as moderators, I just think it's poor design that the dichotomy is between acting as a moderator and not acting at all

Rubiksmoose

@nitsua60 I think there is often a lot of misunderstanding about what a mod can do, which is a necessary prerequisite if you are trying to talk about what they should do.

mxyzplk

14:32

@nitsua60 I'm less interested because I'll be honest, I have no idea. Seems like high rep users and the review queues can do a lot of stuff, once you get into the deep details (tag synonyms!) I don't even know the lines partially because they do keep adding functionality so high-rep and queues can do more. And then there's stuff (tag burnination, handling socks) we can't do and have to refer to Community. I wish such a question well but am not personally super interested in the minutia.

Carcer

@Rubiksmoose and I think BESW is right when he says that questions about how mods would improve the new user experience betray a misunderstanding of what is and is not within the mods' power.

(assuming on my part questions like that were the kinds of questions he meant.)

Rubiksmoose

@Carcer Or at least the things they can do, 10k and 20k users can basically also already do.

(if not below that)

mxyzplk

@Carcer Strongly suggest reading "Turn The Ship Around!" (Marquet) then. It's how much of the world works. If you're a boss (or in this case, captain of a nuclear sub), there's no "lesser authority stance" for you. You can delegate authority, you can coach, but when you make a decision that decision goes. In this way SE is just like everything else.

desire for weakness is not strength. wise application of strength is strength.

Carcer

@mxyzplk I might look it up at some point, though I can't help but naively feel like that the rigid military command structure of something like a submarine should not be analogous to human interactions in contexts like an office job or a forum

like sure, if the only speed you can go is 100mph then I went you to go 100mph when it's appropriate and I'm not trying to stop you from doing that, but I still don't think it's a good design that your car can only do 100mph or 1mph

anyhow, I suspect it's not going to be productive for me to debate further on that topic

Akixkisu

@Carcer if you are going to read that you may also be interested in political leadership and double-consciousness in Souls by W.E.B. Du Bois.

vicky_molokh

14:42

@Carcer One of the metas suggested that there are consequences to electing the most active community members/leaders into moderator positions.

Rubiksmoose

So, I just had a thought sparked by this conversation related to leadership building and closing/teaching. Thinking back I've cast lots of close votes, many of which were easy unequivocal things that needed to be closed. but each time I learned more about the site and how to effectively manage it. If a mod had instead gotten there and closed them before me, I wouldn't have been able to reach the level of experience and confidence such as I have now.

5

Of course a lot of that may come down to the mods simply not being and/or wanting to be around all the time so they can't close everything. But if they were super active, I could see that creating a leadership vacuum maybe.

Sounds simple and obvious now that I write it out, but I think this discussion really made it click and give it context to me.

So by restraining themselves and refraining from using the powers too much, the mods have allowed newer users to gain confidence and experience with the system and rise to leadership positions of their own.

Which I think is part of "wise application of strength"

JohnP

18:17

@Rubiksmoose Yes. It will actually be easier to do that on a site like RPG, simply because you have a good base population of active, high rep users. They will act as they normally do, saving you having to apply a mod hammer. If you have questions about why they acted, then you can ask your fellow mod team.

Lower traffic sites actually have a harder learning curve, simply because the community isn't active enough to show you the trends/moires of the group.

@Rubiksmoose Also, for newer users, it is helpful to explain why you are closing their question. Links to the tour, help section, relevant meta post, etc. also help guide the user to educate themselves and become productive members. That was a hard lesson for me to learn initially.

V2Blast

21:05

@Rubiksmoose true, true

BESW

...Yeah, I could've phrased that better. I stand by the point that understanding the capacities of moderation is necessary for accurately identifying the qualities of a good moderator, but "invalidation" isn't on the table.

Transcript for

2019 Role-Playing Games Moderator Ele…