« first day (3595 days earlier)      last day (22 days later) » 

6:03 PM
In local news: Diamonds are not forever
2
 
 
1 hour later…
Ave
7:33 PM
@skullpatrol I really don't see the problem with that mod agreement
except maybe for iv on mod responsibilities
 
8:04 PM
@Ave only a mod could answer that, pal
Let's not forget that stack overflow is getting a huge increase in traffic because of the COVID-19 lockdown.
So, business is picking up for the executives, which means more money for them and there are a lot more new contributors around.
 
@Ave The biggest issue I see is that it has much more provisions for SE directly telling mods what to do. They can extend the agreement with the mod policies on meta, and mods are required to "accept additional guidance given by members of the Stack Exchange, Inc. Community Team and Senior Leadership Team"
I'm pretty sure that second part was much, much worse in earlier non-public versions of the agreement
The agreement isn't problematic if you trust SE. But especially with a few more extensions like the underage user reporting that was published and then removed on meta, you get potentially a lot more formal reasons to remove mods.
But my strong impression is that a large part of it is caused by a desire of the people higher up in SE to keep the mods more under control (this is based to a large part on comments from e.g. Shog on how bad earlier versions of this were).
2
 
In my humble opinion, they destroyed a lot of trust with the Monica affair
2
 
If you disagree with an instruction, you can still always just resign your moderatorship at that time. It's not like it's a job we need to keep. Pre-emptively inviting removal by refusing the new agreement is of course an option, but it feels a little premature to me.
 
On a related note, I wonder if SE has policy in place regarding moderator misconduct, bullying, racial bigotry, white ethnocentrism.
 
@murgatroid99 I would personally sign it (if I were still willing to be a mod), but I can understand people that won't.
 
8:19 PM
@EddieKal You're a mod too. Shouldn't you know this? There is a moderator removal process, bullying and bigotry are violations of the code of conduct, and moderators are required to follow the code of conduct on penalty of removal
@MadScientist I did sign it. I think it's reasonable
 
My major issue is the "accept guidance from Senior Leadership Team" stuff. The language is watered down to make that clause essentially useless, but I'm not sure that would stop them from trying it out anyway
 
@murgatroid99 Yes I do know that. But those things were/have been allowed to last for months without SE doing anything. I will stop here and hopefully get a post onto the floor of Meta SE soon.
 
Have you guys seen how much the traffic on stackoverflow has increased since Covid started?
and the timing of it came pretty much after everybody left over the Monica affair
let's face it the executives are making good money here on mostly volunteer work
I will stop here also.
 
Tim
9:06 PM
@EddieKal I would be surprised there is such a policy. The moderators at several sites are corrupted and abusive
No one has ever been held accountable
Notably, stackoverflow, cs, meta
Please help make stackexchange a better place, everyone!
 
Make_Stackexchange_Great_Again?
 
Tim
Stack Exchange for All!
Ordinary user's life matters!
 
and All for Stackexchange!
 
Tim
Let's fight against moderator brutality!
 
I'm with you pal.
 
 
2 hours later…
Ave
11:04 PM
@skillpatrol Eh. I don't think so.
We're all humans capable of reading here.
You can open up version 1, and open up version 2. You can view them side by side and map out the differences.
Then judge for yourself what you think is okay (everything except for #4 from what I've seen) to expect from mods and what isn't (#4).
@MadScientist This is the only concerning one I saw, yeah. I'd be not care much about it several years ago but SE administration has, uh... not been great lately!
I think the statement I agree with the most is this:
3 hours ago, by murgatroid99
If you disagree with an instruction, you can still always just resign your moderatorship at that time. It's not like it's a job we need to keep. Pre-emptively inviting removal by refusing the new agreement is of course an option, but it feels a little premature to me.
 
Yeah that's where I'm at, not like I'd take a pay cut or anything
I demand a 20% pay raise actually
 
Ave
I think it kind of reduces the effectiveness of quitting over a thing if you're not going to say exactly what it's about (in the linked post it is kind of obvious to some extent, but "However, there are multiple problems with this new version" clearly says "multiple", and I cannot find multiple issues myself), or if it's not immediately obvious (recent event).
@Unionhawk Can we tip you in stars instead?
 
Ultimately it's up to any individual mod what they want to do, the thing seemed reasonable to me but I'm not the entire mod team of every site so
 

« first day (3595 days earlier)      last day (22 days later) »