Information icon.svg Results for the 2023 RationalWiki Moderator Election have now been posted. Thank you for participating in this election, and congratulations to the winners!


From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Essay.svg This essay is an original work by Blue.
It does not necessarily reflect the views expressed in RationalWiki's Mission Statement, but we welcome discussion of a broad range of ideas.
Unless otherwise stated, this is original content, released under CC-BY-SA 3.0 or any later version. See RationalWiki:Copyrights.
Feel free to make comments on the talk page, which will probably be far more interesting, and might reflect a broader range of RationalWiki editors' thoughts.

I submit that the vagueries of the moderators' remit, combined with the complete and utter failure of the moderators to effect any of their objectives, gives cause for a more specific determination of moderator prerogatives, powers, limitations and procedures. Here I will describe in some detail my proposal.


Moderators will act in two capacities,

  1. individually
  2. in consultation with other moderators.

Individual action[edit]

In all cases except emergencies, moderators must first directly engage users involved in a dispute before taking individual action.

Alone, moderators can act voluntarily in the following situations:

All individual action must be temporary - any provisions should not exceed about three hours in length - and must take place during the development of the situation, not afterward. Moderators may use the following tools in individual action:

  • Page protection
  • Edit filters
  • Revokation of sysop rights
  • Blocks

If individual moderator action lasts beyond an acceptable duration, affected users may ask other moderators to restore the status quo ante.

Group action[edit]

Whenever a dispute beyond the scope of individual action is brought to the collective body of moderators, or when individual action of moderators is challenged, the moderators can only act after deliberation. The length of this deliberation should be proportionate to the number of users involved in the dispute and/or the gravity of the dispute. Moderators may accept or dismiss cases, though if at least two moderators agree to hear a case, it must be considered.

The end of the deliberation will be marked by a vote within the body of moderators. The decision must be supported by a majority, but the vote has no duration requirement. Moderators with a conflict of interest should recuse themselves from this vote, but are not required to.

The decision of the moderators will be completely binding until such time as it may be repealed by the moderators themselves or comes to its natural end. Moderators can take individual action to ensure the enforcement of such decisions (though all users theoretically could help as well) provided that common sense ought to be utilized.

Moderator group action may result in the following:

  • Prevention from editing a specific range of pages or namespaces
  • Revokation of sysop rights for long durations
  • Summary closing of all open discussion threads relating only to the matter resolved

Under no circumstances can moderators:

  • Impose changes to the community standards
  • Ban a user from the site for a period longer than three days
  • Improperly remove moderator rights (see below)


Every six months, seven moderators and two alternates will be elected by eligible voters. By-elections for an additional four moderators will only be called if the number of moderators drops below five.


Forced removal of moderator rights can only be done by a community vote, and follows the established procedure for rights removal voting.


Moderators may resign at any time. However, the fifth moderator to resign during each six-month term will retain the power to vote on group decisions until the conclusion of a by-election.


Any moderator account which remains inactive for two months will be summarily demoted, provided that the user is warned beforehand.