| I thought this|
was supposed to be
|RationalMedia Foundation (RMF)|
| The nicest bunch of assholes on RationalWiki|
|Shills and Whores|
If you have any concerns that need to be brought to a moderator's attention or complaints about a moderator, please go here.
- The main function of the moderator is to monitor conflicts and use the tools they are given to keep discussions from veering off in directions that are harmful to the community and the site.
- The second function of the moderators is to help boot-strap certain policies or procedures that we struggle with. A great example of this is how to vote for something, how long does a vote last, when does it pass or fail, what should even be voted on? There is no way to address these issues without some people having the power to set a certain amount of basic policy.
Moderators, in consultation with the community and each other, also may help develop a structure of procedures for running the site.
- The primary tool given to moderators is the authority to act on their own volition to deal with problems the site may encounter. Moderators are allowed to take actions to curb destructive conduct or discourse and those actions should not be undone by anyone else.
- The main technical tools that moderators have, that sysops do not have, are the ability to lock a page so that no one but moderators can edit it; to change all user rights; and to hide revisions from everyone. This is intended as a solution to "wheel warring", where sysops repeatedly revert each other's admin actions. This is especially important because pretty much everyone on here whose edits are constructive and mostly accepted by the mob eventually gets demoted to
Sysoprevoke is a user "right" which can only be added or removed by mods. It prevents a user from using any of the tools of sysop, even if they are marked as being a sysop in user rights. In other words, it prevents anyone but a mod from re-sysopping someone. Techs have the technical abilty to sysoprevoke themselves or a user who has self-requested it, but are not permitted to put users in sysoprevoke unilaterally. Techs are not permitted to remove sysoprevoke placed by a moderator without approval from a moderator or the mob.
The mantra of the moderator is to do as little as possible to meet the responsibility of their position. If a brief note on a talk page asking a user to tone something down will suffice, then that’s all that should be used. Maybe a 2-hour lock on a talk page that's gone out of control would suffice. If a block is needed it shouldn’t be for longer than a few hours, a day at the most. A light touch is the key. The moderators' job is not to remove people or censure them, but to keep the vitriol in our discourse to appropriate levels.
As for filling in policy issues, moderators should view their actions as boot-strapping, not issuing orders from on high. What is the least amount of policy that needs to just be declared, in order to move forward? Perhaps declaring a vote is all that is needed, for example.
Permanent removal of rights or censure
Any action that will be permanent or long term, such as rights removal, blocking or censure, should still be handled by the larger community. Moderators can help establish the rules of discussion, and the structure for arriving at a decision, but it should still be the community that is empowered to act on long term issues both in dealing with our fellow community members and site policy.
Current list of moderators
- ListUsers/moderator (there are 6)