I'm not too concerned with giving ROs more power to moderate their own rooms. So long as we had a way to easily investigate actions taken, and flags raised when it looks like ROs are abusing their tools
here's hoping we don't get Meta Wars 2: revenge of the downvote
One aspect of inclusivity that is overlooked is exclusion due to too much moderation. When someone gets chat banned for asking a question like has happened before, some rooms with enough 10k'ers would be able to just kick out everyone they don't particularly like
Which is bad optics for public Q/A imo. And the lack of accountability for chat flags only makes that problem harder to tackle
I've had several inclusivity-related concerns (not just the meta voting thing I keep mentioning) relating to SE. And if I hadn't been too busy battling Dr. Eggman, keeping away from Amy's unwanted advances, and accepting Shadow's challenges, I would have probably published a blog post on the same topic.
@JourneymanGeek And that's why I'm all for ROs having better tools. If they don't moderate their room properly, then it's easy to just shut it down. They can't say it's a few bad apples
If they're using their tools more than average, raise a flag. If they're abusing it, remove them as an RO.
@JourneymanGeek So does deletion. The people who need to investigate it can still see them. But anyway, I'd much prefer an 'archive' rather than 'move' functionality. At least for me, it's super confusing to reconstruct what happened when messages are moved to a general trash bin
@Rob in general, looking at all the conversations we have had on chat - I suspect one of the issues we have in general is... chat moderation dosen't have the same sold basis site moderation does.
> But I think a web-based real time chat system like Campfire could offer that informal public gathering third place — a space for people who love the topic to meet, discuss, and collaborate in a different way. It would foster community, and be complementary to both strict Q&A;, and meta-discussion.
Aside of Tavern, Charcoal, and SOCVR, I only use chat to request for mod/community assistance on main site moderation for things that don't need a meta post, or flag, yes.
UPDATE: Praise your choice of deity, I found it!
UPDATE AGAIN: Due to a number of people wanting to know where it was found - I sold my car a couple of months ago and had a bag of stuff I'd removed from the car before it was collected, the bag contained my passport among other things (and a pair...
I certainly don't care enough about it to try and work out a plan to change things over there. I'm not even a member there beyond occasional spam flagging
@JourneymanGeek A post like this would either be destroyed as r/a (due to some of the bullet points) or downvoted to hell on a healthy site. The fact that it's a) not and b) upvoted means there are greater systemic incompabilities with the SE model on travel
that I'm not sure any one or even group of users can address
@JourneymanGeek That's actually offensive and insulting to everyone who cares about quality on that stack
A mod telling users not to use the tools they're given for moderation because the poster is new? That's in direct contradiction to network wide policy saying we should only ever consider the post, not who posted, when voting.
> If you can fix a question easily from a new user - do that instead of close-voting. Eg if they've asked 5 questions in one, remove the last 4 to keep it at 1 q per post, and add a comment explaining. Also fix spelling/grammar/CAPS - not everyone is a native speaker / grammar guru.
if someone asks 5 questions in one, there is almost never a surefire way to know which one they actually mean. That's something for OP to do while their question is closed as too broad
@JohnDvorak Most of the time in these circumstances, the one in the title is an aggregation of 2-5 of those in the Q
In such cases editors simply don't have enough information to properly distill the question down - You're either editing it into what you want (not what edits are for) or into a very imprecise approximation of what op might have wanted (if you guessed right)
If I wrote such a meta reply to a similar question on MSO I'd expect the meta reply to be destroyed as r/a, and rightly so
@JohnDvorak meh, i've seen less offensive stuff deleted on meta
what's more important then the post itself is the culture it indicates. The fact that it's endorsed (eh: created) by one of the mods makes it impossible to maintain any trust in the moderation there
Would you consider tons of off topic bad questions from beginners that don't get duly downvoted and closed because of niceness requirements as garbage?
even if we had reminders plastered on every page reminding people to downvote bad content and flag and close we'd still have more people who just upvote stuff they like and ignore the rest
Sometimes the problem is: bad questions by new users are not downvoted by regular users (for the sake of welcoming?), but then get upvoted by another new users...
@JourneymanGeek Or on the flipside. If average question quality is so bad that in the process of looking for things to answer you only find closeable stuff
SE seems to recognize this with their efforts being focused on improving question quality
Well, when it's just the word with valid context looks like it's acceptable, though maybe things changed by now. But just posting a curse word without context, especially as image, is bad idea.
