I have read the question about What is the process of removing a moderator from office if he/she goes rogue? but here I want to know what actions would be done after a moderator is known to be rogue. For example, apart form removing he/she from moderator status can it also:

  • Reverse any damage made by the moderator to questions, answers, flags, users, etc..

  • Notify harmed users

  • Verify if this bad moderator is also a moderator in another site and remove he/she from status (To prevent another problem)

What can actually be done in case of some moderator going wild. My question started after looking at the nominations right now and seeing a very strange nominated user who appears on other sites for nomination and has little score in all. This makes me wonder a lot about the intent to go for moderator and what could happen. With this in mind should there be an update on the rules to include:

  • A higher needed participation on the site
  • A higher score to make sure he/she is safe as a moderator (Or at least safer than someone with 100 score for example)
  • Any other particular rule that can help in having a less chance of having a rogue one.
share
4  
1) Don't leave your moderators out in the sun. 2) meta.stackexchange.com/questions/151606/… –  Shog9 Feb 8 '13 at 16:34
    
@Shog9 like the link nice. But they for example do not say, if they can reverse everything bad that was done. Although a lot of the comments have good information and the answers cover a lot of ground. –  Luis Alvarado Feb 8 '13 at 16:38
5  
SE employees know where we live, and then they come for us. –  jrg Feb 8 '13 at 16:43
1  
Always wondered if I merged all the moderators on the site in to my account if I would turn in to a super-moderator® :D –  Bruno Pereira Feb 9 '13 at 9:27
    
Would salting or picking work? ;p –  Journeyman Geek Feb 9 '13 at 11:54
add comment

2 Answers

up vote 23 down vote accepted

My question started after looking at the nominations right now and seeing a very strange nominated user who appears on other sites for nomination and has little score in all. This makes me wonder a lot about the intent to go for moderator and what could happen.

People want to become moderators for a great variety of reasons. Some high rep users make terrible moderators, and some low rep users turn out to be excellent. I suggest not jumping to conclusions. :)

Participation on the site is likely an indicator of how invested the person is, but it's not always a good measure of how they would perform as a moderator. No amount of reputation, badges, etc. is going to guarantee that someone will be good at moderating.

With all that said, almost every action a moderator can take is reversible. If a moderator were to go full on rogue, we can recover fairly easily. What you will usually see is an occasional mistake that's easily solved via meta or a review by another moderator.

If all else fails, though, we have a process for removing an unfit moderator, but it rarely comes to that.

And last but not least, every moderator is bound by an agreement. Violations of that agreement will result in a speedy diamondectomy.

share
    
Good good, thanks Anna. +1 for the Diamondectomy. Is that performed close to the liver or the heart? –  Luis Alvarado Feb 8 '13 at 16:39
1  
It's done much closer to the spade. –  Grace Note Feb 8 '13 at 16:42
5  
@LuisAlvarado It's a highly complicated procedure that involves cranial posterior extraction. –  Anna Lear Feb 8 '13 at 16:44
    
As an alien species this "diamondectomy" gives me grave reason for concern. Some of my vital organs (including my eyes and teeth) are made of diamonds, and so removing them could have devastating results. Wouldn't it be safer to perform a heartectomy? ♥? –  RolandiXor Feb 9 '13 at 19:37
add comment

A few points:

  • A link to team@stackexchange.com is on the bottom of every page. If anybody has a serious problem with a moderator, bypass the mods and go straight to the overlords. Abuse will lead to demodification.
  • Moderators are elected. People shouldn't vote for people who are not suitable for the job.
  • The electorate can get it wrong (GWB anyone?!) but again, if we start declaring illegal wars on users, you don't have to wait years and years before we go away, you can just report us.
  • Practically all operations are logged to a user. Reverting rogue actions should be possible.

In terms of process, the existing moderators (and SE staff) are monitoring the election. If anybody seriously unfit to become a moderator was progressing too far, I'm sure we'd start making noises up the chain of command.

Importantly: Don't worry and have some faith in the electorate. There are several good candidates above the user I'm certain you're talking about and they are obviously better candidates. With the exception of electing me, the community has done a pretty good job at picking great moderators to date.

share
add comment

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .