Moderator Code of Conduct - an idea whose time has come February 13, 2025 9:57 AM Subscribe
In the recent post about removing the MeTa queue, Violet Blue made a comment that they had submitted a post about creating a Moderator Code of Conduct that had been refused at the time with a suggestion to try again later. We're officially a non-profit, responsibilities for site management are transitioning to the board and the Moderation Oversight Committee is working to form. I think "later" is now.
Violet Blue proposed five guidelines as a starting point:
As Metafilter moves toward a community governance model, I think it's a perfect time for us to evaluate what we think Metafilter's values should be in re. a moderation strategy and create a set of guiding principles/ a code of conduct/ however you wish to call it.
For legal reasons, this is indeed a time that I am being sincere.
Violet Blue proposed five guidelines as a starting point:
1. Be transparent — Document your work,Back in December, adrienneleigh left a very lengthy and well-received comment outlining their own moderation strategy on a different forum that began with five primary principles:
2. Be respectful — Remind and comment more, delete less.
3. Consider context — Most users don't comment in a vacuum.
4. Be reliable — Keep your word.
5. Reach out — Let upset mefites know they matter.
1. We are members of the community first. The community has given us special powers as mods, which are to be used to assist and support the community, not to police or smother it.warriorqueen and trig have very patiently and painstakingly composed novels here in MeTa about how to run a values-based community organization, far too many to link to concisely.
1a. Because we are community members first, we are accountable to our community. They are allowed to question and criticize us, in private or in public, and they are entitled to expect a response.
2. Our job is to help our community members have the conversations they want to have. It's not to arbitrarily stop conversations or steer them in a particular direction (other than away from violating our rules or our values, when necessary), and it's not to decide arbitrarily, or without damn good reasons, that a member of our community needs to be silenced or booted.
3. Conflict is part of being in community. People need to be protected from aggression and harassment, but they don't need to be protected from conflict per se. Rather, community members need to be given tools to manage conflict, and shown examples of managing it in healthy ways.
As Metafilter moves toward a community governance model, I think it's a perfect time for us to evaluate what we think Metafilter's values should be in re. a moderation strategy and create a set of guiding principles/ a code of conduct/ however you wish to call it.
For legal reasons, this is indeed a time that I am being sincere.
I have been working as a member of the MOC to get access to training materials and the moderator handbook. My thought is that the MOC should eventually resolve cases by suggesting amendments and additions to the training guidelines and manual for moderators (and Content Policy for users!), or else refer our findings to the mod/Board/ED for further action.
I don't feel authorized to share the training manual broadly, but I think that the mods or the Board should release it to the community to review. There's not actually anything salacious in it that I've noticed--nothing I haven't heard for years from the older mods: it reads like a truly excellent guide that I'd guess was lovingly crafted by the old moderator team and (to my ear) has a lot of wisdom in it. I have guesses about its authors--some of the wiser humans I know!
But that's the trick: many (most?) of the things that people have been angry about lately are all in violation of prior practice and the trainings that moderators apparently receive. Some particular examples:
1. not reaching out when a MeTa is delayed in the queue. (the training manual assumes a queue and relies on it, providing lots of reasonable examples of posts that wouldn't be approved.)
2. editing comments and posts. (deletions are fine, obviously, and particularly provocative main site Metafilter posts are a candidate for deletion)
3. deleting swearing that is NOT directed at another user. (It's actually been site policy for a while to delete attacks on other users.)
These things are all described in the training manual and explicitly trained against, often with really good reasons! I'd be pretty happy with the moderation described in the training materials. And while there's value in starting from scratch, I think recognizing that the site has a long and storied history that got us to where we are and is one of the only reasons not to decamp to Reddit/BlueSky/Twitter/wherever is that "lore" and the rich history and tradition that makes this place a hub of good conversation.
posted by anotherpanacea at 10:33 AM on February 13 [23 favorites]
I don't feel authorized to share the training manual broadly, but I think that the mods or the Board should release it to the community to review. There's not actually anything salacious in it that I've noticed--nothing I haven't heard for years from the older mods: it reads like a truly excellent guide that I'd guess was lovingly crafted by the old moderator team and (to my ear) has a lot of wisdom in it. I have guesses about its authors--some of the wiser humans I know!
But that's the trick: many (most?) of the things that people have been angry about lately are all in violation of prior practice and the trainings that moderators apparently receive. Some particular examples:
1. not reaching out when a MeTa is delayed in the queue. (the training manual assumes a queue and relies on it, providing lots of reasonable examples of posts that wouldn't be approved.)
2. editing comments and posts. (deletions are fine, obviously, and particularly provocative main site Metafilter posts are a candidate for deletion)
3. deleting swearing that is NOT directed at another user. (It's actually been site policy for a while to delete attacks on other users.)
These things are all described in the training manual and explicitly trained against, often with really good reasons! I'd be pretty happy with the moderation described in the training materials. And while there's value in starting from scratch, I think recognizing that the site has a long and storied history that got us to where we are and is one of the only reasons not to decamp to Reddit/BlueSky/Twitter/wherever is that "lore" and the rich history and tradition that makes this place a hub of good conversation.
posted by anotherpanacea at 10:33 AM on February 13 [23 favorites]
I think it's extremely important to articulate all three of the following things for the New Era of MetaFilter:
1. principles
2. policies
3. procedures
The part of my comment that phunniemee quotes in the post is about #1. (The rest of my comment, which is at the link, is about #3) Violetblue's quoted comments are also about #1. The material that anotherpanacea describes above is about #2 and #3, it sounds like.
I would say that broader community input is vital on #1; #3 should be handled entirely by ths Board and the MOC (probably by recising the existing handbook); and #2 should be hammered into a draft by the Board and MOC (again, probably by revising existing material) and then feedback from the wider community solicited.
posted by adrienneleigh at 10:49 AM on February 13 [11 favorites]
1. principles
2. policies
3. procedures
The part of my comment that phunniemee quotes in the post is about #1. (The rest of my comment, which is at the link, is about #3) Violetblue's quoted comments are also about #1. The material that anotherpanacea describes above is about #2 and #3, it sounds like.
I would say that broader community input is vital on #1; #3 should be handled entirely by ths Board and the MOC (probably by recising the existing handbook); and #2 should be hammered into a draft by the Board and MOC (again, probably by revising existing material) and then feedback from the wider community solicited.
posted by adrienneleigh at 10:49 AM on February 13 [11 favorites]
In my opinion, these are basic workplace principles that any organization, including a community-run organization, should be able to hold its staff to in the course of normal everyday business, without external micromanagement. To be clear, I'm not coming at this from a place of naïveté, I understand the many many reasons why it feels needed, I just think any organization that can't depend on its management to exercise fundamental judgment and diligence is ipso facto not sustainable.
posted by dusty potato at 10:49 AM on February 13 [5 favorites]
posted by dusty potato at 10:49 AM on February 13 [5 favorites]
I think this is a fantastic idea, and absolutely necessary.
posted by maryellenreads at 10:51 AM on February 13 [5 favorites]
posted by maryellenreads at 10:51 AM on February 13 [5 favorites]
1. principles
2. policies
3. procedures
I would say that broader community input is vital on #1; #3 should be handled entirely by ths Board and the MOC (probably by recising the existing handbook); and #2 should be hammered into a draft by the Board and MOC (again, probably by revising existing material) and then feedback from the wider community solicited.
My sense is that the Board needs to select 1, no? They can put it up to a member vote, but ultimately some of this is just constrained by the legal structure of a non-profit: a Board selects a mission/vision/values and an ED (perhaps aided by staff or volunteers) implements it. That gets weirdly recursive with member-elected boards, I guess. For instance, some Board candidates might choose to run on a campaign of strong free speech principles allowing significantly more crude language, trolling, and stuff that I'd call bad behavior. As a member, I can vote for more swearing or allowing swearing at other members--but my sense is that the Board would need to, for instance, check with its attorneys about the legality of operating a site accessible in Germany while allowing Nazi stuff. (Not actually what I'd vote for, to be clear!)
That would fundamentally change 1 in ways that alter 2 and 3.
Meanwhile, one of the things I love about the materials is how much they are imbued with the old sense of what this place is and means: our mission, vision, and values. I feel weirdly conservative in many of my comments lately but that's just because I like the particular kind of freewheeling but intelligent and lovingly disagreeable discourse that flourished here in the 2004-2014 era.
posted by anotherpanacea at 11:05 AM on February 13 [3 favorites]
2. policies
3. procedures
I would say that broader community input is vital on #1; #3 should be handled entirely by ths Board and the MOC (probably by recising the existing handbook); and #2 should be hammered into a draft by the Board and MOC (again, probably by revising existing material) and then feedback from the wider community solicited.
My sense is that the Board needs to select 1, no? They can put it up to a member vote, but ultimately some of this is just constrained by the legal structure of a non-profit: a Board selects a mission/vision/values and an ED (perhaps aided by staff or volunteers) implements it. That gets weirdly recursive with member-elected boards, I guess. For instance, some Board candidates might choose to run on a campaign of strong free speech principles allowing significantly more crude language, trolling, and stuff that I'd call bad behavior. As a member, I can vote for more swearing or allowing swearing at other members--but my sense is that the Board would need to, for instance, check with its attorneys about the legality of operating a site accessible in Germany while allowing Nazi stuff. (Not actually what I'd vote for, to be clear!)
That would fundamentally change 1 in ways that alter 2 and 3.
Meanwhile, one of the things I love about the materials is how much they are imbued with the old sense of what this place is and means: our mission, vision, and values. I feel weirdly conservative in many of my comments lately but that's just because I like the particular kind of freewheeling but intelligent and lovingly disagreeable discourse that flourished here in the 2004-2014 era.
posted by anotherpanacea at 11:05 AM on February 13 [3 favorites]
I don't feel authorized to share the training manual broadly ... it reads like a truly excellent guide that I'd guess was lovingly crafted by the old moderator team
It's a genuine surprise to me to learn that the current mod team has any standard of practice to refer to at all, thank you for sharing this info.
posted by phunniemee at 11:56 AM on February 13 [15 favorites]
It's a genuine surprise to me to learn that the current mod team has any standard of practice to refer to at all, thank you for sharing this info.
posted by phunniemee at 11:56 AM on February 13 [15 favorites]
My sense is that the Board needs to select 1, no?
Right, but don't overlook the fact that the current temporary board is prepping for a permanent board to come in, and presumably there will be elections for the membership of that permanent board. Thus, it's more than valid for people to discuss these issues now as the results will inform the path forward for any members that want to stand for the permanent board. That is the community part of a community-run site.
posted by Violet Blue at 12:06 PM on February 13 [3 favorites]
Right, but don't overlook the fact that the current temporary board is prepping for a permanent board to come in, and presumably there will be elections for the membership of that permanent board. Thus, it's more than valid for people to discuss these issues now as the results will inform the path forward for any members that want to stand for the permanent board. That is the community part of a community-run site.
posted by Violet Blue at 12:06 PM on February 13 [3 favorites]
I don't know if this is exactly related to code of conduct, but I was pretty surprised to find out a few months ago that the BiPoC Board was largely? half? made up of mods. As we move towards a community governance model, I would imagine there are other boards and committees that will be offering guidance and making decisions on behalf of the community. Most or all may need some kind of staff contact or liaison. I think many or most should not have mods/staff as members if any part of their purview is to address mod issues. A mod being on the BiPoC board seems like a clear conflict of interest to me. How could the BiPoC board address moderation issues frankly when the mods are in the discussion?
Obviously, the situation will be different if the site switches to a model where there are member volunteer mods that are doing defined set of actions and might also be valuable contributors to boards or committees. (But even in that case, there would presumably be some board/committee dedicated to moderation decisions that would have no mods as members.)
posted by snofoam at 12:16 PM on February 13 [14 favorites]
Obviously, the situation will be different if the site switches to a model where there are member volunteer mods that are doing defined set of actions and might also be valuable contributors to boards or committees. (But even in that case, there would presumably be some board/committee dedicated to moderation decisions that would have no mods as members.)
posted by snofoam at 12:16 PM on February 13 [14 favorites]
I'd like to specifically include that deleting content should be a last resort. I was going to make an exception for 'obvious spam/trolling', but heartfelt comments have been mistaken for jokes before. There's just something really sad about a post or comment that someone invested their effort in vanishing into thin air.
posted by demi-octopus at 12:23 PM on February 13 [3 favorites]
posted by demi-octopus at 12:23 PM on February 13 [3 favorites]
So what's the penalty when a Moderator violates the Code of Conduct and who enforces it?
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 12:28 PM on February 13 [8 favorites]
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 12:28 PM on February 13 [8 favorites]
That's a good question, I expect there would be a way to complain to the MoC/Board, or maybe even the business manager if we have one, and depending how it gets set up. TLDR: TBD.
Keep in mind, however, that when we talk about mods in a practical way, we also have to talk about budget, the cost of paying for them, hiring a business manager/ED, and addressing whatever other expenses we have. What we can pay for year in/out, and what we want to pay for, and how many mods we want/don't want and how many are paid/unpaid are all interrelated questions too.
posted by Violet Blue at 1:10 PM on February 13
Keep in mind, however, that when we talk about mods in a practical way, we also have to talk about budget, the cost of paying for them, hiring a business manager/ED, and addressing whatever other expenses we have. What we can pay for year in/out, and what we want to pay for, and how many mods we want/don't want and how many are paid/unpaid are all interrelated questions too.
posted by Violet Blue at 1:10 PM on February 13
MetaTalk functions as a retroactive court after a spot decision has already been made. But what if a pending decision was put to group discussion, raising participation for what would otherwise be a precedent unnoticed deep in some thread. A TV celebrity judge once decided a drink refill case that was seeking a nickel in damages, saying that it deals with a principle, not about the money. Point being that issues which heighten misunderstandings are usually not simple, and could use this venue beforehand rather than pinning beleaguered mods between a complaint model and their job duties.
posted by Brian B. at 2:09 PM on February 13 [1 favorite]
posted by Brian B. at 2:09 PM on February 13 [1 favorite]
A mediator would be effective at member greivences and for cases involving disputes or conflict with moderators and members going forward. I don't think a member needs to go to some board in order to ask for a mediation between themselves and the site moderators or member.
posted by clavdivs at 3:56 PM on February 13
posted by clavdivs at 3:56 PM on February 13
My sense is that the Board needs to select 1, no?
The Board will obviously have the final responsibility for approval, yeah. But i think the community needs to be involved in the formulation of "what do we want the community to be", which is fundamentally what mission statements/values statements/principles are about.
posted by adrienneleigh at 3:59 PM on February 13
The Board will obviously have the final responsibility for approval, yeah. But i think the community needs to be involved in the formulation of "what do we want the community to be", which is fundamentally what mission statements/values statements/principles are about.
posted by adrienneleigh at 3:59 PM on February 13
I agree with adrienneleigh's comment above. It is important to keep in mind that 'community-led' does not mean the wider community has to make every small decision about what procedures should be (oh god, can you just imagine it?), but should have robust involvement and influence in deciding high-level things like principles and, to a lesser extent, policies.
posted by dg at 6:29 PM on February 13 [5 favorites]
posted by dg at 6:29 PM on February 13 [5 favorites]
Yes, precisely what dg said. I'm not suggesting that we all get in here and bikeshed for 18 months, but fundamentally the question here is "what should this community be like?" and that is not a question that can or should be answered without the community actually getting to weigh in!
posted by adrienneleigh at 6:32 PM on February 13 [2 favorites]
posted by adrienneleigh at 6:32 PM on February 13 [2 favorites]
Most or all (committees) may need some kind of staff contact or liaison. I think many or most should not have mods/staff as members if any part of their purview is to address mod issues.
I agree. At least as a general rule, staff members should not be voting members, at least of any group that determines policy, if not any and all committees. Otherwise seems like it could be a conflict of interest, or at best, unclear roles.
posted by NotLost at 9:37 PM on February 13 [3 favorites]
I agree. At least as a general rule, staff members should not be voting members, at least of any group that determines policy, if not any and all committees. Otherwise seems like it could be a conflict of interest, or at best, unclear roles.
posted by NotLost at 9:37 PM on February 13 [3 favorites]
On the fundamental principles and role of moderation, I still think about suedehead's comment from 2019 and I hope we might get there.
Mods, I strongly suggest you change the role of moderators away from police and towards facilitators.posted by away for regrooving at 11:36 PM on February 13 [11 favorites]
...
It's happened in the past for Metafilter -- jessamyn was sometimes more of a facilitator than a police -- and it can happen again. But if it will, it will structurally look differently than how it does now, in terms of diversity, identity, roles, and process.
I wish I could help give to Metafilter a little bit of what I have in my daily life. I wish I could help the "mods" realize that they need to stop being the police and that they can to become facilitators and gardeners of Metafilter as a community garden. Most of all I wish I could help create a better space for all the community members who, like me, are thinking about leaving, wishing we could stay, craving community, but dealing with a site structure that is structurally unwilling to change its practices.
Imagine how great it could be otherwise! Imagine if you actually apologized, showed up, received support, made mistakes. Imagine if you stopped being the police, became facilitators, supporting people, not policing them. Imagine if you could ask for help from the community and receive it.
And for the community - imagine how exciting it would be to discuss and talk in a space where everyone is supporting each other. To me the POC threads are a glimmer of hope at Metafilter, where people can share thoughts and conversations and support each other in ways that are difficult and rare elsewhere on this site. This is the direction that Metafilter could move in.
I know I keep banging this old drum, but I really think we have too many and too complicated rules on this site.
(Guidelines, content policy, microaggressions, unacceptable words, ad hoc rules for users 1, 2, 3).
So given that there apparently exists a moderator handbook, I think it would be better to make it public and see if needs amending, rather than add a new Code of Conduct to the ecosystem.
posted by TheophileEscargot at 2:10 AM on February 14 [7 favorites]
(Guidelines, content policy, microaggressions, unacceptable words, ad hoc rules for users 1, 2, 3).
So given that there apparently exists a moderator handbook, I think it would be better to make it public and see if needs amending, rather than add a new Code of Conduct to the ecosystem.
posted by TheophileEscargot at 2:10 AM on February 14 [7 favorites]
Yes, the general idea sounds great! I'd quibble a bit with wording, I think Be Helpful should be highest on the list, but again that's just general quibbling, that can be worked out. The verbiage from Adrienneleigh's server is particularly good and I'm in favor of adopting most, if not all of it.
Anyway, this MeTa is similar to one I was working on so I'll just toss it in here. The other mods thought it was good and liked the idea, so here it is in all it's unpublished MeTa glory:
Feedback: Moderation checklist
Hi there from the moderation team! There are sometimes concerns about how moderators deal with situations and sometimes we look back and think “oh, doing X would have been a better way to deal with that”. With that thought in mind, we put together a checklist that mods can go through as they deal with situations.
This checklist doesn’t try to cover every situation, it’s more of a guideline. It’s being presented to the community to be public about how moderation works and inviting feedback.
Here’s the checklist:
Assess the situation
☐ Read/Assess the comment, post, and/or situation
☐ Check flags and read any notes about the flags
☐ If a comment, check broader context of thread .
☐ Decide if comment/post breaks any explicit Guidelines or the Content Policy
☐ Check user’s history in thread or in general to see if there’s been repeated problems with their responses
☐ See if talking to the writer of the post/comment about the issue would mitigate things.
☐ Decide on a course of action that is centered around mild action that leaves room for escalation if need be and what’s best for the community.
Take action
☐ Public mod note with no removal of content
☐ Public mod note with a removal of content
☐ Private mod note on user’s file (viewed viewable by mods only)
☐ Private mod note in thread (viewable by mods only)
☐ Take no action and leave a note (public or private) explaining why no action was taken.
Communicate action taken
☐ Communicate with the writer of the post or comment.
☐ Communicate with the reporter of the situation.
☐ Leave note in thread.
☐ Include link to Guidelines
☐ Include link to Content Policy
☐ Include link to FAQ
☐ Affirm/state the moderation is here to assist the community
☐ Mention MeTa and Oversight Committee if members disagree with a mod action
posted by Brandon Blatcher on February 11 at 5:22 AM
Tagged: Moderation guidelines
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 4:39 AM on February 14 [2 favorites]
Anyway, this MeTa is similar to one I was working on so I'll just toss it in here. The other mods thought it was good and liked the idea, so here it is in all it's unpublished MeTa glory:
Feedback: Moderation checklist
Hi there from the moderation team! There are sometimes concerns about how moderators deal with situations and sometimes we look back and think “oh, doing X would have been a better way to deal with that”. With that thought in mind, we put together a checklist that mods can go through as they deal with situations.
This checklist doesn’t try to cover every situation, it’s more of a guideline. It’s being presented to the community to be public about how moderation works and inviting feedback.
Here’s the checklist:
Assess the situation
☐ Read/Assess the comment, post, and/or situation
☐ Check flags and read any notes about the flags
☐ If a comment, check broader context of thread .
☐ Decide if comment/post breaks any explicit Guidelines or the Content Policy
☐ Check user’s history in thread or in general to see if there’s been repeated problems with their responses
☐ See if talking to the writer of the post/comment about the issue would mitigate things.
☐ Decide on a course of action that is centered around mild action that leaves room for escalation if need be and what’s best for the community.
Take action
☐ Public mod note with no removal of content
☐ Public mod note with a removal of content
☐ Private mod note on user’s file (viewed viewable by mods only)
☐ Private mod note in thread (viewable by mods only)
☐ Take no action and leave a note (public or private) explaining why no action was taken.
Communicate action taken
☐ Communicate with the writer of the post or comment.
☐ Communicate with the reporter of the situation.
☐ Leave note in thread.
☐ Include link to Guidelines
☐ Include link to Content Policy
☐ Include link to FAQ
☐ Affirm/state the moderation is here to assist the community
☐ Mention MeTa and Oversight Committee if members disagree with a mod action
posted by Brandon Blatcher on February 11 at 5:22 AM
Tagged: Moderation guidelines
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 4:39 AM on February 14 [2 favorites]
☐ Mention MeTa
You only get to do this if you get rid of the queue.
posted by phunniemee at 4:45 AM on February 14 [8 favorites]
You only get to do this if you get rid of the queue.
posted by phunniemee at 4:45 AM on February 14 [8 favorites]
Hey Brandon!
Some good stuff here. I worry a little that some things are more context-dependent, like the difference between the deletion policy in AskMe and the main site. But a checklist is always better than nothing because it helps make sure we don’t miss a step!
I’ve asked this before, but I just want to check: are the user files GDPR compliant? If not, I’d consider leaving them out of anything that might become guidelines as Metafilter can’t really afford those fines!
posted by anotherpanacea at 4:49 AM on February 14 [5 favorites]
Some good stuff here. I worry a little that some things are more context-dependent, like the difference between the deletion policy in AskMe and the main site. But a checklist is always better than nothing because it helps make sure we don’t miss a step!
I’ve asked this before, but I just want to check: are the user files GDPR compliant? If not, I’d consider leaving them out of anything that might become guidelines as Metafilter can’t really afford those fines!
posted by anotherpanacea at 4:49 AM on February 14 [5 favorites]
"Do nothing" or "Watchful waiting" should be a choice on the action list. As you yourself recently pointed out, the moderators do not need to jump immediately into any sort of action all the time. A lot of times adults can just sort themselves out, or a rule being broken ends up not a huge deal.
posted by lapis at 8:20 AM on February 14 [4 favorites]
posted by lapis at 8:20 AM on February 14 [4 favorites]
I’ve asked this before, but I just want to check: are the user files GDPR compliant?
Not sure, but worth looking into for the current and new site!
"Do nothing" or "Watchful waiting" should be a choice on the action list.
Also good points!
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 8:14 AM on February 15
Not sure, but worth looking into for the current and new site!
"Do nothing" or "Watchful waiting" should be a choice on the action list.
Also good points!
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 8:14 AM on February 15
« Older Turn off the MeTa queue before it becomes a... | Why are "wrong" answers getting deleted now? Newer »
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
1. We are members of the community first.
2. We are accountable to our community.
3. Our job is to help our community members have the conversations they want to have.
4. Conflict is part of being in community. Community members need to be given tools to manage conflict, and shown examples of managing it in healthy ways.
and add from VB
5. Be transparent — Document your work. (This would be the long begged for moderation log. There is zero reason not to start this now. It can begin as a simple shared Google sheet into which mods can cut and paste their actions.)
posted by phunniemee at 10:08 AM on February 13 [8 favorites]