[DISCUSSION] Abolishing the Mod Rank 3: Temporary Moderator-y

Summary:

Take 3: Discussing the removal of Mod as a rank and reworking it as a tool

[DISCUSSION] Abolishing the Mod Rank 3: Temporary Moderator-y

Cassandra_Prime 04 Feb 2023 23:25

O5 Link: Am I a mod, or am I a muppet?

Previous Threads:

Abolishing the Mod Rank

Abolishing the Mod Rank 2: Now it's Personnel

I've made a fair few changes to this policy. I would ask that Moderators and Administrators especially take a close look at the whole thing, so as to avoid any confusion if this policy passes when it is put up for a vote.

---

BEGIN PROPOSAL

---

SECTION I: Policy Need

As staff as a body has changed in responsibility and culture we need to re-examine how we use the Moderator position.

I.A Moderator Role

Moderator currently exists as two married parts. One, the staff hierarchical role of Moderator. Two, the actual moderator tools within Wikidot.

Currently the functioning differences between the Operational Staff(OS) role and Moderator(Mod) role are that:

1.) Moderator serves as a social role and may be bestowed whether or not the staff member requires the tools it comes with. Moderator is a shorthand for "trusted user".

2.) Moderators can view AdCap Coordination in the staff Discord.

3.) Moderators can request that any disciplinary action against them only be voted upon by other Moderators and Admins per Section V.B.III of the Charter.

4.) Moderators+ are able to approve the creation of workbenches.

5.) Moderators receive the Moderator wikidot tools.

Do we have a need to keep any of these?

1.) No. As Mod is promoted via the same process as any other OS, there is no guarantee that the role reflects a trustworthiness above OS. This is a holdover from a time of much more striated staff structure which gave little weight to those at the bottom.

As time has progressed this has changed with the merging of rank segregated channels, removal of blackboxes and also a shift in culture as seen by the much decreased use of those still extant segregated staff spaces that allow only OS+, mod+ or captaincy+.

2.) No. There is no reason AdCap should not be viewable to all staff of at least OS.

While in the past it may well have made sense, currently adcap see limited use and when it is used, very little, if any, warrants a blackbox of this degree.

As in 1 this would seem to be a relic of when staff spaces were more segregated, when the dynamic was geared towards the staff role one had determining the weight of one's words and opinions on matters, a trend which has been reversing as seen with the merging, unblackboxing and even opening to the public of various staff channels.

I would like to see this as a continuation of that trend.

3.) No. As long as Moderator also functions as a social role, a jury of that Mod's peers may only feed into toxic power dynamics. Even without the Moderator role, the staff member in question can still request a jury of their peers; that jury will simply be broader.

4.) Yes. Workbenches are valuable tools for certain staff members to fulfill important tasks. However, they need not be tied to the Moderator rank.

5.) Yes. The healthy functioning of the site is heavily reliant on the Moderator Wikidot tools.

Of these, the only true benefits of the Moderator role is that Mods are given Moderator tools, and are able to create and approve workbenches.

Given this, I firmly believe we should divorce Moderator wikidot tools from our current staff hierarchy, and eliminate the social component from it entirely.

I.B Moderator Role Bestowal/Removal

As staff and the site have grown, teams have been added, as have subteams which have become more specialized. In some cases there are even teams that deal with offsite content rather than the SCP Wiki itself, such as the Discord Team and portions of Internet Outreach. We have even at times had staff who are not site members.

Staff members who do not use Wikidot moderator capabilities obviously do not require those capabilities. Yet we are not in the habit of reviewing the frequency of its use by Moderators, or, if indeed they need it at all, nor do we currently remove Wikidot moderator capabilities from Moderators who do not require the role, which currently would essentially be demotion to OS.

Those accounts who do not use Wikidot moderation capabilities, be they Inactive, Reserve or active staff engaging in other work are security vulnerabilities, as there is always the possibility, however slight, of someone with malicious intent gaining access to a staff member's Wikidot account, or some other unforeseen event causing issue with the site.

While this is true for anyone with Wikidot moderation capabilities, when the account holder is not using these capabilities it is a completely unnecessary risk. We have in the past been in situations where accounts have been compromised, and while we have made changes to lower those risks I believe this is worth doing for the same reasons we typically remove moderation capabilities from retired staff.

On the flip side, it is entirely possible that a team, such as the Deletions subteam of MAST for instance would, despite having a healthy amount of OS and JS, not have enough active Moderators to keep up with a workload which requires Wikidot moderator capabilities. Given promotions happen every four months, it is easy to quickly fall behind on such tasks, going four months without sufficient Moderators on a given team or subteam can be disastrous.

SECTION II: General Policy Proposed

As such I propose

1.The elimination of Moderator as a staff rank and that all current Moderators become Operational Staff.

2. The creation of a "Moderator tools" role which exclusively confers Wikidot Moderator status on the SCP Wiki onto a staff member, and no other powers or privileges previously conferred by the "Moderator" role.

2.1. AdCap viewing permissions be transferred to all OS+.

2.2. The power to approve the creation of workbenches be held by Acting Team Captains as well as Admins.

3. The creation, implementation and utilization of processes for the conferring of the "Moderator tools" role on qualifying staff member, as laid out in Section III

3.1. All current Moderators will immediately be given the opportunity to be put up for the newly created role if they so choose.

4. The creation, implementation and utilization of processes for the removal of the "Moderator tools" role from staff members who no longer need them, or due to disciplinary reasons, as laid out in Section V

As a result:

All current Moderators would immediately become Operational Staff with the "Moderator tools" role.

SECTION III: Nominating candidates for Moderator tools

At any time, acting Team Captains may put forth one or more of their team members of Operational Staff rank or higher as candidates for the role*.

*Acting Team Captains may only nominate the aforementioned candidates for the purpose of aiding the candidate in accomplishing staff goals under the purview of the team whose Captain nominated them. However, those possessing the Wiki Moderator role may use these powers for any team they are members of.

Admins may at any time put forth one or more candidates for the role for the purpose of aiding in staff duties requiring the role.

SECTION IV: Obtaining the Moderator tools role

Nominating Administrators or Acting Team Captains will inform all Administrators and Acting Team Captains of their intent to nominate Moderator tools candidates.

(Optional) Though it is not required it is recommended that teams merge their nomination threads if they intend to nominate staff members around the same time as to prevent voter fatigue. However as one of the tenets of this policy is the nomination on an as needed basis do not feel obligated to do so.

Nominating Administrators or Acting Team Captains will create a voting thread detailing:

A. Their candidate(s)
B. Why the candidates require the Moderator tools role.

The thread will remain open for one week.

While the thread is open O.S.+ will be able to vote on whether or not each candidate should be given the Moderator tools role.

Requirement for a candidate to receive the Moderator tools role is a simple voting majority, with a quorum equal to that required for policy implementation (currently 30%).

There is no obligation for staff members to cast a vote in the thread.

Only votes for or against candidates are permitted.

In a situation with multiple candidates a voter may choose to cast a vote on the election of all, some, or none of the candidates.

Candidates may not vote in their own election.

Following the election process Administrators must review the process and bestow upon the elected the Moderator tools role and its associated powers.

In the event the process is deemed by Administrators to have been mismanaged, the results should instead be voided.

SECTION V: Removing the Moderator tools Role

The Wiki Moderator role should be removed from staff members at the following times:

When the staff member is Retired, Inactive or Reserve*.
By request of the staff member in question*.
As a result of disciplinary action.
By consensus of their Captains.
By Admin consensus.
At such time as the staff member's Moderator tools are not renewed.

ALL Moderator tools roles expire on the conclusion of Winter promotions unless renewed as specified in Section VI.

*in these cases the role may be obtained again with assent of admins and/or team captains (in cases where the staff member used the role for the purpose of tasks under this team's purview) without requiring a staff vote.

SECTION VI: Renewal of the Moderator tools Role

When MAST informs Administrators and Acting Team Captains of upcoming Winter Promotions, MAST will also inform Administrators and Acting Team Captains of the upcoming Renewal thread.

When MAST requests a list of Operational Staff candidates for Winter Promotions from Acting Team Captains they will also ask Acting Team Captains for a list of their team members with the Moderator tools role whose role will be renewed. Acting Team Captains may only request Moderator tools renewal for members of the team of which they are Acting Team Captain. Multiple teams may request the renewal of Moderator tools for the same member of staff.

When MAST creates a Winter Promotions thread they will also create a Moderator tools Renewal thread. This thread will contain two lists:

1. The list of staff members to have their Moderator tools role renewed. This will also include which teams authorized the renewal.

2. The list of staff members to have their Moderator tools role removed.

Acting Team Captains and Admins will have until the conclusion of Winter Promotions to issue corrections in the O5 thread. MAST is responsible for editing the lists upon being informed of these corrections.

Immediately following the conclusion of Winter Promotions, Administrators MUST remove the Moderator tools role and associated permissions from every staff member whose Moderator tools role was not explicitly renewed.

In the event that Winter Promotions do not occur on a given year, the Moderator tools Renewal process should occur on the dates of the most recent Winter Promotions.

SECTION VII: O5 updates and Recordkeeping

VII.A Mod Tools Primer

The text within the below collapsible will be put into a newly created page on O5. It will act as a guide for those receiving the "Moderator tools" role. It will be linked under the "Information" dropdown menu on 05command.

Candidates should be made aware of this document by their nominating acting team captain before they are voted upon.

+ show block

Hello and welcome! This is a primer on the SCP Wikidot's moderator tools.

A word on staff hierarchy:

In its current form, the Moderator tools role connotes the set of permissions granted to trusted SCP Wiki staff members, when staff require said permissions to perform their designated tasks.

While the Moderator tools role allows staff to perform site actions those without cannot, the role is not intended to confer additional status or authority within the staff hierarchy.

Operational Staff with Moderator tools permissions remain Operational Staff.

What actions do Moderator tools permissions allow, and how do I perform them?

On Wikidot, Moderator tools permissions (known as moderator permissions on Wikidot) allow greater editing actions that typical users (including other staff members) do not have, most notably:

1. Permanent deletion of any page or forum comment.
To delete a page:
Scroll to the bottom of the page, click on "options" then click on "delete". You will be given two options: "just rename" and "delete completely". Select "Delete completely" and then click the "delete" button that appears below that.

To delete a forum comment:
Below the comment select "options", then select delete.

2. Editing of any page or forum post (including locked pages and threads)
You are able to edit the pages and forum posts of others, be they locked or unlocked, the same way you would your own.
3. Ability to lock/unlock pages or threads (including pages like Metadata).
To lock a page:
Scroll to the bottom of the page, click on "options" then click on "lock page" You will be prompted with a tick box next to the words "Page blocked:" if the box contains a check-mark upon opening the page is currently locked, if it does not contain a check-mark upon opening then the page is currently unlocked. You can toggle from locked to unlocked and vice versa by clicking on the box. When it is in the desired position click on the "save" button below the box.

4. Ability to rename any page or move any forum thread.
To rename a page:
Click on the "edit" button at the bottom of the page, the first box, under "title of the page" will allow you to change the page's title, after changing it to the desired title you must click the "save" button to implement the change.

To rename a forum thread:
Above the first post in the thread click on "more options" then click on "Edit Title & Description" and then input the desired title (and/or description) then click the "save" button.

To move a forum thread:
Above the first post in the thread click on "more options" then click on "move thread". Select the new category from the drop-down list of categories, then press save when you have selected the destination. (While the Moderator tools do not allow the deletion of forum threads, they allow their renaming, the deletion of the posts contained, and it's moving to the appropriate category for deleted threads)

Note: In the case of being unable to perform a moderator action due to a redirect or CSS element it is possible to bypass this by appending "/norender/true" to the original URL.

It is important to only use these abilities when necessary.

If you are performing a Moderator tools role action, especially if you are new to using these permissions, it is common to briefly check in with another member of staff. Best practice is to be certain that this is both something you should be doing, and something that you are doing correctly.

For example, though all staff with Moderator tools permissions can delete pages, we have deletion guidelines and a dedicated deletion subteam. If, due to extraordinary circumstances, a staff member outside the team needs to perform deletions, the deletions team and/or guidelines should be consulted prior to any page removal.

Who does not need Moderator tools permissions?

While technically all Operational Staff are eligible for the Moderator tools role, not every staff member requires the role to perform their duties.

For instance, teams operating exclusively off-site, such as the staff Discord team, do not require the power to delete Wikidot pages as doing so is outside their responsibilities. (Conversely, the Deletions subteam does not require the ability to ban users on off-site platforms, and as such does not need those permissions and would not be given them.)

Thus, staff members whose team duties do not involve Wikidot operations do not need Moderator tools permissions. That said, it is important to note that some staff duties are shared across all teams, such as updating the Metadata page.

How does one acquire the Moderator tools role?

If you think you need Moderator tools capabilities to perform your staff duties, or could better perform your staff duties with said capabilities, talk to your relevant team captain!

If they concur, a captain will post an O5 thread for staff members to vote on whether you, the candidate, are trustworthy enough to be conferred these powers, and whether in fact these powers are required for your tasks. (Captains are expected to justify why the candidate requires the role.)

I hope you've found this helpful!

If there is something you do not understand, or feel is missing from this primer, talk to a fellow staffer about it! This guide may be in need of an update. :)

VII.B Staff lists

The Master Staff List page will have its "Moderator" section removed. Its contents will be duplicated to the "Operational Staff" section. The "Operational Staff" table will receive an additional column with the name "Mod Tools". The Mod Tools field will contain an 'X' for each row corresponding to a staff member currently holding Moderator Tools permissions or the eligibility to receive them without review.

The Active Staff List page will have its "Moderator" section removed. Its contents will be duplicated to the "Operational Staff" section. The "Operational Staff" table will receive an additional column with the name "Mod Tools". The Mood Tools field will contain an 'X' for each row corresponding to a staff member currently holding the Moderator Tools role.

The Retired Staff List will keep its "Moderator" section, so as to preserve historical accuracy of the rank held by staff members prior to inactivity or retirement. However, from this point forward, no newly retired or newly inactive staff members will be added to the "Moderator" section. A note will be added above the table explaining that "Moderator" is a depreciated position. The "Operational Staff" table will receive an additional column with the name "Mod Tools". The Mod Tools field will contain an 'X' for each row corresponding to a staff member currently holding the Moderator Tools role. As they did not hold these tools prior to retirement or inactivity, those currently on the "Operational Staff" list will not be eligible for Moderator Tools without review and marked as such. Returning Moderators will be eligible for Moderator Tools without review as per Section II.3.1 of this policy, and their status will be updated to "Operational Staff" as per Section II of this policy.

The Tech Hub Tag List section on the workbench tag should be updated to reflect Section II.2 2 of this proposal.

All other staff lists or documents which explicitly reference Moderator as a rank will be updated to reflect the changes of this proposal.

SECTION VIII: Responsibilities

The following is a list of responsibilities regarding this proposal and which staff groups are responsible for overseeing them:

Acting Team Captains are responsible for correctly following the nominations process and voting thread as laid out in Section III. Administrators are responsible for reviewing and validating that the process occurred in line with current policy. In the event the process was mishandled it is the responsibility of the Administrators to void the results. In the event the process was correctly handled and a candidate receives the Moderator tools role it is the responsibility of the Administrators to confer the role and its permissions upon the staff member as soon as possible.

Acting Team Captains are responsible for renewing Moderator tools roles as laid out in Section VI only for members of their team who require the role to complete team tasks.

Staff with the Moderator tools role are responsible for requesting the removal of their Moderator tools role if they no longer require it to complete their staff duties as laid out in Section V.

Administrators are responsible for the removal of the Moderator tools role and associated permissions as soon as possible when required from a staff member as laid out in Section V.

MAST as the team responsible for handling promotions are responsible for the maintaining of a list of all staff members with the Moderator tools role and the regular enacting of the Renewal process as specified in Section VI. In the event MAST are no longer responsible for promotions, those who have become responsible for the promotions process will be responsible for the Renewal process. In the event MAST in unable to handle their responsibilities as outlined in this document it is the responsibility of the Administrators to ensure that the Renewal process occurs.

Administrators are responsible for using their powers (such as admin Fiat) to ensure that this policy does not unduly interfere with staff work. (For example, though it is intentionally not provided for in this policy it may become necessary to use Admin Fiat to create an exception to one or more portions of this policy to one or more members of staff.)

It is the responsibility of the Administrators to ensure that Acting Team Captains, MAST and their fellow Administrators adhere to this policy.

---

END PROPOSAL

---

Thank you to Rounderhouse, torcsandantlers, stormfallen, Siddhartha Alonne and psychicprogrammer for their help with the proposal.

Thank you to Zyn and stormfallen for helping with the Mod Primer

Changelog/Commentary:

+ show block

Got some good feedback. Some led to changes, some did not. I would like to mention some of the changes I made or did not make and why I chose to do so.

Time vs Activity: Part of the intent behind this policy is, for security purposes among others, only give those that actually require and use Moderator powers those powers. Ideally someone with those powers who does not need or use them would ask to no longer have them, but that's not always going to be the case. So, the idea was that their team captains keep tabs on what staffwork their team members are doing (which should be the case anyway) and get the role removed from those not needing those powers. However, historically staff have not been good at keeping up with something like this, and that would likely mean this policy, even if it passed, falling to the wayside. Instead, the expiration date is a compromise of sorts. While the renewal threads don't explicitly require activity review by captains, I'm expecting captains to be aware of if their team members require the role or not, as well as if their team members should be considered inactive etc…Given the high burnout rate of staff I can't imagine there would be a situation where no removals should occur. If come 2024 it seems like captains are, without thinking, renewing every Moderator tools permission I will be disappointed. I would have liked to set this to he twice a year rather than the once, but frankly I could see that being a mess. If after this policy has been in effect for a while a future staff member thinks having it more than once would work, then they have my blessing, but I'd rather this get off to a solid start first. Ditto, if in the future there are consistent activity checks I would think it better to tie this to those checks, but I'd rather that not start with this.

Name: Initially I was going to go with Wikitools. I've since been convinced that calling it something so far afield from Moderator would be confusing given that's what the tools are called on Wikidot. I was mostly wanting to change the name to prevent confusion due to returning staffers not realizing that the Moderator staff rank had been changed to this degree and potential future confusion in terms of recordkeeping. Adding 'tools' to the term is probably good enough though. Any further discussion of names would almost definitely be bikeshedding, so I'd rather not. I do appreciate the past suggestions though.

Quorum: Quorum, as I've previously mentioned, is not something I'm particularly fussed about. Honestly I set it to our general quorum so that this doesn't get held up with what I consider to be minutiae. That said I do have concerns re: voter fatigue. If people aren't forced to show up (which they aren't), if team captains decide to make separate threads for one candidate at a time one after the other (which is allowed under this policy) then voters may just not show up. To an extent I'm trusting Captains not to do that and staff members to show up to vote, and I'm trusting that. If, after this policy passes, people would like to see a lower quorum then I'm all for it, it'll just have to be a separate vote.

Lack of permanent roles: Leveritas had brought up valid concerns with the last iteration regarding long standing staff members with the role who regularly use it going on vacation, for example, and returning to find their role removed. I am not so concerned with this, especially in this iteration. As it relates to the expiration and renewal of the role, for someone who regularly uses it to be overlooked would require their Captains, MAST and Admins not catching it before the initial thread. It would then require nobody issuing a correction over the course of the thread being up. After that, when an admin goes to remove the role they'd have the chance to realize it and do an admin Fiat. Given the amount of people involved I find this to be unlikely to occur. In the very worst case the role gets removed and later re-added with a vote or a fiat shortly thereafter. Exceptions might be made to the expiration requirement for specific staff members using admin fiat, and I'm all for that if it proves necessary, but I don't want to codify it here because I do not want such a decision to be lightly made. If nominees and nominators were given the chance for a permanent appointment or a temporary appointment then I believe many would choose permanent, which would run counter to the intent behind this policy.

Discussion Timer: