2

I see many meta posts complaining against the alleged action of moderators; particularly goldPseudo. As these posts keep coming up, I would like to know if it is even possible for a mod change to occur while the site is in beta? Who decides on the new mods?

| |
8

I'm one responsible for the moderators on Islam—Stack Exchange. If there were to be a change in moderators before graduation, I'd be the one to do it. For more details, please see Moderator Pro Tempore.

Now as for the moderator you mentioned, I've been working with him since private beta. goldPseudo has been and continues to be the leader this site needs. He has been accosted on all sides by disgruntled users and yet he responses with dignity and poise. Every day he makes hard decisions that the community should be making for themselves and yet the primary feedback he gets is complaint.

For the record, I've investigated many complaints about this site's moderators. And in every case, the accusations are either vastly overstated or utterly groundless. Never have I found a situation where goldPseudo has placed his own interests above those of the community and its goal of expert answers to questions about Islam.

Let's stop crying wolf, shall we?

Addendum

Several people have mentioned that the above is a bit one-sided. The reason we appoint moderators on beta sites is that we need a small group of people to be in charge of mundane janitorial tasks. Please take a moment to read our Theory of Moderation. Like everyone else, moderators make mistakes sometimes; it's inevitable. So we give users ways to overrule their decisions individually. Most of their decisions can be reversed by community moderation. And every decision can (and often is) discussed on meta. When people make persuasive arguments, it's entirely possible that moderators will change their minds.

A significant part of my frustration is that a handful of people seem unable or unwilling to try understanding why moderators decide as they do. I suspect that if more people tried their hands at community moderation, there'd be a greater respect for the diamond moderators. We have specifically picked pro tems who have shown from their actions that they have a strong commitment to creating an enduring resource for learning about Islam. Leadership isn't limited to the handful of people who have diamonds next to their names; it's available to anyone who cares about this community.

If you want to help out, I encourage you to look over this detailed guide written by members of the Physics site. A strong site has many users dedicated to commenting and flagging when they see problematic posts. Try it out and see how it works.

| |
  • 3
    The complaints have never been about him putting his interests above the community, but as I've also explained in my recent complaint against his outrageous decision to suspend us from chat, he often treats users in imperious ways, embarks on character attacks at times to enforce compliance and is too rigid to show tolerance in cases that do not need iron-fist moderator action. A recent example is his reckless decision to delete my messages in chat despite the fact that they were justified based on the community consensus and to even suppress my defenses by suspending me from chat. – infatuated Sep 12 '14 at 21:04
  • 1
    These were the issues also extensively discussed by Kaveh in Issues with Moderation which seems to reflect a common sentiment by users considering the high upv-votes. – infatuated Sep 12 '14 at 21:09
  • Also note that a lot of moderation practices in this site do not follow any specific site rule or community consensus. Arbitrary deletions of posts (both on meta and main) sometimes simply because the moderators simply don't like them, is an example that we recently decided to regulate to prevent conflicts, but there are more instances that should be also taken care of in future. – infatuated Sep 12 '14 at 21:10
  • 3
    @infatuated: I read your post titled "Should content representing an offical scholarly view of an Islamic sect critical of another sect be banned?" And I thought maybe there was finally a wolf moment. But it turned out to be some chat messages posted out of the blue dragging in (literally) ancient history. I don't know if deleting them was the right decision, but I do know that your meta post was one of the examples of vastly overstated accusations I had in mind. You would be better served to not immediately jump to moderator malfeasance. – Jon Ericson Sep 12 '14 at 22:09
  • 1
    The trouble is the moderator doesn't even care to substantiate any of his claims. Even in his supposed answer he intentionally avoids touching upon my supportive arguments. He refuses to be accountable for the wrong decisions he made and the outrage he caused. Despite the fact that I had explained in the chat there was nothing wrong with my messages, he proceeded to delete them and even delete my protests. This was a clear example of imperious iron-fist moderation that no surprise can strongly outrage the users. – infatuated Sep 13 '14 at 3:38
  • 3
    Jon, I think you are also exaggerating a bit. Have you been on Mathematics Meta? AFAIR Mathematics is considered one of the most successful sites, yet the criticism of moderators have been fierce at times. Dismissing all complaints generally and in this way is not helpful. I think it's clear that many active users see problems with moderation. Now you can disregard them and have the site for your favorite moderator but I am sure you know as well as me that such a site will eventually fail. I would completely disagree with your claim that goldPsuedo is the "leader" this site needs. – Kaveh Sep 20 '14 at 7:51
  • 4
    I don't think he should step down or be replaced but I think there is a lot about good moderation that he needs to learn. A moderator who loses the respect and trust of a considerable section of a site's community will be much less effective even when the moderator actions are appropriate ones. The percived attitude of a moderator is important. One of the main criterias of a good moderation is moderating using the least possible amount of binding mod powers. A leader does not need to force others to follow him/her. – Kaveh Sep 20 '14 at 8:19
  • 1
    @Kaveh: You are absolutely correct and I have updated my answer to reflect what I think might be the deeper problem here: not enough people express their disagreement with counter-actions and too many people come right to meta. There are lot's of problems on this site and a very small number of people are addressing them. Plagiarism and excessive debates in particular are problems that should not be left to the moderators to deal with. I haven't so much dismissed complaints as found little to back them up. goldPsuedo isn't perfect, but he's doing well in a hostile situation. – Jon Ericson Sep 21 '14 at 4:23
  • 1
    Thanks @Jon for the update. I completely agree with you that other users must help uphold the policies way more than they do right now if the site is going to succeed. – Kaveh Sep 21 '14 at 11:43
  • recently i flagged his comment "as not constructive" and he bans immediately my flagging rights. I wasn't even looking if he was moderator or not. IMO it was not constructive and i flagged. My flagging past can show i am not doing bad about flagging. one flag on moderator gives me ban on flag for 7 days. Is this fair moderation? He is taking harsh decisions. He may give a lot of effort on this site but it doesn't mean he is doing a good job. – nim Feb 2 '16 at 13:20
  • @nim: I'm not at all sure what you are talking about here. Does it have something to do with your meta post? meta.islam.stackexchange.com/questions/1705/… – Jon Ericson Feb 3 '16 at 22:06
  • @jon no i am not talking about my meta post. It was earlier and i couldn't able to flag any post last two days. Text was saying "your flagging history history not good, you are banned from flagging questions and answers for 7 days. However my flagging history is not that bad one or 2 of my flags are found not helpful. After writing here, even i could able to flag posts in two days. Before my due time end. I thought one of moderators see the post and corrected it. – nim Feb 4 '16 at 7:32

You must log in to answer this question.

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