Content Warning: This Comment May Have Been Secretly Edited October 24, 2024 1:43 PM Subscribe
Hello, folks. I would like to know 1) if it's common practice for mods to edit users' comments without any indication of a mod note, 2) when this practice began, and 3) if it's been disclosed as a community practice here. As a member of the mefi community it's certainly something I would like to provide feedback on!
I noticed that a recent dumb joke comment of mine was altered at some point after it was posted.
The comment in question:
Was my comment in poor taste? Yeah sure, many of the things I do are. If a comment picks up flags, please delete it. Or add a content warning that says "MOD NOTE: CONTENT WARNING FOR GORY IMAGE" if you must. That's the community I have been a part of--moderation by deletion with active mod involvement in the thread. I absolutely do not want to be in a community where people's comments are EDITED by a mod without any indication that the text was written by someone other than the poster.
My own comment here and the relatively minor edit is about as stupid as it gets in the specific, but I'm feeling genuinely scandalized right now and deeply uncomfortable to find out that our mods are editing users comments in secrecy. I've been on metafilter for a decade and a half, and I know the people here only because of the things that people say online. It's important to me that our names are appended to the things we actually say.
This is a staggeringly bad path for metafilter moderation to take and I think the community needs some disclosure on how often this happens.
[phunniemee's note: Loup did reach out to me over email to explain that this edit followed the policy from the FAQ to add a content warning where deemed necessary by a mod, but that it was an error to not leave a mod note or to let me know the edit had occurred. That the mod team has discussed and agreed that a mod note will always be included in the future. I appreciate that individual errors happen and I believe it's most likely that this was an edit made in good faith. However. There have been a number of mod calls this year that have eroded the faith that I have in the ongoing moderation of the community I love, and I would like to continue forward with this metatalk to ensure we continue to be a community that's moderated thoughtfully and with active user engagement.]
I noticed that a recent dumb joke comment of mine was altered at some point after it was posted.
The comment in question:
Where’s the mugshot. There are no known photos of this guy after like 2006The bold text--the content warning--was not added by me. There is no mod note either in my comment or elsewhere on the thread indicating that this was edited in any way.
Found it. (Content warning: gory image)
posted by phunniemee at 3:22 PM on October 22
Was my comment in poor taste? Yeah sure, many of the things I do are. If a comment picks up flags, please delete it. Or add a content warning that says "MOD NOTE: CONTENT WARNING FOR GORY IMAGE" if you must. That's the community I have been a part of--moderation by deletion with active mod involvement in the thread. I absolutely do not want to be in a community where people's comments are EDITED by a mod without any indication that the text was written by someone other than the poster.
My own comment here and the relatively minor edit is about as stupid as it gets in the specific, but I'm feeling genuinely scandalized right now and deeply uncomfortable to find out that our mods are editing users comments in secrecy. I've been on metafilter for a decade and a half, and I know the people here only because of the things that people say online. It's important to me that our names are appended to the things we actually say.
This is a staggeringly bad path for metafilter moderation to take and I think the community needs some disclosure on how often this happens.
[phunniemee's note: Loup did reach out to me over email to explain that this edit followed the policy from the FAQ to add a content warning where deemed necessary by a mod, but that it was an error to not leave a mod note or to let me know the edit had occurred. That the mod team has discussed and agreed that a mod note will always be included in the future. I appreciate that individual errors happen and I believe it's most likely that this was an edit made in good faith. However. There have been a number of mod calls this year that have eroded the faith that I have in the ongoing moderation of the community I love, and I would like to continue forward with this metatalk to ensure we continue to be a community that's moderated thoughtfully and with active user engagement.]
Although, per loup it was a mistake, I'd be interested to know how often mods go in and edit comments. I can't recall ever seeing a mod note in someone else's comment. Has anyone received communication indicating that their comment was edited?
posted by Sparky Buttons at 2:09 PM on October 24 [1 favorite]
posted by Sparky Buttons at 2:09 PM on October 24 [1 favorite]
this is such an unforced error!
I took have noted - more than any particular policy stance - a lot of straight-up sloppy moderating lately. Misreading comments, deleting things with wildly unclear explanations, letting other things stand without thinking through what they're permitting...
posted by sagc at 2:10 PM on October 24 [9 favorites]
I took have noted - more than any particular policy stance - a lot of straight-up sloppy moderating lately. Misreading comments, deleting things with wildly unclear explanations, letting other things stand without thinking through what they're permitting...
posted by sagc at 2:10 PM on October 24 [9 favorites]
Mod note: Leaving a copy of the message sent to phunniemee for context
"Hi phunniemee,
I wanted to reach out about your Meta. You see, editing comments is not something the moderation team does with any sort of regularity, but minor edits do happen and have been a normal practice for years.
We do have a few specific instances where edits may occur, as outlined in the FAQ (https://faq.metafilter.com/71/Are-posts-or-comments-edited-by-mods):
– at the request of the poster, for minor reasons
– fixing a broken link
– fixing a typo or broken HTML
– putting a NSFW or other content warning indicator in
– moving part of a long post to a “more inside” location
– AskMe posts where the only question is in the title
adding tags
– removing personal information [ex: whois records, email addresses] that is against the guidelines
– removing a gratuitous self-link in an otherwise okay post or comment
That being said, I understand that communicating the edit didn't happen here and I’m sorry about that. The comment was flagged during Brandon's shift and he took a look at it, and thought the image could absolutely be seen as disturbing and that it needed a note, the edit was made, but he failed to make clear it was mod edit or to communicate it to you.
We have now discussed this collectively and we'll make sure to always make such edits in a way that are evidently made by moderation (as you suggest in your draft).
Please let me know if you would like to post an edited version of your Meta of if you consider your questions addressed by this email.
--
-loup"
posted by loup (staff) at 2:19 PM on October 24 [11 favorites]
"Hi phunniemee,
I wanted to reach out about your Meta. You see, editing comments is not something the moderation team does with any sort of regularity, but minor edits do happen and have been a normal practice for years.
We do have a few specific instances where edits may occur, as outlined in the FAQ (https://faq.metafilter.com/71/Are-posts-or-comments-edited-by-mods):
– at the request of the poster, for minor reasons
– fixing a broken link
– fixing a typo or broken HTML
– putting a NSFW or other content warning indicator in
– moving part of a long post to a “more inside” location
– AskMe posts where the only question is in the title
adding tags
– removing personal information [ex: whois records, email addresses] that is against the guidelines
– removing a gratuitous self-link in an otherwise okay post or comment
That being said, I understand that communicating the edit didn't happen here and I’m sorry about that. The comment was flagged during Brandon's shift and he took a look at it, and thought the image could absolutely be seen as disturbing and that it needed a note, the edit was made, but he failed to make clear it was mod edit or to communicate it to you.
We have now discussed this collectively and we'll make sure to always make such edits in a way that are evidently made by moderation (as you suggest in your draft).
Please let me know if you would like to post an edited version of your Meta of if you consider your questions addressed by this email.
--
-loup"
posted by loup (staff) at 2:19 PM on October 24 [11 favorites]
I can't believe I skipped over that comment thinking it was going to be an actual picture of Jeffries' terrifying visage. From now on I'm clicking every link I come across.
posted by mittens at 2:31 PM on October 24 [5 favorites]
posted by mittens at 2:31 PM on October 24 [5 favorites]
Hmmmm, the FAQs clearly say comments may be edited exactly the way this one was. I very much was not aware that mods would ever edit a comment and I'm absolutely certain most people had not read the FAQ or not read it in full (ignoring the '...or comments'), just like I did.
I agree that, if a comment transgresses the rules, it should be deleted. If a mod thinks it's worth saving, they could email it to the user and let them edit and re-post it, I guess. But in general comments are not something that should be edited and, given the scant moderation resources available these days, just delete comments that cross the threshold and save those resources for other things. Maybe in the site re-design an automatic process could be included to email a deleted comment to the poster or something, but don't waste expensive human time on it.
posted by dg at 2:51 PM on October 24 [1 favorite]
I agree that, if a comment transgresses the rules, it should be deleted. If a mod thinks it's worth saving, they could email it to the user and let them edit and re-post it, I guess. But in general comments are not something that should be edited and, given the scant moderation resources available these days, just delete comments that cross the threshold and save those resources for other things. Maybe in the site re-design an automatic process could be included to email a deleted comment to the poster or something, but don't waste expensive human time on it.
posted by dg at 2:51 PM on October 24 [1 favorite]
Here is an example of known moderation that I'm used to seeing on Metafilter.
posted by phunniemee at 2:57 PM on October 24 [4 favorites]
posted by phunniemee at 2:57 PM on October 24 [4 favorites]
I think using the term 'edited' is disingenuous here.
A warning was added, but comment content was not modified.
posted by Rash at 3:11 PM on October 24 [21 favorites]
A warning was added, but comment content was not modified.
posted by Rash at 3:11 PM on October 24 [21 favorites]
I suppose that's true, because when editors edit and leave a comment, they usually mention it in that same line (i mean, to not do so would be like putting words in people's mouths, and that's just vile! --ed.)
posted by i used to be someone else at 3:13 PM on October 24 [4 favorites]
posted by i used to be someone else at 3:13 PM on October 24 [4 favorites]
What else could you call it, though? It's appearing as if it were phunniemee's words; I certainly wouldn't interpret it as a mod note if I came across the comment after it was added.
posted by sagc at 3:17 PM on October 24 [17 favorites]
posted by sagc at 3:17 PM on October 24 [17 favorites]
Am I overlooking it, or has this instance not been fixed with a mod note in the thread and/or next to the edit, e.g. "Found it. (Content warning: gory image) [Mod note: this content warning regarding a famous special effects image was added by a moderator but only noted as such belatedly, after this MeTa was posted.]"
posted by Wobbuffet at 3:55 PM on October 24 [1 favorite]
posted by Wobbuffet at 3:55 PM on October 24 [1 favorite]
I know I say "i WoRk iN hR" a whole bunch around here, but sharing this publicly:
When you emailed me and asked me to edit my Metatalk submission, I was very intentional about not repeating the Brandon drag and instead refocusing this back where it belongs, on the moderation policy. And yet you shared your own full reply publicly. Embarrassing.
posted by phunniemee at 3:59 PM on October 24 [44 favorites]
The comment was flagged during Brandon's shift and he took a look at it, and thought the image could absolutely be seen as disturbing and that it needed a note, the edit was made, but he failed to make clear it was mod edit or to communicate it to you.instead of taking ownership over the moderation posture as a whole is embarrassing and very poor management. It makes me feel bad for Brandon when I'm out here trying to be morally outraged. Please stop throwing employees under the bus in public.
When you emailed me and asked me to edit my Metatalk submission, I was very intentional about not repeating the Brandon drag and instead refocusing this back where it belongs, on the moderation policy. And yet you shared your own full reply publicly. Embarrassing.
posted by phunniemee at 3:59 PM on October 24 [44 favorites]
Mod note: It makes me feel bad for Brandon when I'm out here trying to be morally outraged. Please stop throwing employees under the bus in public.
It's fine because it's pretty much a copy and paste of a draft note *I* wrote and then shared on the mod slack to see what others thought. Loup later messaged me after my shift was over to ask if he could use the note in replying to you, I said yeah, he changed the instances of the use of "I" to "Brandon" and here we are.
Brandon is not feeling thrown under the bus :)
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 4:45 PM on October 24 [30 favorites]
It's fine because it's pretty much a copy and paste of a draft note *I* wrote and then shared on the mod slack to see what others thought. Loup later messaged me after my shift was over to ask if he could use the note in replying to you, I said yeah, he changed the instances of the use of "I" to "Brandon" and here we are.
Brandon is not feeling thrown under the bus :)
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 4:45 PM on October 24 [30 favorites]
I thought we weren’t allowed to share mod/user emails for privacy reasons?
posted by bowbeacon at 5:06 PM on October 24 [5 favorites]
posted by bowbeacon at 5:06 PM on October 24 [5 favorites]
At a minimum, anything edited by the mods should be clearly marked as such. But preferably, if a comment is that problematic, it should just be deleted with a note.
I'm very uncomfortable with the idea that comments might be edited in a way that puts words into users' mouths, even if those words are benign. The idea that the mods think this is okay--and then defend themselves by posting private conversations without the user's consent--makes me question the basic integrity of the place.
posted by rpfields at 5:18 PM on October 24 [8 favorites]
I'm very uncomfortable with the idea that comments might be edited in a way that puts words into users' mouths, even if those words are benign. The idea that the mods think this is okay--and then defend themselves by posting private conversations without the user's consent--makes me question the basic integrity of the place.
posted by rpfields at 5:18 PM on October 24 [8 favorites]
Mod note: Here are two entries on the communication policy, whose additions were noted in the July 18, 2024 site update:
What is the policy on member to member communications via MeFi Mail?
What is the policy on member to moderator communications?
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 6:02 PM on October 24
What is the policy on member to member communications via MeFi Mail?
What is the policy on member to moderator communications?
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 6:02 PM on October 24
Mod note: And that is probably it for now on official communications about this stuff. Probably be close to 24 hours before anyone has time say anything else, if anything needs to be said.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 6:08 PM on October 24
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 6:08 PM on October 24
Here are two entries on the communication policy
From the second link:
"What is the policy on member to moderator communications?
[..]
Anything a user writes to the Moderation Team is considered private and will not be shared with anyone, except with current staff members for peer review."
So is the excerpt posted above considered okay because it is the mod response to phunniemee but doesn't contain what she wrote?? That would be extremely disingenuous if so. It still violates the privacy of the exchange.
posted by rpfields at 6:14 PM on October 24
From the second link:
"What is the policy on member to moderator communications?
[..]
Anything a user writes to the Moderation Team is considered private and will not be shared with anyone, except with current staff members for peer review."
So is the excerpt posted above considered okay because it is the mod response to phunniemee but doesn't contain what she wrote?? That would be extremely disingenuous if so. It still violates the privacy of the exchange.
posted by rpfields at 6:14 PM on October 24
Please stop throwing employees under the bus in public.
Have to admit I had a little involuntary imaginary "choking on my coffee" moment reading that too. But if Brandon was ok with it in advance, that changes to owning up to your mistakes in public, which I appreciate. Ay, we all make them.
On topic data point, I also would assume it was phunniemee who added the content warning, absent a mod note otherwise. Which so far nobody's disputing would be a good idea.
posted by ctmf at 6:16 PM on October 24 [5 favorites]
Have to admit I had a little involuntary imaginary "choking on my coffee" moment reading that too. But if Brandon was ok with it in advance, that changes to owning up to your mistakes in public, which I appreciate. Ay, we all make them.
On topic data point, I also would assume it was phunniemee who added the content warning, absent a mod note otherwise. Which so far nobody's disputing would be a good idea.
posted by ctmf at 6:16 PM on October 24 [5 favorites]
So is the excerpt posted above considered okay because it is the mod response to phunniemee but doesn't contain what she wrote?? That would be extremely disingenuous if so. It still violates the privacy of the exchange.
Clearly the policy says "Anything a user writes to the Moderation Team is considered private and will not be shared" -- but the above doesn't contain that so I don't think that part of the policy has much bearing. Moreover, the very next sentence of the policy says:
But regardless I fail to see the problem with the moderators saying, in a metatalk broached by the user in question, that there's add'l context and what that context is, so long as they don't reveal the communications from the user-side. I do not think this is the first time the mod staff has included communications they sent in a metatalk post, either, though I don't have other examples to hand.
posted by axiom at 9:00 PM on October 24 [2 favorites]
Clearly the policy says "Anything a user writes to the Moderation Team is considered private and will not be shared" -- but the above doesn't contain that so I don't think that part of the policy has much bearing. Moreover, the very next sentence of the policy says:
Members may share Moderation Team’s responses, except for any instance where another user is involved.Are mods considered members? I don't know that we need to litigate that, maybe the policy could be reworded to say "mods or members may share..."
But regardless I fail to see the problem with the moderators saying, in a metatalk broached by the user in question, that there's add'l context and what that context is, so long as they don't reveal the communications from the user-side. I do not think this is the first time the mod staff has included communications they sent in a metatalk post, either, though I don't have other examples to hand.
posted by axiom at 9:00 PM on October 24 [2 favorites]
Oh lord please don't make me have to choose between siding with Mods or HR
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 11:01 PM on October 24 [22 favorites]
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 11:01 PM on October 24 [22 favorites]
I would like to know when this practice began
This 2012 post of mine was edited to include the content warning: '[some photos NSFW]'. It never occurred to me that I should be scandalized by this.
If the practice has been going on for at least the last 12 years with no community outrage, I would respectfully suggest it is perhaps .. not that big a deal?
posted by verstegan at 1:25 AM on October 25 [44 favorites]
This 2012 post of mine was edited to include the content warning: '[some photos NSFW]'. It never occurred to me that I should be scandalized by this.
If the practice has been going on for at least the last 12 years with no community outrage, I would respectfully suggest it is perhaps .. not that big a deal?
posted by verstegan at 1:25 AM on October 25 [44 favorites]
I think a better mod toolkit would take care of some (not all) inconsistent moderation practices that sometimes erode trust. Noting that an edit has been made by a mod should just happen automatically, and then it’s 100% consistent (and hopefully faster.) There could be a toggle to add “at user’s request.”
posted by warriorqueen at 2:52 AM on October 25 [16 favorites]
posted by warriorqueen at 2:52 AM on October 25 [16 favorites]
I would respectfully suggest it is perhaps .. not that big a deal?
Allow me to clarify what I think is a big deal. The fact that this in particular is a content warning is a red herring.
My trust of moderation here has eroded to the point where I simply don't trust that it stops at a benign content warning, if we decide that completely unremarked upon editing (amending, adding, etc) of user comments is okay to do.
I literally do not know, and none of us can possibly know, what else is being secretly edited by mods unless they tell us, which is why I submitted this Metatalk. It's not 2012 here anymore.
posted by phunniemee at 4:45 AM on October 25 [17 favorites]
Allow me to clarify what I think is a big deal. The fact that this in particular is a content warning is a red herring.
My trust of moderation here has eroded to the point where I simply don't trust that it stops at a benign content warning, if we decide that completely unremarked upon editing (amending, adding, etc) of user comments is okay to do.
I literally do not know, and none of us can possibly know, what else is being secretly edited by mods unless they tell us, which is why I submitted this Metatalk. It's not 2012 here anymore.
posted by phunniemee at 4:45 AM on October 25 [17 favorites]
Apologies for the derail, i have a genuine question: what is the meaning behind writing a word by mixing capital letters and non-capital letters? eXaMpLe
Sorry for the clumsy wording, i guess this has a name but as i don't know it, not being a native speaker, Google was not helpful.
Thank you,
posted by 15L06 at 4:51 AM on October 25 [2 favorites]
Sorry for the clumsy wording, i guess this has a name but as i don't know it, not being a native speaker, Google was not helpful.
Thank you,
posted by 15L06 at 4:51 AM on October 25 [2 favorites]
what is the meaning behind writing a word by mixing capital letters and non-capital letters? eXaMpLe
short and simple
more detail
posted by phunniemee at 4:58 AM on October 25 [2 favorites]
short and simple
more detail
posted by phunniemee at 4:58 AM on October 25 [2 favorites]
"It's insulting to think your user base are such pussies that an image from RotLA would cause them tRaUmA"
FB, I wouldn't use the word insulted, but, yeah, its baloney. The image was not worthy of any kind of "warning" in the first place. This action dilutes the effectiveness of content warnings.
If the mods want to spend their time dealing with piddly, nonsensical gestures so be it. But yeah, the comment "added by the mod" should be included.
posted by rhonzo at 5:18 AM on October 25 [4 favorites]
FB, I wouldn't use the word insulted, but, yeah, its baloney. The image was not worthy of any kind of "warning" in the first place. This action dilutes the effectiveness of content warnings.
If the mods want to spend their time dealing with piddly, nonsensical gestures so be it. But yeah, the comment "added by the mod" should be included.
posted by rhonzo at 5:18 AM on October 25 [4 favorites]
In terms of trust of moderation...
I recently received a communication from an accursed realm of lost and tortured souls.
A_Ghost_User says they get a "this account is closed" message if they try to log in. If you look at their profile, it doesn't say "this account is closed". But if you click the button to Memail them, it says "Sorry, this member's account is disabled."
Are they banned? Why were they banned? And why doesn't the profile say so?
posted by TheophileEscargot at 5:26 AM on October 25 [6 favorites]
I recently received a communication from an accursed realm of lost and tortured souls.
A_Ghost_User says they get a "this account is closed" message if they try to log in. If you look at their profile, it doesn't say "this account is closed". But if you click the button to Memail them, it says "Sorry, this member's account is disabled."
Are they banned? Why were they banned? And why doesn't the profile say so?
posted by TheophileEscargot at 5:26 AM on October 25 [6 favorites]
Oh maybe A_Ghost_User is the one who's been editing haunting the comments. Clever stunt!
posted by phunniemee at 5:32 AM on October 25 [3 favorites]
posted by phunniemee at 5:32 AM on October 25 [3 favorites]
Wow, that's... a wildly not OK comment? Phunniemee and I are clearly not alone in thinking that, when mods edit comments, they generally should add a note that says they did so. Both phunniemee and the mods have acted with far more decorum than you just demonstrated.
posted by sagc at 6:09 AM on October 25 [5 favorites]
posted by sagc at 6:09 AM on October 25 [5 favorites]
Goodness Jacqueline, it sounds like your blood sugar is low. I'm fine 🎀
posted by phunniemee at 6:09 AM on October 25 [5 favorites]
posted by phunniemee at 6:09 AM on October 25 [5 favorites]
You know, the fact that the FAQ entry doesn't address whether the edits will be silent/invisible or not - or, conversely, what types of editing will always result in a mod note - seems like something that could be addressed.
Personally, I think you should always leave note, lest someone's arm get pulled off.
posted by sagc at 6:14 AM on October 25 [3 favorites]
Personally, I think you should always leave note, lest someone's arm get pulled off.
posted by sagc at 6:14 AM on October 25 [3 favorites]
Mod note: Notes:
1 comment removed as part of a user's requested account wipe.
Another comment removed (but responses left up) for attacking another user's emotional stability. Jacqueline, if you want to repost that comment without the attacks, you can contact us to get the text of the comment, but please do not include those attacks in a reposted comment. If they are included, it could result in a ban.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 6:18 AM on October 25
1 comment removed as part of a user's requested account wipe.
Another comment removed (but responses left up) for attacking another user's emotional stability. Jacqueline, if you want to repost that comment without the attacks, you can contact us to get the text of the comment, but please do not include those attacks in a reposted comment. If they are included, it could result in a ban.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 6:18 AM on October 25
So um... the mods agree that they should say if they edit a comment, and there was a mistake made here. They listed reasons why a comment might get edited. The only controversy I can see is that the comment perhaps did not need a content warning, but that feels like a judgement call and it seems like a harmless modification.
I mean, the mods shouldn't do what they did, and every mod who has posted in this thread has said so? Is there anything left to discuss?
posted by Cannon Fodder at 6:32 AM on October 25 [12 favorites]
I mean, the mods shouldn't do what they did, and every mod who has posted in this thread has said so? Is there anything left to discuss?
posted by Cannon Fodder at 6:32 AM on October 25 [12 favorites]
Incidentally, the Corridor Crew did a video on the Indiana Jones effects which discussed this scene. They literally made a wax head, melted it, filmed it in timelapse, and played it back at accelerated speed. It's kind of a tribute to old school practical effects that it generates content warnings forty years later....
posted by TheophileEscargot at 6:55 AM on October 25 [10 favorites]
posted by TheophileEscargot at 6:55 AM on October 25 [10 favorites]
"I mean, the mods shouldn't do what they did, and every mod who has posted in this thread has said so? Is there anything left to discuss?"
There is not, but the people running the show have previously burned through their goodwill with many regular users, so it's easy for things to smoulder even when everyone basically does the right thing in a specific instance. Trust is important!
posted by Kwine at 8:02 AM on October 25 [4 favorites]
There is not, but the people running the show have previously burned through their goodwill with many regular users, so it's easy for things to smoulder even when everyone basically does the right thing in a specific instance. Trust is important!
posted by Kwine at 8:02 AM on October 25 [4 favorites]
Mod note: Comment removed. Jacqueline, please take a break from this thread, as your comments are still coming off as an attack. Thank you.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 8:26 AM on October 25
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 8:26 AM on October 25
Mod note: We're closing up this thread as the issue has been addressed. I will edit this comment or add another later as a final writeup of this post.
Additional text added about 15 minutes after the comment was first posted:
With that concern of this MetaTalk having been addressed and a change communicated, we're going to close up this post.
The concerns, as written by the original author of this post:
1) if it's common practice for mods to edit users' comments without any indication of a mod note, 2) when this practice began, and 3) if it's been disclosed as a community practice here.
Answer: Yes, it's been a practice to edit users' comments for minor edits that do not involve changes in content/meaning, as mentioned in the FAQ entry, "Are posts or comments edited by mods?". This is no specific date when this began, but it's been in practice for over a decade, as communicated in the previously mentioned FAQ entry.
Solution: Moving forward, the moderation team will make it clear when a minor edit to a post or comment has occurred. The FAQ entry which describes instances of when a comment might be edited has been updated to indicate that a moderator will leave a note when doing such editing.
If people have questions about other things that were not part of the subject of the post, feel free to Contact Us for clarification.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 8:29 AM on October 25 [20 favorites]
Additional text added about 15 minutes after the comment was first posted:
With that concern of this MetaTalk having been addressed and a change communicated, we're going to close up this post.
The concerns, as written by the original author of this post:
1) if it's common practice for mods to edit users' comments without any indication of a mod note, 2) when this practice began, and 3) if it's been disclosed as a community practice here.
Answer: Yes, it's been a practice to edit users' comments for minor edits that do not involve changes in content/meaning, as mentioned in the FAQ entry, "Are posts or comments edited by mods?". This is no specific date when this began, but it's been in practice for over a decade, as communicated in the previously mentioned FAQ entry.
Solution: Moving forward, the moderation team will make it clear when a minor edit to a post or comment has occurred. The FAQ entry which describes instances of when a comment might be edited has been updated to indicate that a moderator will leave a note when doing such editing.
If people have questions about other things that were not part of the subject of the post, feel free to Contact Us for clarification.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 8:29 AM on October 25 [20 favorites]
This thread is closed to new comments.
can't wait for that trans advisory council to be set up in 2035 for maybe some mild recommendations to come down the pipe in 2042
posted by i used to be someone else at 1:55 PM on October 24 [22 favorites]