Volunteer MeFi Modding December 20, 2024 6:20 AM   Subscribe

A number of people have called for volunteer moderation at MeFi. The No. 1 question about that is, how many people are willing to be a volunteer moderator, and for how many hours a week?

This is also a good thread to discuss any other aspects of potential volunteer moderation at MeFi.

(I am not for or against this idea at this time. But this is a good initial check on feasibility.)
posted by NotLost to MetaFilter-Related at 6:20 AM (50 comments total) 1 user marked this as a favorite

I am somewhat hesitant to derail this conversation from the get-go, but I think I am going to anyway.

As someone who has volunteer modded on multiple sites since back in the AOL days and then professionally modded and managed a team of mixed volunteer and professional mods, I would say that this question presumes a model of volunteer moderation -- scheduled shifts with a set number of mods on duty -- that we should not take as a default or ideal scenario for volunteer-led moderation. If we are asking the question just to get an idea if this model, among all the possible volunteer-led moderation models, is feasible, then sure, fine. But if we have had an in-depth discussion on possible technology-enabled or volunteer-led moderation models that wasn't just a few comments here and there within some larger shitshow of a pile-on thread, then I managed to miss it entirely.

Many, many more people will be available much more frequently if they can dip in and out responding to flags and discussing things collectively in a Mod Discord during the time they are already on the site than if they have to promise to spend Sundays from 1-5pm just modding MetaFilter.

Like, I would be willing to take a four hour shift a week modding MetaFilter, provided I had flexibility from week to week on which four hour block they were (and that's always going to be a problem with getting people to voluntarily moderate a website whose peak usage is during business hours in the place where most of the users are) but if I was part of a group of people with the ability to moderate on the fly, past experience suggests I would do that for many, many more than 4 hours per week.
posted by jacquilynne at 6:40 AM on December 20 [17 favorites]


I think this is a premature post because the organizational model has to be put in place and then tools/training/docs built to support whatever that model is, if it's different. [Deleted on preview what jacquilynne said better.] People's lives will change during that time.

Also, if feasibility is being determined, remember there are lots of engaged members who don't come into MetaTalk that much.

But to kick off availability, I also think I would be available to put about 4 hours a week into the site consistently, and available for more work in sprints at times and with advance notice, and that could be moderating/covering vacation or break times, or it could be other things.
posted by warriorqueen at 6:43 AM on December 20 [7 favorites]


The No. 1 question about that is, how many people are willing to be a volunteer moderator, and for how many hours a week?

Actually, I think the #1 question is whether the current mod team (or the incoming Board or whoever it is that owns Metafilter now) are interested in hiring/training volunteer mods at all. Anything else is pretty moot until that question has been answered.
posted by fight or flight at 6:43 AM on December 20 [2 favorites]


How much people are actually willing to do could inform any potential consideration by the new ownership.
posted by NotLost at 6:52 AM on December 20 [3 favorites]


I'd be happy to be involved, but I fully agree with jacquilynne. Assigning shifts is almost certainly going to be the wrong way to handle the job. If there are just 15 people who have mod powers, and a subscribable flag queue, and a general expectation that people will read a few posts when they're in front of their computers, everything will almost certainly work out fine.
posted by bowbeacon at 7:00 AM on December 20 [8 favorites]


I'll just add that if people have a block/hide feature (which I think is planned if I read the site update correctly - I'm a bit distracted this morning), I think a delay in moderation now and then would be okay, because people can control if there's something in their sight line.

You still want to moderate to continue to support values and discussion, but the individual members can immediately remove upsetting things from their view, which helps a lot.
posted by warriorqueen at 7:03 AM on December 20 [2 favorites]


I don't think it's bad to discuss this now (or anytime really, other than perhaps too frequently). As much as whoever is running the site can just decide to do this or not, I think the process of the community accepting either decision will take time to make sure it's as smooth as possible. To answer the core question, I think I'd be willing to volunteer if my questions are addressed I'd be willing to do so, if I stay active enough. I agree with jacquilynne that trying to impose a "shifts" model (or hours per week) on volunteers is probably not a great idea: too much like an employee and much less likely to get volunteers to do so, in general.

One issue with having volunteer moderators would be deciding the process of how they are selected. Staff decision using... some process? Maybe some sort of community process where users say "hey I want to be a mod because X, Y, Z" and then we vote/discuss/whatever. Unless there would be a limited access mode coded for the volunteers, they probably would have to sign confidentiality agreements and similar, which of course likely would involve some lawyer time to get set up. But a more limited view where the volunteer mods would _mostly_ just have access to what normal users see, plus flags and the ability to delete posts/comments, could be useful enough to think about. There's also thinking about if the volunteers would be able to see deleted content and to potentially restore it.

I think some of the potential ethical issues about unpaid labor have become a bit less severe due to the transfer to the non-profit but still exist since the volunteer mods to some extent, by their very nature, will displace paid work. I guess in summary I think if it's thought through and has large scale support from both the community and staff/board folks, it could be a useful addition.
posted by skynxnex at 7:04 AM on December 20


I really do not understand the confidentiality problems people are envisioning. You have to delete public posts on a website, and say things like "Hey, I think the discussion of whether hot dogs are a sandwich is kind of a derail, let's talk about burritos."

There should not be anything that is confidential or sensitive involved in reposting links to newspapers and blogs. If there is, the system is being managed incorrectly.
posted by bowbeacon at 7:07 AM on December 20 [3 favorites]


I was going to post along the lines of what jacquilynne said. I would definitely be interested in being trained to do at least some part of the moderation (e.g. responding to flags), and doing that, especially if there were no set shifts. I feel like some change in the moderation model, including more automation (e.g., hide on x flags until a mod reviews), distributed first-tier modding, etc. could be a lot more responsive and efficient. Maybe the higher-level mod position is really a user-relations manager or something distinct from the volunteer mod team and that person does the really tricky or personal info things with support from the board if needed.
posted by snofoam at 7:10 AM on December 20 [7 favorites]


I just don't think we need much of anything paid happening. This is an internet message board that gets 700 posts per day. The organizational structure should look a LOT more like a PTO meeting than a business.
posted by bowbeacon at 7:12 AM on December 20 [7 favorites]


> If there is, the system is being managed incorrectly.

I think that is being a bit too unfair. If the assumption, going back to 1999(!), was always that it'd be super-close people or employees, then it's totally reasonable to let things like IP addresses, direct private communication, and payment addresses be easily accessible to all moderators. I'd say since then expectations of data isolation between roles has increased and if we're moving to allow less close/non employee mods, there might have to be adjustments made to not scare (some) users off. Not a big deal to know those things might exist and might need to be dealt with. (Edited to add: or maybe nobody actually cares about any of that and/or it's already all hidden and no big deal but these are things I know have been concerns at other communities/companies where I've had backroom access.)
posted by skynxnex at 7:17 AM on December 20 [3 favorites]


This is an internet message board that gets 700 posts per day.

Sure, but it doesn't have to stay that way. I doubt it's going to be where it was in the heyday of text-based communication.

But it's been really interesting to see Google prioritize Reddit content, and while I think there are a lot of reasons for that, one of them has to be that people click through on Reddit content and engage with it. I don't think forums are dead-dead. I think that with the right people and roles, and community energy we could see growth - steady, unspectacular growth. It's just can we get there before there's not enough content here to attract new people.

One of my frustrations over the last 6 months has been a sense that we are squandering the runway the SC provided for us, but the last week things feel different. I think we can do better and there's no reason to go to zero on day one.
posted by warriorqueen at 7:24 AM on December 20 [6 favorites]


Payment should be handled by a third party. Metafilter shouldn't have access to payment information.

There should not be any direct private communication. Just don't allow it!

IP addresses should be on the server and only really discoverable by a subpoena. Or, more reasonably, should just never be logged. They're not important, and there's no real reason to have them.
posted by bowbeacon at 7:27 AM on December 20 [4 favorites]


Sure, but it doesn't have to stay that way. I doubt it's going to be where it was in the heyday of text-based communication.

I think that's a good thing to hope for, but there's about a 99.9% chance that metafilter will never be above 1500 posts per day ever again. That's just how things are, in reality. We can have a lot of fun in that reality, learn a lot of neat things, have meetups and friends, and real community. But it will almost certainly never be at a scale that requires a paid Executive Director, or anything like that. It needs an elected board of 5 people with the keys to the bank account who write the yearly check for $2000 in hosting costs, just like the PTO buys t-shirts for field day every year, and hires a magician to come in when the reading festival hits its goal.

Treating this place as a business with a $250k per year budget, or even a $50k/year budget, is going to end in bankruptcy, very very quickly.
posted by bowbeacon at 7:31 AM on December 20 [3 favorites]


If we're talking about shifts I could do one- or two-hour shifts here and there, on a week-by-week basis, but not longer than that. If we're talking about something like Jacquilynne described, then I could do more than that.

a more limited view where the volunteer mods would _mostly_ just have access to what normal users see, plus flags and the ability to delete posts/comments, could be useful enough to think about.

I think this is really important. I've always assumed regular mods can see things like poster information for anonymous posts, IP addresses, private email addresses, historical info like long-ago deleted comments and past conversations with mods, etc. Maybe I'm wrong?

I think it would help to get a full official list of what information and tools the current mods have access to, so that we can think about each one and whether volunteers should have access to it. This is information we need mods to supply.

A separate list we might be able to compile ourselves is a full list of mod actions that currently exist, so we can think about how each one would play out with volunteers, and whether it should be restricted, eliminated, retained, or expanded. Things like:

- deleting comments
- restoring deleted comments
- leaving official mod notes
- deleting posts
- restoring posts
- approving or rejecting anonymous AskMe posts
- approving or rejecting MetaTalk queue posts (soon may it die)
- responding privately to users who have flagged things that won't be deleted
- privately communicating with users to nudge their behavior in a specific thread (warnings, etc.)
- privately communicating with users (warnings, etc.) about patterns of behavior broader than a single thread
- privately responding to incoming user contact submitted through the contact form
- privately responding to incoming user contact sent to a specific mod directly via MefiMail or email
- reading and responding to MetaTalk threads
- determining moderation policy
- getting all mods on the same page
- training mods
- being trained
- waiving the $5 signup fee on request

What else?
posted by trig at 7:32 AM on December 20 [4 favorites]


- summarizing MetaTalk posts (granted that this has been done only sporadically but if done well it might be a useful thing to keep up)
posted by trig at 7:34 AM on December 20 [4 favorites]


I think that's a good thing to hope for, but there's about a 99.9% chance that metafilter will never be above 1500 posts per day ever again. That's just how things are, in reality.

I won't take that bet until I see what the full new org structure is like, but I personally can think of multiple ways to get there in a 1-2 year timeframe, that take a lot of time and a bit of money.

One $$ way would be to buy ads on Reddit that display in specific subreddits that say "Tired of fly-by insults on Reddit? Try Metafilter."

Or buy Google Search Ads against "can I still eat" (I joke, I joke.)
posted by warriorqueen at 7:35 AM on December 20


- banning users temporarily (timeouts)
- banning users permanently
- restoring perma-banned users
- checking new user accounts to see if they're BNDs/attempts to get around bans (I don't know how this actually works)
- doing account wipes on request
- emailing specific deleted comments to users on their request
posted by trig at 7:38 AM on December 20 [3 favorites]


Also I'm not advocating for current spending levels, but I also don't think you only build for what you currently have, if you have some runway. (abusing the edit window)

Right now ongoing donations are around $16k/month, so I would say you could look at that for budgeting (set your costs below that, but not like, zero.) I'm not sure what the non profit rules are for keeping money in the bank either, though. And we have a Finance Committee I learned! They were working on the budget so hopefully they can continue that work.
posted by warriorqueen at 7:38 AM on December 20 [2 favorites]


I think we should follow the example of the Park Slope Food Coop and force everyone to volunteer for a shift as a moderator.
posted by betweenthebars at 7:40 AM on December 20 [2 favorites]


"Tired of figuring out which subreddit to post in?"

"Need Advice? Try Ask Metafilter"
posted by trig at 7:40 AM on December 20


Metafilter has a Park Slope Food Coop aura.
posted by betweenthebars at 7:41 AM on December 20 [4 favorites]


I think we should follow the example of the Park Slope Food Coop and force everyone to volunteer for a shift as a moderator.

I think Park Slope volunteers get discounted beans though.
posted by trig at 7:41 AM on December 20 [3 favorites]


Re: what data metafilter collects and PHI stuff (and level of private communications), there's different levels depending how much you think you need to ensure the operating of the site and how much you want to help prevent socking-type abuse. And to be clear, I don't think and didn't mean to imply MeFi has any payment info over the amount that they receive back from PayPal et al. Some of my memory is from the olden days of it being almost entirely Matt and there was the $5 signup so please just see that as a derail to ignore, if you wish.
posted by skynxnex at 7:44 AM on December 20 [1 favorite]


Park Slope Food Coop

I don't know what that is but I Googled it and lo, a Reddit thread came up with this comment:

"Main reasons to join the coop IMO are (1) you live in the neighborhood and it's convenient, (2) you like weird social environments for your personal anthropological observation (the people are actually interesting and fun in my experience), (3) you enjoy the novelty of a mildly chaotic grocery store where all the workers seem generally confused, (4) you want to LARP working in a grocery store by doing shifts, (5) you ideologically like the idea of a coop, (6) you specifically want the higher quality but pricier produce."

Sounds legit. But not in favour of making participation any harder. ;)
posted by warriorqueen at 7:44 AM on December 20 [2 favorites]


I think modeling volunteer moderation after the professional moderation is wrongheaded for a number of reasons - I still think something like (the latter half of) this is a more feasible way forward.
posted by restless_nomad (retired) at 7:49 AM on December 20 [3 favorites]


- reading the previous history of a user's communications with staff/volunteers
- reading current inbound communications of any kind
- viewing the history of deletions and timeouts of a specific user
- reading any commentary that staff might make behind the scenes, to denote that a specific user has been pushing the boundaries repeatedly and is on a "last warning" or any such thing.
- contributing to discussions on such topics with staff about specific users
posted by quacks like a duck at 7:50 AM on December 20 [2 favorites]


I'd be interested in being a volunteer mod, but only in a very specific, localized-to-FF kind of way.

I'm not at all interested in (or, let's face it, suited for) adjudicating disagreements and bad behavior on the blue or even the green. But I'd be happy to repair bad links and images, correct episode numbers, or delete spoilers on FanFare. And I'm always there anyway, so it wouldn't be a huge imposition.

(For anyone who doesn't know, something like 50-75% of FF movie posts show up with broken image links, at which point I then dig up a poster and flag the post with the link, at which points mods correct it. Skip the middle man, I'd say.)
posted by DirtyOldTown at 7:53 AM on December 20 [7 favorites]


Regarding the list of mod actions, Rhaomi posted this in another thread:
FWIW, the transition board requested a breakdown of mod coverage and tasks (which we got)

I'll ask if they can post that breakdown here.

In the meantime
- discuss time-sensitive decisions with other mods
- discuss general decisions with other mods
- repair typos/broken links/formatting issues/episode numbers/etc
- delete spoilers
- move posts that were posted in the wrong subsite to the correct subsite
- forward tech issues to the dev team
posted by trig at 7:56 AM on December 20 [3 favorites]


What else?

- editing posts/comments at the original user's request

(Side note: given that the short-lived hiding-comments-with-the-details-tag experiment resulted in one accidentally overwritten/lost bit of comment text, I think that implies there's currently no record of older versions, when mods edit a comment. That would probably need to change if volunteers were to have edit access.)
posted by nobody at 8:01 AM on December 20 [2 favorites]


I think we can all agree our biggest priority right now is implementing a system where I can demand members of the board resign if/when they appoint volunteer mods I disapprove of
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 8:01 AM on December 20


Speaking of edited comments and private information that's visible to mods, I've always assumed edit-window edits are stored and visible (so mods can see if someone's been abusing the edit window). That's just a guess on my part though.
posted by trig at 8:06 AM on December 20 [1 favorite]


When I moderated stuff in the late 90s/early00s, we would leave notes on members' profiles like "gets drunk on Fridays" "thinks we are AOL support, so if starts yelling about account check to see if they mean their AOL account."

Totally inappropriate stuff, but at that time there was just a different vibe. I have NO IDEA if this is the case with the MF database, but it wouldn't surprise me.

Please do not go beat up the current mods for this if it does turn out to be the case and noting again that I have NO IDEA IF IT IS THE CASE. This was just a thing during a specific period of Internet history.
posted by warriorqueen at 8:23 AM on December 20 [3 favorites]


What is "PTO" in this context?
posted by NotLost at 8:29 AM on December 20


Parent/Teacher Organization. The 10 parents who determine how to spend the bake sale money at a public school.
posted by bowbeacon at 8:34 AM on December 20


I think the question also needs to include a determination of what subsites a person is willing to moderate. It is much different moderating say Ask than Meta. Then there is MetaTalk.
posted by JohnnyGunn at 9:23 AM on December 20 [1 favorite]


I would assume that volunteer mods wouldn't so much be scheduled for shifts as empowered to help when they are around.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 9:31 AM on December 20 [3 favorites]


On that note - what about if there are specific types of threads a volunteer mod is trying for their own sanity to avoid (e.g. specific political subjects).

If the answer is that acting as a mod requires a commitment to moderate on any thread or topic, I think that's fine - just needs to be made clear.

More questions for consideration: What happens when a mod acts in ways that other mods and/or community members object to. What should the process be for "firing" a mod. How much handholding/retraining should they be given before that happens. What sorts of damage, if any, would a "rogue" mod be able to do.
posted by trig at 9:32 AM on December 20 [3 favorites]


Another potential perk of having subsite-specific volunteer mods could be that people who spend a great deal of time on particular sections of MeFi would be excellent candidates to add tags, potentially making tags much more useful.

If I had the means, for example, I'd probably add tags to FanFare movie posts for some combination of genre, director, stars, director of photography, composer, editor, etc. If we ever did anything with the existing but not-actually-in-use-AFAIK "URL to stream/purchase" field, I would be happy to make sure something is there, too.

I'd be willing to bet there might be volunteer mods available willing to do this for anime, wrestling, what have you.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 9:43 AM on December 20 [4 favorites]


I'd love to help out with whatever form the volunteer modding takes.
posted by Diskeater at 9:48 AM on December 20 [2 favorites]


I would assume that volunteer mods wouldn't so much be scheduled for shifts as empowered to help when they are around.

I agree- there's no way I could promise to cover any particular regular shift, but I wouldn't have a problem occasionally checking a priority queue of issues.
posted by a faded photo of their beloved at 9:55 AM on December 20


I personally won't stay if MeFi moves to an exclusively volunteer mod model. I was here in the days where, if MeFi had been volun-modded, there were absolutely users who would have gleefully banned people they didn't like, for no other reason than they didn't like them.

Just wanted to suggest that not everyone is comfortable with volun-mods.
posted by cooker girl at 10:13 AM on December 20 [3 favorites]


I think the assumption is that appointing any volunteer mods would have to be preceded by implementing a moderation log, making it transparent/easy-to-spot if people were abusing their limited power.

It's an example of the kind of new options we could have if moderation wasn't mostly done behind a curtain.

Now that you mention it though, I think not having ban power would be a smart limitation on the powers of volunteer mods. Leave that up to the full-time paid staff.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 10:22 AM on December 20 [7 favorites]


I really do not understand the confidentiality problems people are envisioning.

SOME moderator actions involve sleuthing out whether one account is a sock puppet for another, or secretly working for the company they're shilling for, or secretly Scott Adams, or whatever. Other moderactions may involve reading direct messages between users. I would think that kind of thing is not that common though, and it shouldn't harm the idea of getting more people involved with moderating to limit just those more sensitive actions to a cabal elite cadre core staff who are trusted to properly handle access to stuff like IPs, email addresses, private correspondence, and whatnot.
posted by aubilenon at 10:54 AM on December 20 [3 favorites]


I am super amused by the idea that mefi is so simple it should be run like a PTO, because at my daughter's elementary school the PTO runs meetings by Robert's Rules of Order, has a near 6 figure budget, and last year the (duly elected!) board was so terrible and antagonistic towards the parents and school staff that there was often a ton of fighting and nastiness at meetings, they constantly complained that there wasn't money to do what the parents wanted to do, they complained that they were overworked and couldn't take on more tasks, they couldn't get volunteers, and they were going to end beloved programs and activities against all input from parents and school staff in attendance.

So I guess what I'm saying is I'd love it if mefi wasn't run like my PTO.
posted by jermsplan at 11:48 AM on December 20 [9 favorites]


Maybe we should shoot for something less contentious, like running it in the style of an HOA.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 12:16 PM on December 20 [3 favorites]


(JOKE, people.)
posted by DirtyOldTown at 12:16 PM on December 20 [4 favorites]


> like running it in the style of an HOA.

Flagged as too real.
posted by skynxnex at 1:03 PM on December 20 [1 favorite]


Maybe the higher-level mod position is really a user-relations manager or something distinct from the volunteer mod team and that person does the really tricky or personal info things with support from the board if needed.

That sounds right to me
posted by knobknosher at 2:05 PM on December 20


Currently I could moderate for 10 hours a week. I’d rather not because I like commenting in askme but if there were a knobsignal I would respond
posted by knobknosher at 2:07 PM on December 20


« Older [MeFi Site Update] December 2024   |   What's the plan, Stan, for Trump 2025? Newer »

You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments