A moderation log, general info page, and site update note March 20, 2025 4:34 PM Subscribe
Just posting several short notes since a page that we were creating was accidently made public a little early and discovered, so we're gonna talk about 3 specific things.
1. The site update is running a little behind as we have a volunteer member going over the P&L information to see if there's anything missing. We hope to post the entire March site update by the end of next week at the latest.
2. Frimble put together a moderation log , located at https://www.metafilter.com/recent-mod-actions.cfm.
It shows the official mod notes from around the site (those mod comments with the thin black line around them). The log covers 50 entries from the previous week.
This log is limited on features, but considered done in this state and no additional development is planned for it. This is because work is being done on a new site which will have a more robust feature set all around, including the moderation log.
3. We added a general information page to the FAQ (https://faq.metafilter.com/#358), which lists staff, committees and other basic information. It's designed to be easy for folks to get that info in one link, aka "at a glance". Additional suggestions for what that page could contain are welcome, feel free to post suggestions in the comments!
1. The site update is running a little behind as we have a volunteer member going over the P&L information to see if there's anything missing. We hope to post the entire March site update by the end of next week at the latest.
2. Frimble put together a moderation log , located at https://www.metafilter.com/recent-mod-actions.cfm.
It shows the official mod notes from around the site (those mod comments with the thin black line around them). The log covers 50 entries from the previous week.
This log is limited on features, but considered done in this state and no additional development is planned for it. This is because work is being done on a new site which will have a more robust feature set all around, including the moderation log.
3. We added a general information page to the FAQ (https://faq.metafilter.com/#358), which lists staff, committees and other basic information. It's designed to be easy for folks to get that info in one link, aka "at a glance". Additional suggestions for what that page could contain are welcome, feel free to post suggestions in the comments!
One comment deleted. Please avoid heavily editing your comments.
That's cold, man.
posted by Lemkin at 5:18 PM on March 20
That's cold, man.
posted by Lemkin at 5:18 PM on March 20
A moderation log is a log of moderation actions. It reflects moderation actions taken, "logs" them, if you will.
I don't understand why it would be limited to secret actions, i think that's just looking for things to complain about?
posted by Sebmojo at 5:23 PM on March 20 [6 favorites]
I don't understand why it would be limited to secret actions, i think that's just looking for things to complain about?
posted by Sebmojo at 5:23 PM on March 20 [6 favorites]
Well, the complaint is that it doesn't seem to include anything *but* what people could already see. It's perhaps the bare minimum that could be done on this version of the site, but it would have been nice if the announcement acknowledged that it doesn't really address any of the things people were hoping a log would help with.
posted by sagc at 5:29 PM on March 20 [13 favorites]
posted by sagc at 5:29 PM on March 20 [13 favorites]
Oh yeah, this is not as full featured as anyone would like (and what will happen with the new site), but it was relatively easy to pull together to have something resembling a public moderation log for the current site. This log wasn't built from scratch, but as I understand it as a non-developer, used code that was already in place on the backend.
Essentially it was "hey, that tracker we use on the backend is similar to a moderation log, in a basic way. Can we repurpose that code to something resembling a public mod log?"
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 6:01 PM on March 20 [3 favorites]
Essentially it was "hey, that tracker we use on the backend is similar to a moderation log, in a basic way. Can we repurpose that code to something resembling a public mod log?"
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 6:01 PM on March 20 [3 favorites]
Ok thanks but just to be crystal clear, if it doesn’t log actions that aren’t noted by mod comments as well, it’s not what people were generally asking for.
did you really say “thin black line” about mod comments bc I am dying over here if so
you know the line is grey
posted by donnagirl at 8:31 PM on March 20 [6 favorites]
did you really say “thin black line” about mod comments bc I am dying over here if so
you know the line is grey
posted by donnagirl at 8:31 PM on March 20 [6 favorites]
Well, at least it gives us an idea how many mod actions with notes take place per day (roughly 4.2 for this data). By my count, over 6.5 days, there were 10 deletions of comments (one or more), 2 deletions of posts, 2 warnings, 4 edits or tags added, a couple things added to Best of and the remainder MetaTalk comments.
Brandon, could you estimate what proportion of mod actions include a note versus not including a note?
posted by ssg at 8:31 PM on March 20 [2 favorites]
Brandon, could you estimate what proportion of mod actions include a note versus not including a note?
posted by ssg at 8:31 PM on March 20 [2 favorites]
did you really say “thin black line” about mod comments bc I am dying over here if so
you know the line is grey
The color of the lines depends on which theme you are using.
posted by St. Sorryass at 12:40 AM on March 21 [3 favorites]
you know the line is grey
The color of the lines depends on which theme you are using.
posted by St. Sorryass at 12:40 AM on March 21 [3 favorites]
This is progress and I appreciate that it's been done, to give users a better view of this aspect of what the mods are doing.
To build on this, either on the new site (when is the new site, actually?) or if it can be scraped from existing backend data, could there be a log of removed comments (every time, not just when a mod feels that a mod note is necessary), recording not the text or author of the comment, just when the comment was removed, from where in the thread the comment was removed (a mod note twenty comments later is not very helpful) and why the comment was removed?
posted by ngaiotonga at 3:30 AM on March 21 [5 favorites]
To build on this, either on the new site (when is the new site, actually?) or if it can be scraped from existing backend data, could there be a log of removed comments (every time, not just when a mod feels that a mod note is necessary), recording not the text or author of the comment, just when the comment was removed, from where in the thread the comment was removed (a mod note twenty comments later is not very helpful) and why the comment was removed?
posted by ngaiotonga at 3:30 AM on March 21 [5 favorites]
could you estimate what proportion of mod actions include a note versus not including a note?
Roughly 60% with notes, 40% without, but that's a very rough guess off the top of my head and I would not hold me to it.
To build on this, either on the new site (when is the new site, actually?) or if it can be scraped from existing backend data, could there be a log of...
There is currently no firm date on when the new site will be officially launched, but a more full featured mod log is planned for after the basic site is up. What that means is that kirkaracha, the developer working on the new site, is aiming to get most of the functionality of the current site up and running first, then start doing major additions. The moderation log for the new site is planned to be among those first additions, as I understand it.
As to the exact feature set of new site's mod log, it hasn't be definitely nailed down, so if there is a feature you'd like to see, I recommend adding it to the feature request form. (list of requests).
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 4:30 AM on March 21 [2 favorites]
Roughly 60% with notes, 40% without, but that's a very rough guess off the top of my head and I would not hold me to it.
To build on this, either on the new site (when is the new site, actually?) or if it can be scraped from existing backend data, could there be a log of...
There is currently no firm date on when the new site will be officially launched, but a more full featured mod log is planned for after the basic site is up. What that means is that kirkaracha, the developer working on the new site, is aiming to get most of the functionality of the current site up and running first, then start doing major additions. The moderation log for the new site is planned to be among those first additions, as I understand it.
As to the exact feature set of new site's mod log, it hasn't be definitely nailed down, so if there is a feature you'd like to see, I recommend adding it to the feature request form. (list of requests).
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 4:30 AM on March 21 [2 favorites]
I really appreciate the new FAQ item! The lists of staff and members of boards/bodies are good references. Thanks!
posted by brainwane at 5:56 AM on March 21 [2 favorites]
posted by brainwane at 5:56 AM on March 21 [2 favorites]
No problem, if people want to suggest other important information to go in there, just post it in the comments. Am leaving the link in the Site Nav bar so people can easily locate the info.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 6:32 AM on March 21
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 6:32 AM on March 21
I think this is a good start, but I do think it (understandably as we are between sites) misses the mark on what the original issue was, which was people being upset that comments or posts (? not sure) were disappearing without clarity on why or clear communication. I think some people expressed that they felt like they were going crazy. :)
posted by warriorqueen at 6:33 AM on March 21 [13 favorites]
posted by warriorqueen at 6:33 AM on March 21 [13 favorites]
I wish you well, but if there’s no planned delivery date and no agreed feature set, I don’t think you’ve got a project.
posted by Phanx at 7:01 AM on March 21 [6 favorites]
posted by Phanx at 7:01 AM on March 21 [6 favorites]
I think this is a good start...
Agree that this is a start, and obviously folks can disagree on whether it's a good one :)
Folks are welcomed to email us to see if a comment or post was removed and we'll answer them. But at this point, I think the mods have been trained to leave a note whenever they're doing that, so it shouldn't be an issue.
If folks DO see stuff being removed without a note being left, they absolutely should feel free to email us or start a MeTa. Folks have been leaving notes in the original thread saying they're starting a MeTa and I think that's ok, if not optimal.
Ultimately people want to feel as though they're being heard and that nothing is being mysteriously disappeared by the moderators. All I would ask is that people be civil and ask about incidents instead of immediately assuming bad intentions and yelling and accusing.
...if there’s no planned delivery date and no agreed feature set, I don’t think you’ve got a project.
Totally understand your point, but disagree. The feature set, at least for the first phase, is duplicating the feature set of the current site. Before we get close to that point we'll decide what the second phase will be. I'll ping kirkaracha to see if he has anything to add.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 7:10 AM on March 21
Agree that this is a start, and obviously folks can disagree on whether it's a good one :)
Folks are welcomed to email us to see if a comment or post was removed and we'll answer them. But at this point, I think the mods have been trained to leave a note whenever they're doing that, so it shouldn't be an issue.
If folks DO see stuff being removed without a note being left, they absolutely should feel free to email us or start a MeTa. Folks have been leaving notes in the original thread saying they're starting a MeTa and I think that's ok, if not optimal.
Ultimately people want to feel as though they're being heard and that nothing is being mysteriously disappeared by the moderators. All I would ask is that people be civil and ask about incidents instead of immediately assuming bad intentions and yelling and accusing.
...if there’s no planned delivery date and no agreed feature set, I don’t think you’ve got a project.
Totally understand your point, but disagree. The feature set, at least for the first phase, is duplicating the feature set of the current site. Before we get close to that point we'll decide what the second phase will be. I'll ping kirkaracha to see if he has anything to add.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 7:10 AM on March 21
If folks DO see stuff being removed without a note being left, they absolutely should feel free to email us or start a MeTa.
What would they be emailing you about? Not trying to be snarky, I just don't get it. I think the issue is that people don't know when something has been deleted, not that they want to have a conversation with the mods about it when they do notice.
posted by dusty potato at 8:02 AM on March 21 [13 favorites]
What would they be emailing you about? Not trying to be snarky, I just don't get it. I think the issue is that people don't know when something has been deleted, not that they want to have a conversation with the mods about it when they do notice.
posted by dusty potato at 8:02 AM on March 21 [13 favorites]
People do sometimes email us asking if a particular comment or post of theirs was actually removed by mods. We take a look at and figure out if that happened or if something happened on the user's end.
That's usually a couple of times a month, when people aren't sure if they clicked away before hitting the submit button.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 8:26 AM on March 21
That's usually a couple of times a month, when people aren't sure if they clicked away before hitting the submit button.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 8:26 AM on March 21
If a mod has the ability to recall whether some specific comment has been deleted, doesn't that mean they're... logging it somewhere?
posted by dusty potato at 8:28 AM on March 21 [5 favorites]
posted by dusty potato at 8:28 AM on March 21 [5 favorites]
So at least a couple times a month the moderation here is so obfuscated it makes people doubt their own experiences. Cool.
posted by phunniemee at 8:34 AM on March 21 [11 favorites]
posted by phunniemee at 8:34 AM on March 21 [11 favorites]
If a mod has the ability to recall whether some specific comment has been deleted, doesn't that mean they're... logging it somewhere?M
Yup!
Why isn't that in the mod log? My understanding is that it was decided that it would involve more development time on the current site and since we're transitioning from it and winding down developing new features on the current site.
In my perfect world, a more full featured mod log would have happened a year ago, at least.
So the current mod log was proposed as a compromise of sorts to get something out and do a full featured log for the new site.
Yes and no. I think here's a lot of legacy stuff going on where comments were silently deleted previously, people remember that and are operating from that premise, so they ask us if X happened.
Because it use to and it's a very reasonable question to ask if it's happening now. That's why I encourage people to ask, it's totally fine and hopefully, over time, that builds some trust.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 8:41 AM on March 21
Yup!
Why isn't that in the mod log? My understanding is that it was decided that it would involve more development time on the current site and since we're transitioning from it and winding down developing new features on the current site.
In my perfect world, a more full featured mod log would have happened a year ago, at least.
So the current mod log was proposed as a compromise of sorts to get something out and do a full featured log for the new site.
Yes and no. I think here's a lot of legacy stuff going on where comments were silently deleted previously, people remember that and are operating from that premise, so they ask us if X happened.
Because it use to and it's a very reasonable question to ask if it's happening now. That's why I encourage people to ask, it's totally fine and hopefully, over time, that builds some trust.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 8:41 AM on March 21
Folks are welcomed to email us to see if a comment or post was removed and we'll answer them. But at this point, I think the mods have been trained to leave a note whenever they're doing that, so it shouldn't be an issue.
So is it now a policy that mods should always leave a comment when they delete? People were asking for that for a while, it's great if that's true.
posted by TheophileEscargot at 8:41 AM on March 21 [1 favorite]
So is it now a policy that mods should always leave a comment when they delete? People were asking for that for a while, it's great if that's true.
posted by TheophileEscargot at 8:41 AM on March 21 [1 favorite]
Mod note: [So is it now a policy that mods should always leave a comment when they delete? People were asking for that for a while, it's great if that's true.
Yes, it is policy that a mod should always leave an official note when something is removed. If you see it not happening, please point that out by email at least!
Yes, some of us were a bit forgetful when we started doing that, but at this point it should be happening as the default, no exceptions. If it isn't, please report it!
(makes mental note to update FAQ entries that mention deleting by this evening)
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 9:34 AM on March 21 [7 favorites]
Yes, it is policy that a mod should always leave an official note when something is removed. If you see it not happening, please point that out by email at least!
Yes, some of us were a bit forgetful when we started doing that, but at this point it should be happening as the default, no exceptions. If it isn't, please report it!
(makes mental note to update FAQ entries that mention deleting by this evening)
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 9:34 AM on March 21 [7 favorites]
Thanks! That's great news!
posted by TheophileEscargot at 9:38 AM on March 21 [2 favorites]
posted by TheophileEscargot at 9:38 AM on March 21 [2 favorites]
From a project management standpoint, the incomplete mod log linked in the post seems perfectly reasonable. It's a quick target of opportunity. Asking for further development on the old site to make its log more complete seems a little silly.
posted by a faded photo of their beloved at 10:30 AM on March 21 [3 favorites]
posted by a faded photo of their beloved at 10:30 AM on March 21 [3 favorites]
I think this is a good start, but I do think it (understandably as we are between sites) misses the mark on what the original issue was, which was people being upset that comments or posts
Part of the challenge is that we don't have a requirements document, so possible features are scattered across MetaTalk threads. It's going to be difficult for everyone to be pleased with the outcome if there isn't a document describing what it should do. (This is also a general challenge in the rebuild.)
I used Chat GPT to write a functional spec (Google Doc; anyone with the link should be able to comment.) If anybody wants to be a stakeholder I can made them an editor.
(I'm responding to a comment by warriorqueen but I'm not directing this at them or anyone else personally.)
posted by kirkaracha (staff) at 12:25 PM on March 21 [5 favorites]
Part of the challenge is that we don't have a requirements document, so possible features are scattered across MetaTalk threads. It's going to be difficult for everyone to be pleased with the outcome if there isn't a document describing what it should do. (This is also a general challenge in the rebuild.)
I used Chat GPT to write a functional spec (Google Doc; anyone with the link should be able to comment.) If anybody wants to be a stakeholder I can made them an editor.
(I'm responding to a comment by warriorqueen but I'm not directing this at them or anyone else personally.)
posted by kirkaracha (staff) at 12:25 PM on March 21 [5 favorites]
In response to, "could you estimate what proportion of mod actions include a note versus not including a note?" BB wrote, "Roughly 60% with notes, 40% without, but that's a very rough guess off the top of my head and I would not hold me to it" in this thread at 4:30am my time.
In response to, "So is it now a policy that mods should always leave a comment when they delete?," BB wrote, "Yes, some of us were a bit forgetful when we started doing that, but at this point it should be happening as the default, no exceptions" at 9:34am my time, with no acknowledgement of the previous reply or explanation for why those two replies are so completely different.
This is fucking crazy-making.
posted by lapis at 12:44 PM on March 21 [17 favorites]
In response to, "So is it now a policy that mods should always leave a comment when they delete?," BB wrote, "Yes, some of us were a bit forgetful when we started doing that, but at this point it should be happening as the default, no exceptions" at 9:34am my time, with no acknowledgement of the previous reply or explanation for why those two replies are so completely different.
This is fucking crazy-making.
posted by lapis at 12:44 PM on March 21 [17 favorites]
...if there’s no planned delivery date and no agreed feature set, I don’t think you’ve got a project.
As Brandon mentioned, the feature set is either recreating or making modest improvements to the existing site. A delivery date is tough to determine for several reasons:
1) I'm the only person working on the site.*
2) I have a full-time job and work on the site evenings and weekends.
3) I'm a web developer, not a project manager.
4) There aren't any functional requirement documents.
I would break down the planned stages like this:
MVP Phase: An MVP that recreates the most-used features (signing up, logging in, making posts, making comments, and editing, flagging, and replying to comments. This is the current phase and we're close to finishing it.
Front-end feature-complete phase: Customize the form for posting to match each subsite's requirements e.g., uploading an audio file for podcast. Code forms for forgot password, change password, etc. Code profile pages. Search.
Admin phase: Coding out the admin backend section. (In progress.)
Mobile phase: Make the site work great on mobile. (The new site is built with responsive design but I've focused on desktop.)
Migration preparation: coding a service for importing the old site's data into the new site.
Migration planning: determine hosting and coordinating a date.
The site will be ready when the community decides it's ready.
* A couple of people have volunteered to help but I need to write some developer documentation first.
posted by kirkaracha (staff) at 12:56 PM on March 21 [6 favorites]
As Brandon mentioned, the feature set is either recreating or making modest improvements to the existing site. A delivery date is tough to determine for several reasons:
1) I'm the only person working on the site.*
2) I have a full-time job and work on the site evenings and weekends.
3) I'm a web developer, not a project manager.
4) There aren't any functional requirement documents.
I would break down the planned stages like this:
MVP Phase: An MVP that recreates the most-used features (signing up, logging in, making posts, making comments, and editing, flagging, and replying to comments. This is the current phase and we're close to finishing it.
Front-end feature-complete phase: Customize the form for posting to match each subsite's requirements e.g., uploading an audio file for podcast. Code forms for forgot password, change password, etc. Code profile pages. Search.
Admin phase: Coding out the admin backend section. (In progress.)
Mobile phase: Make the site work great on mobile. (The new site is built with responsive design but I've focused on desktop.)
Migration preparation: coding a service for importing the old site's data into the new site.
Migration planning: determine hosting and coordinating a date.
The site will be ready when the community decides it's ready.
* A couple of people have volunteered to help but I need to write some developer documentation first.
posted by kirkaracha (staff) at 12:56 PM on March 21 [6 favorites]
[…]no acknowledgement of the previous reply or explanation for why those two replies are so completely different.
This is fucking crazy-making.
It would be nice to get an answer from a mod, but a more charitable interpretation of the two comments would be that "mod actions" can include a number of things beyond just deletions, so there's no inherent contradiction between the two statements. The first comment that you link to was replying to a post breaking down the entries in the new moderation log into ~2 (commented on) deletions per day and a similar number of non-deletion mod comments (like noting edits, tagging, warnings, etc.). The estimated 40% of non-commented-on moderation actions could very well be more things in that second category—edits, tagging, non-public communication with members, etc. could be happening without associated notes in the threads, and without any contradiction to the second comment you linked.
posted by JiBB at 1:10 PM on March 21 [8 favorites]
This is fucking crazy-making.
It would be nice to get an answer from a mod, but a more charitable interpretation of the two comments would be that "mod actions" can include a number of things beyond just deletions, so there's no inherent contradiction between the two statements. The first comment that you link to was replying to a post breaking down the entries in the new moderation log into ~2 (commented on) deletions per day and a similar number of non-deletion mod comments (like noting edits, tagging, warnings, etc.). The estimated 40% of non-commented-on moderation actions could very well be more things in that second category—edits, tagging, non-public communication with members, etc. could be happening without associated notes in the threads, and without any contradiction to the second comment you linked.
posted by JiBB at 1:10 PM on March 21 [8 favorites]
Why did the previous owners move ahead with a massive rewrite without providing any requirement documents to their contractor?
posted by bowbeacon at 1:44 PM on March 21 [3 favorites]
posted by bowbeacon at 1:44 PM on March 21 [3 favorites]
(To be clear, I think kirkaracha is doing a pretty darn good job with what he's been given)
posted by bowbeacon at 1:46 PM on March 21 [4 favorites]
posted by bowbeacon at 1:46 PM on March 21 [4 favorites]
It seems a little insane that the decision was made to build a new site without specs or requirements, with a single developer working in their off hours! How is that not a recipe for failure? It’s seriously impressive and to kirkaracha’s credit that it has gotten this far, but pulling back the curtain at this point, it seems closer to doom than to success. Maybe I misunderstand but this doesn’t seem like a reasonable way to proceed. Shouldn’t there at least be some kind of road map or rubric?
posted by rikschell at 1:50 PM on March 21 [4 favorites]
posted by rikschell at 1:50 PM on March 21 [4 favorites]
"Refactor the current site into a more modern/maintainable system, keep all existing functionality. You have admin rights for the existing site, code and database."
As far as specs and requirements go, I'd much rather that than a document-- especially if I was doing 95% of the work solo on a shoestring budget.
posted by Static Vagabond at 2:24 PM on March 21 [4 favorites]
As far as specs and requirements go, I'd much rather that than a document-- especially if I was doing 95% of the work solo on a shoestring budget.
posted by Static Vagabond at 2:24 PM on March 21 [4 favorites]
As a (former) developer, I'd say that "match this existing, working system" is way more of a set of specs than I ever got, and that includes working for a company (SPSS) that actually believed in detailed written specs.
It sure looks like kirkaracha was brought on board, looked at the ColdFusion code, and barfed. It's a bold move to rewrite an entire system, but I've sure been brought in to look at an existing system and decided it had to be thrown out and redone.
posted by zompist at 2:47 PM on March 21 [9 favorites]
It sure looks like kirkaracha was brought on board, looked at the ColdFusion code, and barfed. It's a bold move to rewrite an entire system, but I've sure been brought in to look at an existing system and decided it had to be thrown out and redone.
posted by zompist at 2:47 PM on March 21 [9 favorites]
If anybody wants to be a stakeholder I can made them an editor.
I am happy and willing!
posted by Kybard at 2:59 PM on March 21
I am happy and willing!
posted by Kybard at 2:59 PM on March 21
I think the issue is that people don't know when something has been deleted
Perhaps one solution is to hire a child who sees dead comments?
posted by snofoam at 3:18 PM on March 21 [18 favorites]
Perhaps one solution is to hire a child who sees dead comments?
posted by snofoam at 3:18 PM on March 21 [18 favorites]
It sure looks like kirkaracha was brought on board, looked at the ColdFusion code, and barfed. It's a bold move to rewrite an entire system, but I've sure been brought in to look at an existing system and decided it had to be thrown out and redone.
That's exactly what happened (except I may not have physically barfed). The original code was built up over decades. It's not built to any best practices (which, to be fair, were largely defined later).
When a new subsite was set up, the code was duplicated from the original MetaFilter site. This makes it really difficult to make changes across subsites. My first encounter with the codebase was when I co-founded SportsFilter with some other members, and the code was a nightmare then.
posted by kirkaracha (staff) at 4:36 PM on March 21 [10 favorites]
That's exactly what happened (except I may not have physically barfed). The original code was built up over decades. It's not built to any best practices (which, to be fair, were largely defined later).
When a new subsite was set up, the code was duplicated from the original MetaFilter site. This makes it really difficult to make changes across subsites. My first encounter with the codebase was when I co-founded SportsFilter with some other members, and the code was a nightmare then.
posted by kirkaracha (staff) at 4:36 PM on March 21 [10 favorites]
In response to, "could you estimate what proportion of mod actions include a note versus not including a note?" BB wrote, "Roughly 60% with notes, 40% without, but that's a very rough guess off the top of my head and I would not hold me to it" in this thread at 4:30am my time.
In response to, "So is it now a policy that mods should always leave a comment when they delete?," BB wrote, "Yes, some of us were a bit forgetful when we started doing that, but at this point it should be happening as the default, no exceptions" at 9:34am my time, with no acknowledgement of the previous reply or explanation for why those two replies are so completely different.
As Jibb noted, those are two different things. Mods should always leave a note when deleting or editing anything, yes.
But mods do more than just edit or delete things. For instance, for the past hour or two, I've been wrangling with updating or creating FAQ entries related to the moderation log, most of which haven't necessitated a note at this point because the server on the current site is throwing errors, and preventing saving the entries after edits. So no notes on them just yet.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 5:57 PM on March 21 [2 favorites]
In response to, "So is it now a policy that mods should always leave a comment when they delete?," BB wrote, "Yes, some of us were a bit forgetful when we started doing that, but at this point it should be happening as the default, no exceptions" at 9:34am my time, with no acknowledgement of the previous reply or explanation for why those two replies are so completely different.
As Jibb noted, those are two different things. Mods should always leave a note when deleting or editing anything, yes.
But mods do more than just edit or delete things. For instance, for the past hour or two, I've been wrangling with updating or creating FAQ entries related to the moderation log, most of which haven't necessitated a note at this point because the server on the current site is throwing errors, and preventing saving the entries after edits. So no notes on them just yet.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 5:57 PM on March 21 [2 favorites]
Why did the previous owners move ahead with a massive rewrite without providing any requirement documents to their contractor?
Do you want the cynical answer?
posted by 922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a at 6:39 PM on March 21 [1 favorite]
Do you want the cynical answer?
posted by 922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a at 6:39 PM on March 21 [1 favorite]
Mods should always leave a note when deleting or editing anything, yes.
When it's literally removing an accidental duplicate like mine yesterday, I'd say it's perfectly fine not to do so.
posted by Candleman at 3:15 AM on March 22
When it's literally removing an accidental duplicate like mine yesterday, I'd say it's perfectly fine not to do so.
posted by Candleman at 3:15 AM on March 22
When it's literally removing an accidental duplicate like mine yesterday, I'd say it's perfectly fine not to do so.
I'm going to firmly disagree on that, at least for now, where we don't have a fully featured mod log. So it's better to leave a note that mod removed a comment, for whatever reason, so there's no question that mod action was taken.
Perhaps we have a full featured log, it might be ok to not leave as many notes. But I think leaving notes adds a human touch and makes moderation more visible, so notes should stay, IMO.
If anybody wants to be a stakeholder I can made them an editor.
I'd like to be a stakeholder on this too.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 7:46 AM on March 22 [5 favorites]
I'm going to firmly disagree on that, at least for now, where we don't have a fully featured mod log. So it's better to leave a note that mod removed a comment, for whatever reason, so there's no question that mod action was taken.
Perhaps we have a full featured log, it might be ok to not leave as many notes. But I think leaving notes adds a human touch and makes moderation more visible, so notes should stay, IMO.
If anybody wants to be a stakeholder I can made them an editor.
I'd like to be a stakeholder on this too.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 7:46 AM on March 22 [5 favorites]
The site update is running a little behind as we have a volunteer member going over the P&L information to see if there's anything missing.
It looks like the February P&L was posted a few days ago to the Google Drive.
Are the mistakes in previous P&L reports going to be corrected? The updated December 2024 report still says that Metafilter raised $148,120.20 in recurring donations that month. And has it been confirmed that recurring donations really dropped to $10,722.74 in January 2025, as it says in the January 2025 P&L?
posted by bunton at 7:58 AM on March 22 [1 favorite]
It looks like the February P&L was posted a few days ago to the Google Drive.
Are the mistakes in previous P&L reports going to be corrected? The updated December 2024 report still says that Metafilter raised $148,120.20 in recurring donations that month. And has it been confirmed that recurring donations really dropped to $10,722.74 in January 2025, as it says in the January 2025 P&L?
posted by bunton at 7:58 AM on March 22 [1 favorite]
I will propose that Metafilter moderators shouldn’t be stakeholders in the rewrite. They shouldn’t be deciders in this process.
posted by bowbeacon at 10:16 AM on March 22 [12 favorites]
posted by bowbeacon at 10:16 AM on March 22 [12 favorites]
Kybard volunteered to be a stakeholder, I made them an editor. If anyone else wants to be a stakeholder, please send me a MeMail.
posted by kirkaracha (staff) at 10:23 AM on March 22 [1 favorite]
posted by kirkaracha (staff) at 10:23 AM on March 22 [1 favorite]
I will propose that Metafilter moderators shouldn’t be stakeholders in the rewrite
I don't endorse this proposal. It's their site, too.
posted by kbanas at 11:49 AM on March 22 [7 favorites]
I don't endorse this proposal. It's their site, too.
posted by kbanas at 11:49 AM on March 22 [7 favorites]
Are the mistakes in previous P&L reports going to be corrected?
Have sent this and your other questions to the Interim Board.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 11:58 AM on March 22
Have sent this and your other questions to the Interim Board.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 11:58 AM on March 22
I would prefer mods not be given extra duties as stakeholders given their repeated assertions that there isn’t time for their core job duties. I also believe it’s good to have some aspects of the site that operate without the influence of the same few people. Please don’t make mods editors of this project
posted by donnagirl at 1:25 PM on March 22 [18 favorites]
posted by donnagirl at 1:25 PM on March 22 [18 favorites]
I would prefer mods not be given extra duties as stakeholders given their repeated assertions that there isn’t time for their core job duties.
This is a very good point.
posted by CtrlAltD at 2:44 PM on March 22 [3 favorites]
This is a very good point.
posted by CtrlAltD at 2:44 PM on March 22 [3 favorites]
> I will propose that Metafilter moderators shouldn’t be stakeholders in the rewrite. They shouldn’t be deciders in this process.
Especially when they're already going out of scope in the google document, in my view:
- "Every action should have a mandatory dialog box for the moderator to explain why an action was taken."
- "If a user’s comment is edited, deleted, or if they are issued a timeout, they should receive a notification." (agree!)
These additions by Brandon (I think) relate to the mod back-end in general. They will have lots of opportunity to suggest improvements to mod tools, but this document is NOT that. (Right?) That is part of kirkaracha's planning above, under "Admin phase: Coding out the admin backend section".
The LOG is supposed to be the user-facing thing that helps us understand how the mod tools have been used, which is why it would be great if only users did the first pass. (Edit: I grant that certain aspects of the mod tool set or changes to same may become part of the mod log, like "deletion reason".)
There is a thing that happens in online communities where people with more power "chime in early" on everything. Regular people who aren't in the hierarchy may get discouraged from trying to contribute something new when people with more power show up immediately and start opinionating at the same time. Quite often, people with less power don't want to be in conflict with those in the hierachy, or even appear to be in conflict, so however much community brainstorming and volunteering (etc) might have happened... does not happen. So for example I am not thinking of asking to work on this spec any more. It would have been a good task for one regular volunteer (and there already was one!).
posted by sylvanshine at 3:18 PM on March 22 [8 favorites]
Especially when they're already going out of scope in the google document, in my view:
- "Every action should have a mandatory dialog box for the moderator to explain why an action was taken."
- "If a user’s comment is edited, deleted, or if they are issued a timeout, they should receive a notification." (agree!)
These additions by Brandon (I think) relate to the mod back-end in general. They will have lots of opportunity to suggest improvements to mod tools, but this document is NOT that. (Right?) That is part of kirkaracha's planning above, under "Admin phase: Coding out the admin backend section".
The LOG is supposed to be the user-facing thing that helps us understand how the mod tools have been used, which is why it would be great if only users did the first pass. (Edit: I grant that certain aspects of the mod tool set or changes to same may become part of the mod log, like "deletion reason".)
There is a thing that happens in online communities where people with more power "chime in early" on everything. Regular people who aren't in the hierarchy may get discouraged from trying to contribute something new when people with more power show up immediately and start opinionating at the same time. Quite often, people with less power don't want to be in conflict with those in the hierachy, or even appear to be in conflict, so however much community brainstorming and volunteering (etc) might have happened... does not happen. So for example I am not thinking of asking to work on this spec any more. It would have been a good task for one regular volunteer (and there already was one!).
posted by sylvanshine at 3:18 PM on March 22 [8 favorites]
What does being a stakeholder in the rewrite mean?
posted by creatrixtiara at 6:52 PM on March 22 [1 favorite]
posted by creatrixtiara at 6:52 PM on March 22 [1 favorite]
I believe a vested interest in a project or activity when the new site is on line.
unless it's a person on the other end of a theodolite in an American Western movie.
posted by clavdivs at 7:05 PM on March 22
unless it's a person on the other end of a theodolite in an American Western movie.
posted by clavdivs at 7:05 PM on March 22
I get what stakeholders mean in general, I'm just not sure what that entails in terms of the mod log specifically. Do we work on developing the log? Do we get updates on the log development? Do we test the log?
Technically all of us are stakeholders (as Mefi members/users) but here it seems to refer to some specific task.
posted by creatrixtiara at 7:45 PM on March 22 [4 favorites]
Technically all of us are stakeholders (as Mefi members/users) but here it seems to refer to some specific task.
posted by creatrixtiara at 7:45 PM on March 22 [4 favorites]
So just editing the spec doc then? Nothing else?
posted by creatrixtiara at 9:11 PM on March 22
posted by creatrixtiara at 9:11 PM on March 22
The info page needs to clarify what the years mean by someone's name. It looks like those dates mean the year that person started their MeFi job. But that's just an educated guess.
posted by NotLost at 9:22 PM on March 22 [1 favorite]
posted by NotLost at 9:22 PM on March 22 [1 favorite]
creatrixtiara: I believe kirkaracha meant he'd give people access to the codebase? But i've completely lost track of the conversation at this point.
posted by adrienneleigh at 10:44 PM on March 22
posted by adrienneleigh at 10:44 PM on March 22
Mod note: The info page needs to clarify what the years mean by someone's name.
Done and have added the link to the functional spec to that page.
I'm taking stakeholder in this instance to apply specifically to just that document, i.e. people who can go in to edit and manage it and be responsible for coordinating with kirkaracha about what feature list is and what order said features are implemented.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 10:58 PM on March 22
Done and have added the link to the functional spec to that page.
I'm taking stakeholder in this instance to apply specifically to just that document, i.e. people who can go in to edit and manage it and be responsible for coordinating with kirkaracha about what feature list is and what order said features are implemented.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 10:58 PM on March 22
people who can go in to edit and manage it and be responsible for coordinating with kirkaracha about what feature list is and what order said features are implemented.
In that case, I definitely don't think mods should be involved in this. Do it as part of your (paid) job and allow others to get involved and have their voices be heard without mods sticking their oars in.
posted by fight or flight at 3:25 AM on March 23 [6 favorites]
In that case, I definitely don't think mods should be involved in this. Do it as part of your (paid) job and allow others to get involved and have their voices be heard without mods sticking their oars in.
posted by fight or flight at 3:25 AM on March 23 [6 favorites]
people who can go in to edit and manage it and be responsible for coordinating with kirkaracha about what feature list is and what order said features are implemented.
This take affirms my belief that mods shouldn’t be stakeholders. Brandon, addressing you directly: mods aren’t MetaFilter owners or kings or better than everyone else. You need to stop taking up space on committees and with projects and allow someone else to get involved without having to work directly with you. Other people’s voices need to be heard.
posted by donnagirl at 5:57 AM on March 23 [9 favorites]
This take affirms my belief that mods shouldn’t be stakeholders. Brandon, addressing you directly: mods aren’t MetaFilter owners or kings or better than everyone else. You need to stop taking up space on committees and with projects and allow someone else to get involved without having to work directly with you. Other people’s voices need to be heard.
posted by donnagirl at 5:57 AM on March 23 [9 favorites]
This project needs a dedicated project manager, preferably one with software project management experience, ideally one that isn't also a mod but who can be read into all the back-end mod tool requirements. This is something I suggest the interim board take on - find a volunteer (and a backup volunteer) and make sure they have the access they need.
It's not fair to kirkaracha to be doing this with raw MetaTalk input (even filtered through a request form) and it's not a great idea for it to be going entirely through the mod team, too. This needs someone who can work with Kirk to figure out time and resource requirements, and ideally someone who can devote some time to thinking about user experience flow and ways to sensibly collect community feedback from more than just the people who read MetaTalk.
posted by restless_nomad (retired) at 6:41 AM on March 23 [22 favorites]
It's not fair to kirkaracha to be doing this with raw MetaTalk input (even filtered through a request form) and it's not a great idea for it to be going entirely through the mod team, too. This needs someone who can work with Kirk to figure out time and resource requirements, and ideally someone who can devote some time to thinking about user experience flow and ways to sensibly collect community feedback from more than just the people who read MetaTalk.
posted by restless_nomad (retired) at 6:41 AM on March 23 [22 favorites]
yeah if I'm being honest my volunteering here was with the intention/expectation of working at least to some degree as a project manager at least in this limited scope, reducing the cacophony of inputs to something more focused and clear. the document now being smothered in suggestions and apparent scope creep does not help.
like: who is supposed to be accepting those suggestions? if it's kirk, then this process has just created more work, more voices and opinions to be filtered and contextualized and decided upon. it's the opposite of what a functional requirements document is supposed to do, i.e. map out for the developer a checklist of base requirements from which they can assess whether they've built a proper MVP upon which further iteration can be done.
a functional requirements doc is not supposed to be something the developer has to approve; that's backwards. it only even tracks as something possible here because there's a void where the approver is supposed to exist in this process
posted by Kybard at 7:03 AM on March 23 [15 favorites]
like: who is supposed to be accepting those suggestions? if it's kirk, then this process has just created more work, more voices and opinions to be filtered and contextualized and decided upon. it's the opposite of what a functional requirements document is supposed to do, i.e. map out for the developer a checklist of base requirements from which they can assess whether they've built a proper MVP upon which further iteration can be done.
a functional requirements doc is not supposed to be something the developer has to approve; that's backwards. it only even tracks as something possible here because there's a void where the approver is supposed to exist in this process
posted by Kybard at 7:03 AM on March 23 [15 favorites]
CAUTION!
RAW METATALK
NOT SAFE FOR
HUMAN DIGESTIONSposted by lucidium at 7:13 AM on March 23 [3 favorites]
The word for this job isn't as much "project manager" as it is "product manager" - a project manager's job is usually more about cat herding and managing dependencies, not about figuring out what the project should even be, what problem it's trying to solve and how best to achieve that.
posted by quacks like a duck at 7:15 AM on March 23 [3 favorites]
posted by quacks like a duck at 7:15 AM on March 23 [3 favorites]
in my career I've seen those titles used interchangeably (mostly because digital strategy can be a messy business) but you're right quacks, we're looking for a product manager
posted by Kybard at 7:26 AM on March 23 [1 favorite]
posted by Kybard at 7:26 AM on March 23 [1 favorite]
I think in this case the distinction is fairly important, because of the absence of any other leadership to drive a clear and coherent direction. Anyone who gets into this needs to have some real confidence in their own ability to provide that leadership without further direction, not just abdicate everything to the crowd or throw their hands up for the lack of focus.
What would success look like? What outcomes will tell us we've done the right thing? Are there unwanted side effects that we want to avoid? Those are the kind of questions that a good product manager would ask before diving into the nitty gritty of sifting requirements or writing specifications. And they'd understand that design isn't only about technology but about the culture and process surrounding it.
posted by quacks like a duck at 7:58 AM on March 23 [4 favorites]
What would success look like? What outcomes will tell us we've done the right thing? Are there unwanted side effects that we want to avoid? Those are the kind of questions that a good product manager would ask before diving into the nitty gritty of sifting requirements or writing specifications. And they'd understand that design isn't only about technology but about the culture and process surrounding it.
posted by quacks like a duck at 7:58 AM on March 23 [4 favorites]
After a week, deletions and mod notes drop off the new mod log. So I threw together a Mefi mod log archive. This has the same content — but is archived forever, tagged by site and mod, and there are RSS feeds (linked in footer). We check for new mod actions roughly every 10 minutes.
posted by Klipspringer at 8:37 AM on March 23 [13 favorites]
posted by Klipspringer at 8:37 AM on March 23 [13 favorites]
Agree in general that we don’t want to spend too much time on this interim product (for which: thank you!) but I do wonder why the log isn’t an archive. I would think persistence would be a feature we’d want. Hopefully this is just a side effect of whatever “good enough” solution the team implemented to tide us over and isn’t a design choice.
posted by eirias at 9:08 AM on March 23 [2 favorites]
posted by eirias at 9:08 AM on March 23 [2 favorites]
Thank you for the update! I am especially happy to hear that someone else is going over the financials before publishing.
Moderation log:
1. Why only 50 comments and why only the last 7 days? I'm hoping this is more a proof of concept rather than what we will see in the future?
2. At the time of this writing, 23 mod comments are from Brandon Blatcher and three from other mods. Is BB working the hours that most need moderation? Are others not commenting their deletions? Do others listed under Mods not really moderate? (My understanding is taz is on hiatus, so that would skew numbers as she seemed to leave mod notes way more often than others.)
New FAQ entry:
1. Why is loup listed as "started 2020" where TravelingThyme is listed as starting "June 2020". Those hirings were both announced at the same time.
BIPOC:
1.I'll cross-post to the BIPOC committee thread, but... BIPOC committee is down to three members? One of them still being an employee? Another employee called on "as needed?" So the BIPOC committee now has 33% - 50% staff representation at any given time? Maybe I am misremembering, but I thought the BIPOC committee was supposed to be an advisory committee to let staff know when they are failing the BIPOC community? That would seem pretty hard to do with so much staff on the committee.
2. Are 2 (or, generously 4) people really enough to represent BIPOC to make substantial changes to Metafilter? Has there been any substantial recruitment efforts to bring that committee back up to size? If so, why is it so low? If not, why not?
posted by a non mouse, a cow herd at 9:25 AM on March 23 [7 favorites]
Moderation log:
1. Why only 50 comments and why only the last 7 days? I'm hoping this is more a proof of concept rather than what we will see in the future?
2. At the time of this writing, 23 mod comments are from Brandon Blatcher and three from other mods. Is BB working the hours that most need moderation? Are others not commenting their deletions? Do others listed under Mods not really moderate? (My understanding is taz is on hiatus, so that would skew numbers as she seemed to leave mod notes way more often than others.)
New FAQ entry:
1. Why is loup listed as "started 2020" where TravelingThyme is listed as starting "June 2020". Those hirings were both announced at the same time.
BIPOC:
1.I'll cross-post to the BIPOC committee thread, but... BIPOC committee is down to three members? One of them still being an employee? Another employee called on "as needed?" So the BIPOC committee now has 33% - 50% staff representation at any given time? Maybe I am misremembering, but I thought the BIPOC committee was supposed to be an advisory committee to let staff know when they are failing the BIPOC community? That would seem pretty hard to do with so much staff on the committee.
2. Are 2 (or, generously 4) people really enough to represent BIPOC to make substantial changes to Metafilter? Has there been any substantial recruitment efforts to bring that committee back up to size? If so, why is it so low? If not, why not?
posted by a non mouse, a cow herd at 9:25 AM on March 23 [7 favorites]
>After a week, deletions and mod notes drop off the new mod log.
*spews coffee out nose*
Wow. That is the opposite of the kind of transparency that members have long been calling for. Given that we'll be lucky if the new site goes live before the fall, if not the end of the year, what on earth was the justification for not permanently archiving this temporary mod log? Who decided it could only contain 7 days of information?
This is the kind of thing, Brandon and other mods, that continues to show a clear and casual disregard for the members of Metafilter.
posted by catspajamas at 10:04 AM on March 23 [4 favorites]
*spews coffee out nose*
Wow. That is the opposite of the kind of transparency that members have long been calling for. Given that we'll be lucky if the new site goes live before the fall, if not the end of the year, what on earth was the justification for not permanently archiving this temporary mod log? Who decided it could only contain 7 days of information?
This is the kind of thing, Brandon and other mods, that continues to show a clear and casual disregard for the members of Metafilter.
posted by catspajamas at 10:04 AM on March 23 [4 favorites]
I.e., we need to be able to see long-term patterns in this temporary mod log.
posted by catspajamas at 10:05 AM on March 23 [3 favorites]
posted by catspajamas at 10:05 AM on March 23 [3 favorites]
I believe kirkaracha meant he'd give people access to the codebase?
The codebase is open source and available on GitHub, which was announced in the January site update.
posted by kirkaracha (staff) at 11:20 AM on March 23 [1 favorite]
The codebase is open source and available on GitHub, which was announced in the January site update.
posted by kirkaracha (staff) at 11:20 AM on March 23 [1 favorite]
Let's stipulate that:
So I set up a Google doc to at least try to collect all of the moderation log requirements in one place. Anyone with the link can add notes, and stakeholders would make edits and finalize the document. I'm sorry, it doesn't seem to have helped that much. I'm going to focus on development and providing updates on that.
* Members that visit MetaTalk. I assume there are lots of people that don't.
This project needs a dedicated project manager, preferably one with software project management experience, ideally one that isn't also a mod but who can be read into all the back-end mod tool requirements. This is something I suggest the interim board take on - find a volunteer (and a backup volunteer) and make sure they have the access they need.
Having a a product manager would be great. It would also be great to have a UX designer and some coding help. Several people have made good user interface notes and I feel like I've been responsive including them.
I sent a message to the board endorsing the idea of them finding a product manager.
a functional requirements doc is not supposed to be something the developer has to approve
I have no desire or interest in approving anything. This is a community site and the requirements should be determined by the members.
posted by kirkaracha (staff) at 12:27 PM on March 23 [11 favorites]
- There's a general feeling among (some*) members that they have asked for changes and feel like their requests haven't gotten a response
- These requests are scattered across MetaTalk threads and not collected in one place
So I set up a Google doc to at least try to collect all of the moderation log requirements in one place. Anyone with the link can add notes, and stakeholders would make edits and finalize the document. I'm sorry, it doesn't seem to have helped that much. I'm going to focus on development and providing updates on that.
* Members that visit MetaTalk. I assume there are lots of people that don't.
This project needs a dedicated project manager, preferably one with software project management experience, ideally one that isn't also a mod but who can be read into all the back-end mod tool requirements. This is something I suggest the interim board take on - find a volunteer (and a backup volunteer) and make sure they have the access they need.
Having a a product manager would be great. It would also be great to have a UX designer and some coding help. Several people have made good user interface notes and I feel like I've been responsive including them.
I sent a message to the board endorsing the idea of them finding a product manager.
a functional requirements doc is not supposed to be something the developer has to approve
I have no desire or interest in approving anything. This is a community site and the requirements should be determined by the members.
posted by kirkaracha (staff) at 12:27 PM on March 23 [11 favorites]
This is a community site and the requirements should be determined by the members.
So how do we design a process that allows that to happen? I don't think the interim board can or should lead that process. Do we open MetaTalks for proposed new features? Do we appoint some kind of group of people to decide what gets built or not?
We definitely shouldn't just wait until there has been an election (which depends on the new site and we have no idea when the election will happen).
posted by ssg at 4:11 PM on March 23 [3 favorites]
So how do we design a process that allows that to happen? I don't think the interim board can or should lead that process. Do we open MetaTalks for proposed new features? Do we appoint some kind of group of people to decide what gets built or not?
We definitely shouldn't just wait until there has been an election (which depends on the new site and we have no idea when the election will happen).
posted by ssg at 4:11 PM on March 23 [3 favorites]
Do we open MetaTalks for proposed new features?
MetaTalk posts are famously good for developing community consensus, so that’s one option. Seriously, though, the idea of undertaking a site rewrite with no leadership or decision makers is totally insane and of course it won’t work even if the developer is good and earnestly engaged. The person that approved this project is mostly used to managing multimillion dollar projects with countless stakeholders, and totally didn’t approve a redevelopment of the site in order to distract from their ability to deliver a pet collage or an elaborate Halloween Gala. The foundation is likely to collapse before the new site is finished.
posted by snofoam at 7:07 PM on March 23 [7 favorites]
MetaTalk posts are famously good for developing community consensus, so that’s one option. Seriously, though, the idea of undertaking a site rewrite with no leadership or decision makers is totally insane and of course it won’t work even if the developer is good and earnestly engaged. The person that approved this project is mostly used to managing multimillion dollar projects with countless stakeholders, and totally didn’t approve a redevelopment of the site in order to distract from their ability to deliver a pet collage or an elaborate Halloween Gala. The foundation is likely to collapse before the new site is finished.
posted by snofoam at 7:07 PM on March 23 [7 favorites]
« Older Regular and semi-regular MeFi clubs?
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
Isn't the point of a moderation log to show the mod actions that are not visible and not obvious? I mean, thank you for doing literally anything differently for once, truly, but ??? Have I fundamentally misunderstood the purpose of a mod log or is this just... not. ? ??
posted by phunniemee at 5:17 PM on March 20 [23 favorites]