User blog comment:Bourgeoisie/Why current moderating practices aren't working/@comment-5772846-20150321004143

While I agree withe the purpose of your post, the way you worded a few thoughts, I'm not super fond of.

I'll preface this by saying that I skimmed the post, but I get the gist...

"Finally, when I see a moderator say "it's my job to warn/kick/ban" I shake my head so hard. This is so ignorant and any moderator who says that should have to rerequest their rights as they clearly don't understand them."

I understand your point here, but when moderators say that, they're meaning "it's my job to enforce (not a word I like, but I'll use it) the policy". (I know you address this in your post, just wanted to clarify that first.)

I don't think they're entirely wrong. Moderators are there to keep the chat safe and clean, and their job is to keep the chat following policies. You can't really deny that.

"The "job" of any user right is to use them for what the community wants you to use them for. If the community doesn't think someone should have been kicked for example, you don't kick."

Again, I basically agree with the principle; however, I don't think that this holds up all the time. There are users here who are fine with inappropriate language... if there were a majority of users with that view on chat at one time when a user used bad language, I still think the mod should kick. Moderating decisions are made by the moderator, in accordance with the policies, not a "oh, let's take a vote and see if the non-mods chatting want me to kick." That somewhat defeats the purpose of a moderator, in my opinion.

The above is obviously a rather extreme example, but I hope you get the point. I agree that you shouldn't disrupt chat, but there is a reason we have particular users as moderators beyond just "oh, they're on a lot."

Anyway... well-written post. I'm glad you're bringing issues to our community's attention, even if I have a few slight objections to your total reasoning. Just to reiterate, I do mostly agree. :P