[Mod-discuss] Re: Admin overriding moderator [was Keith Moore's response to WGLC (was Re: WG Last call...)]

[Rob Sayre <[e-mail]>]

On 10/8/25 12:38 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> On 09-Oct-25 00:50, Nick Hilliard wrote:
>> Eliot Lear wrote on 08/10/2025 12:19:
>>> And now PR#256[1] deals with admins rescinding/amending moderator
>>> decisions.  I do not agree with this approach for reasons previously 
>>> stated.
>>
>> yeah that's thorny. In practice, this PR looks like it creates a subtly
>> different threshold for administrators than for moderators - the text as
>> stated allows the admins to unilaterally overturn a decision without
>> reference to the moderators' opinions. This will be problematic in
>> situations where the chair has a different interpretation of what
>> constitutes disruptive behaviour.


Hi, I kind of favor it for this reason, but do not feel strongly.

That lets the chairs reverse something without a fight, so overblown 
arguments about "secret police" and "censorship" melt away, and devolve 
into the existing structures.


>>
>> The existing control process looks less problematic. I.e. if the chair
>> is unresponsive and there's a subsequent disagreement about the actions,
>> then just escalate.
>>
>> Or: reword to require consensus between admins and moderators for
>> reinstatement if there's a dispute like this?
>>
>> I wonder if this PR is getting too much into the weeds.
> 
> Yes. It seems to me that such a disagreement should be immediately referred
> to the AD, rather than degenerating into a game of ping-pong between a
> WG Chair and a moderator, with the indicted participant playing the part of
> the ping-pong ball.

Yes, can't have that. But I would expect a chair to tell the moderators 
"no, it's fine" and anything serious to head for the AD.

I'm not willing to fight about this one, and I think my PR made the 
point better.

thanks,
Rob