Background
It is almost never appropriate to debate specific moderation decisions in public.
- Moderation decisions often involve sensitive information, discussing these publicly risks exposing private details about individuals or incidents.
- Public debates can erode trust in moderation processes, suggesting that decisions are negotiable rather than based on established policy and process.
- Online debates can quickly escalate, inviting hostility, trolling, or misinformation, especially on contentious topics.
- Fediverse servers are independent. Your moderation decisions should align with your server’s policies and community guidance, not the opinions of third-party servers. It is impossible to reflect or satisfy the moderation approaches of 30,000 ActivityPub services. (But be open to to reviewing your policies as and when appropriate.)
- Public debates may prioritise loud voices over the needs of marginalised or vulnerable members, undermining the community’s safety and inclusivity.
When and How to Respond
If there’s confusion or questions about your server’s rules or moderation approach, provide a general explanation of your policies without discussing specific reports or cases.
When false information about a decision spreads, a concise, factual statement can help prevent unnecessary conflict.
Use non-contentious times to educate about moderation practices, helping users understand the reasoning behind decisions.
Best Practices for Communication
- Direct community members to your official channels for appeals or discussions about specific cases.
- Share general information about moderation processes or decision-making approaches without describing any one report’s specifics.
- Avoid personalising conflicts or engaging emotionally – focus on the facts and the policies.
- Never type a reply or engage while angry or frustrated, just sit back, collect yourself, get input from other moderators if needed.
- Always ensure responses don’t inadvertently harm vulnerable groups or invite additional controversy.
