• So, some of you may be aware that there are currently 3 "moderator" ranks. These are Content Moderator, Thread Moderator, and our own custom Moderator rank. Content mod and Thread mod are fairly recent additions by Wikia that are pretty similar to our own existing rank with some slight differences. You can view the full specifics of each rank by looking at Special:ListGroupRights but basically:

    Content Moderator:

    • Delete pages
    • Protect pages
    • Undelete pages
    • Rollback
    • Move files

    Thread Moderator:

    • Delete/Edit/Move comments
    • Chatmod
    • Forum admin

    Moderator:

    • Block users
    • Delete pages
    • Move files
    • Rollback
    • Delete/Edit/Move comments
    • Blog edit/move
    • Roundabout chat moderation by being able to add/remove banned from chat to user permissions

    My proposed change is to go back to just using our own moderator rank but to add to its permissions chatmod, forum admin, and page protection. The only iffy right is undelete and I think that one should stick with admins+ due to the sheer amount of destruction that it combined with other commands can cause (ask User:TehAnonymous why no comments from before July 2011 exist on Vayne's page).

    So, uh, leave your opinions on the matter below and whether or not you support my proposal.

      Loading editor
    • Consolidating all mod ranks into a single one would likely make things a lot more consistent and less confusing, since the only real reason to have a separate moderator rank would be for chat (and even then, it's not that big a difference). However, this also means giving all mods block rights, which requires a very serious assessment of all the current mods who currently don't have access to that. As a content moderator myself, I feel the main decision should come from those who are out of the loop, i.e. admins, 'crats and regular users.

        Loading editor
    • I'm a recent mod, so I do not know what this change will intail. If you could explain what these "changes" will do upon the ranks, that would be much helpful.

        Loading editor
    • GreenMoriyama wrote: I'm a recent mod, so I do not know what this change will intail. If you could explain what these "changes" will do upon the ranks, that would be much helpful.

      You're actually the reason I made this. When Teh promoted you to moderator you had 5 total ranks: Chat mod, Thread mod, Content mod, Moderator, and Rollback, just seemed a little silly to me to have so many different ranks all for the same thing (moderation of the wiki). The new ranks might work on wikis that previously didn't already have a moderator rank but we've had this rank since I started and it has been an integral part of our command chain.

      In regards to actual changes that would happen, you'd lost some things that don't really see much use (moving message wall posts, editing others wall posts, marking other users' edits as patrolled) and potentially undelete (not that it sees much use as is since you can always recreate a page, only reason to undelete something is to keep revision history and if you want that you can contact an admin).

      Willbachbakai wrote: However, this also means giving all mods block rights, which requires a very serious assessment of all the current mods who currently don't have access to that.

      It's you and User:Tyranitar12, ever other content mod is also a moderator.

        Loading editor
    • NeonSpotlight wrote:

      You're actually the reason I made this. When Teh promoted you to moderator you had 5 total ranks: Chat mod, Thread mod, Content mod, Moderator, and Rollback, just seemed a little silly to me to have so many different ranks all for the same thing (moderation of the wiki). The new ranks might work on wikis that previously didn't already have a moderator rank but we've had this rank since I started and it has been an integral part of our command chain.

      In regards to actual changes that would happen, you'd lost some things that don't really see much use (moving message wall posts, editing others wall posts, marking other users' edits as patrolled) and potentially undelete (not that it sees much use as is since you can always recreate a page, only reason to undelete something is to keep revision history and if you want that you can contact an admin).


      Oh, so I was the reason? Not that I feel special, but it shows that the community leads have their head on the ball. Nice to know.

      Otherwise, I don't mind losing some of the privileges, as those were not the ones I intended on getting when becoming a mod. You do say they would go unused anyways, so no complaints from me about this change. As Will says though, it may be a good idea for non-mods to be the ones discussing this.

        Loading editor
    • I found it confusing what ranks do what as I looked into it.

        Loading editor
    • LoL Wiki has moderator for years, but most wikias on Fandom didn't have an intermediate user level between editor and administrator. I'm pretty sure moderator does everything that content_moderator and thread_moderator can do, but have been assigning people all rights for completeness.

      Edit note: The above paragraph is a little history for everyone, but I'm indirectly responding to Willbachbakal- we can't just disable the new moderator functions, but ignoring them does the same thing.

      I can get behind just using the moderator userlevel and ignoring the existence of content/thread moderator.

        Loading editor
    • Wow. So Mods can now block users? That's the best update for mods.

        Loading editor
    • Good in that we do not need admins themselves to do all the banning, but also risk moderators abusing their powers if they try to vest in themselves the act to ban of their free will...

      Of course, from what I have seen, when selecting admins & moderators, it was important for many to know if someone was trustworthy and not irresponsible of their judgement.

        Loading editor
    • Phantomofdark wrote: Wow. So Mods can now block users? That's the best update for mods.

      On this wiki, no; they've always been able to do that.

        Loading editor
    • TehAnonymous wrote:

      Phantomofdark wrote: Wow. So Mods can now block users? That's the best update for mods.

      On this wiki, no; they've always been able to do that.

      Really? I didn't noticed this. I assumed mod weren't able to ban users

        Loading editor
    • Phantomofdark wrote: Really? I didn't noticed this. I assumed mod weren't able to ban users

      Content/thread moderators cannot, but the wiki's all-purpose Moderator rank can. The move would basically entail giving every mod the latter title, rather than creating a new rank from scratch.

      TehAnonymous wrote: we can't just disable the new moderator functions, but ignoring them does the same thing.

      I understand that, but I don't think block rights are really something that can be ignored: users who currently hold the content/thread moderator ranks were perhaps not voted in with the expectation that they'd have that kind of power, and I think we've all seen at least one mod abuse it before -- it's not pretty. I trust that Tyranitar12 and I won't issue unwarranted bans, but I stress that this is a move everyone aware of this discussion needs to be on board with first.

        Loading editor
    • Was there a discussion on using the new moderator ranks that I missed (serious question, I was gone for the better part of a year). If anything I'd assume that the people who currently hold those ranks and those that voted them in would've thought they wouldn't have the additional rights (protect, forum admin, undelete) not the other way around, since moderators have had the block right since 2010 and the request for mod is the same request that we've always used.

      Regardless of what way we go we'll still be giving out the moderator rank to those who apply to become a moderator, unless there's a specific discussion otherwise. The purpose of this discussion/proposal was adding the new rights (protect, forum admin mostly) to our existing rank to clear up redundancies and confusion.

      As an aside: Tyranitar should have block rights, straight up, as he applied for the moderator position, which includes block rights, why he doesn't I don't know as I wasn't here for his nomination and unless Teh or someone else says otherwise I will be giving him the rights that he was nominated for. You, Will, shouldn't even be a mod, you applied for rollback (which is silly in the first place, rollback stopped needing a rights request back when we took away colored usernames, and someone should have told you that and just given you the rights instead of making you jump through hoops), if these changes went through you wouldn't gain the ability to block people, you'd still stay where you are as content mod unless another rights request is brought up.

        Loading editor
    • NeonSpotlight wrote: if these changes went through you wouldn't gain the ability to block people, you'd still stay where you are as content mod unless another rights request is brought up.

      In that case, there is no issue, thank you for clarifying. I'll likely apply for mod rights sometime in the future, but for now it's good to know this move won't grant undue privileges.

        Loading editor
    • When I think about it, there are two basic things I'd like to 1) There should be only two kinds of moderations: content and community 2) Every moderator who is granted special rights should be granted the inverse rights, too.

      That means: Content moderators should be granted rights for content moderation, where "content" means "permanent stuff that visitors can see", i. e. forum posts, comments, pages, etc. Content moderators should be granted all rights related to actions such as delete, move, protect, edit protected, rollback, upload etc.

      Community moderators should be granted rights for user moderation, related to actions such as warn, kick, ban, promote/grant, rename.

      Knowing that mistakes can happen, I think it is wise to always grant the inverted right. For example, a content moderator that can delete or protect a page should also be allowed to restore or unprotect a page. If you trust a person enough to allow him to delete content, you basically assume he's able to distinguish between "good" and "bad" content. No reason to not allow him to restore unrightfully deleted good content, then.

      The only exception to this "inversal" rule can be the revoking of rights, although this is not necessary if you trust your moderators.

        Loading editor
    • This gives mods almost all of the sysop-level rights. Why not just remove the mods altogether, and just give people +sysop? Either way I'd support consolidating all the mod rights into the local moderator group that we've used for years.

        Loading editor
    • Ajraddatz wrote: This gives mods almost all of the sysop-level rights. Why not just remove the mods altogether, and just give people +sysop? Either way I'd support consolidating all the mod rights into the local moderator group that we've used for years.

      Sysop still has some pretty influential tools that mods wouldn't have, like mediawiki editing, theme designer, wiki features, nuke, abuse filter, and the ability to give out rollback and chat mod. Whether or not our current crop of mods should have access to these tools is a discussion for a later date, although I do think it could help promote more growth for the wiki if more people had access to mediawiki, would just require more oversight from other admins and us 'crats.

        Loading editor
    • Ah yes, that's fair enough. I forgot that admins can assign all these permissions now. Really, what's the point of 'crats anymore o_O

        Loading editor
    • Ajraddatz wrote: Ah yes, that's fair enough. I forgot that admins can assign all these permissions now. Really, what's the point of 'crats anymore o_O

      To encourage certain individuals into coming back and contributing to the project in an active manner through editing and moderation.

        Loading editor
    • Heh, that doesn't sound like me. Though to be totally honest I thought I handed in the 'crat bit months ago. Done now.

      Still though, it feels like there is duplication here. Wikis don't really need more than regular user --> maybe rollback --> sysop --> bureaucrat, especially small ones. I'd support any change like that, though the proposed one here at least consolidates most of the non-sysop rights into one group.

        Loading editor
    • an anonymous contributor
        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message