Board Thread:Wiki Running/@comment-3225604-20160318110749

There are currently two proposals in my mind on how content moderators are promoted.

The first proposal is that it sets up the inactive policy for "rollbacks", or "content moderators" to be exact.

"Rollbacks" are users who can undo edits in one-click, and not showing this edit on the Recent Activity log. In this proposal, all rollbacks are promoted to content moderators automatically, with the exception of those who are inactive for more than 3 months. If the content moderator fails to be active in the past 3 months, s/he will be demoted back to rollback instantly until a bureaucrat promotes him/her back. For demoted administrators, s/he will receive the rollback rank automatically and no taking away of the rights is needed.

The advantage is that the vandalism control will be more efficient and we can really stop the spread of vandalism. However, the problem is that the large number of content moderators may result in the abuse of powers.

The another proposal is that it is used when it is necessary.

Remember the vandalism warning in the main page? That's how it is going to be finally used. We will choose a backup content moderator squad. When the vandalism warning reaches to red or above, the users in the squad will be automatically promoted to content moderators until the warning is downgraded back to orange or below.

The advantage is that the vandalism control can be efficient in dire situations. Moreover, to stop vandalism, blocking users may be the last resort, so it may be a bit redundant to have so many content moderators at once when the vandalism is not too great at the moment. However, this requires the bureaucrats to be active in doing the call-up and it falls short when facing unexpected vandalism.

So which proposal do you support? The first one or the second one? 