Asking specifically because of the situation over at !worldnews. I see that recently, there has been an open call for moderators - https://lemmy.ml/post/5277453 - with the following requirements:

“You have to be on the lemmy.ml instance” and “Should have a history of activity here”

Are these the only requirements really? Because I think that moderators have quite some extraordinary power within a community, to the point that they can just censor whatever is unpleasant to their personal opinion, as if it were violating the community’s rules when in fact it’s not.

(For instance, see the modlog over at !worldnews https://lemmy.ml/modlog/14788 - where everyone expressing doubts about the justification to call “genocide” the Israeli reaction to the Hamas terror attacks is banned. I just think that moderators should show some sense of the actual power they possess and be careful to exhibit it. As in the case above, despite the atrocities of war, there’s good reason not to speak of genocide - and even if that’s not the moderators’ opinion, expressing doubt about the justification to call it so does not violate the community’s rules.)

  • Izzy
    5•1 year ago

    There is probably no good answer or at least no definitive answer as of course instance admins can do whatever they want and clearly do. They usually have no founding principles or strict guidelines in which they adhere.

    In my opinion I’d prefer people to enact moderation as little as possible. There should be a set of rules outlined for the community and the only time a moderator should take some moderation action is if one of those rules is broken. Of course there are always going to be things that are in grey areas, but I believe it makes more sense to have as few false positive actions taken as possible. If this results in some undesirable comments or posts to remain active then so be it. That is what the point system is for after all.

    If the rules are determined to be inadequate then they should be updated and everyone should be informed so that everyone can make personal decision about whether to continue participation or not.