Proposal for a moderation team
Hi folks, I would like the board to consider, at their next meeting, the formation of a team for moderation of XSF discussion venues (at least MUCs). "Why?" Currently the set of people with moderator/admin status in XSF venues varies from channel to channel, and people are granted permissions on a rather ad hoc basis. This raises questions of responsibility and transparency, and moderation varies significantly between channels. The goal of a moderation team would be to: - Formally define a set of people to gain moderation rights across all XSF discussion venues - Spread the responsibility, accountability and decision-making among members - Improve communication between moderators (formation of a dedicated MUC for the team to discuss moderation matters would be sensible) Currently moderators act primarily as individuals, which leaves them open to being singled out for retaliation, rather than feeling like they have the backing of the XSF. This sometimes leads to no moderation action being taken, when it probably should (if we care about the health of our community). If moderation decisions can be agreed with a team, this will help make our moderation actions more consistent and more fair to both the moderator and the moderated. "What would be the difference from the conduct team?" I see the conduct team as a smaller group reserved for tackling only important cases, mostly reactively, in response to reports and appeals as described in the CoC. The moderation team would (ideally) consist of slightly more people. They would be responsible for the day-to-day moderation duties while following the words of the CoC and the direction of the conduct team where provided. Regards, Matthew
Thanks Matthew! * Matthew Wild <mwild1@gmail.com> [2026-03-03 17:56]:
I would like the board to consider, at their next meeting, the formation of a team for moderation of XSF discussion venues (at least MUCs).
this is a great proposal, and (looking in retrospect) was overdue for a long time.
- Spread the responsibility, accountability and decision-making among members
This is also something that has prevented me from volunteering with room moderation in the past, so if Board decides to create such a team, I'd be ready to volunteer. Georg
Hi, I'm not one to TOFU normally, but I have nothing to add except a +1. On Dienstag, 3. März 2026 17:56:15 Mitteleuropäische Normalzeit Matthew Wild wrote:
Hi folks,
I would like the board to consider, at their next meeting, the formation of a team for moderation of XSF discussion venues (at least MUCs).
"Why?"
Currently the set of people with moderator/admin status in XSF venues varies from channel to channel, and people are granted permissions on a rather ad hoc basis. This raises questions of responsibility and transparency, and moderation varies significantly between channels.
The goal of a moderation team would be to:
- Formally define a set of people to gain moderation rights across all XSF discussion venues - Spread the responsibility, accountability and decision-making among members - Improve communication between moderators (formation of a dedicated MUC for the team to discuss moderation matters would be sensible)
Currently moderators act primarily as individuals, which leaves them open to being singled out for retaliation, rather than feeling like they have the backing of the XSF. This sometimes leads to no moderation action being taken, when it probably should (if we care about the health of our community). If moderation decisions can be agreed with a team, this will help make our moderation actions more consistent and more fair to both the moderator and the moderated.
"What would be the difference from the conduct team?"
I see the conduct team as a smaller group reserved for tackling only important cases, mostly reactively, in response to reports and appeals as described in the CoC. The moderation team would (ideally) consist of slightly more people. They would be responsible for the day-to-day moderation duties while following the words of the CoC and the direction of the conduct team where provided.
kind regards, Jonas
Hi everyone, This sounds like a good idea. Pragmatically: Would this be set up as a Work Team under our bylaws? How would members be selected? Do we have enough people interested in joining? Maybe preemptively, we can think of a concept charter for such a team? Since the team would be using the Code of Conduct as a guide, it could also help address some of the questions about its applicability that came up many moons ago but never fully got resolved. This could be a good way to get new feedback and see if improvement of the CoC in practice is desirable. Kind regards, Guus On Tue, Mar 3, 2026 at 5:56 PM Matthew Wild <mwild1@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi folks,
I would like the board to consider, at their next meeting, the formation of a team for moderation of XSF discussion venues (at least MUCs).
"Why?"
Currently the set of people with moderator/admin status in XSF venues varies from channel to channel, and people are granted permissions on a rather ad hoc basis. This raises questions of responsibility and transparency, and moderation varies significantly between channels.
The goal of a moderation team would be to:
- Formally define a set of people to gain moderation rights across all XSF discussion venues - Spread the responsibility, accountability and decision-making among members - Improve communication between moderators (formation of a dedicated MUC for the team to discuss moderation matters would be sensible)
Currently moderators act primarily as individuals, which leaves them open to being singled out for retaliation, rather than feeling like they have the backing of the XSF. This sometimes leads to no moderation action being taken, when it probably should (if we care about the health of our community). If moderation decisions can be agreed with a team, this will help make our moderation actions more consistent and more fair to both the moderator and the moderated.
"What would be the difference from the conduct team?"
I see the conduct team as a smaller group reserved for tackling only important cases, mostly reactively, in response to reports and appeals as described in the CoC. The moderation team would (ideally) consist of slightly more people. They would be responsible for the day-to-day moderation duties while following the words of the CoC and the direction of the conduct team where provided.
Regards, Matthew
On Tue, 3 Mar 2026 at 18:44, Guus der Kinderen <guus.der.kinderen@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi everyone,
This sounds like a good idea. Pragmatically: Would this be set up as a Work Team under our bylaws? How would members be selected? Do we have enough people interested in joining? Maybe preemptively, we can think of a concept charter for such a team?
I think a work team makes sense, to ensure we have some formal structure and oversight for a team that will be representing the XSF via its actions. Here is a proposed charter (Guus and I worked on this together): # XSF Moderation Team Charter ## 1. Purpose The Moderation Team is established as a formal XSF Work Team to ensure consistent, fair, and transparent moderation across XSF discussion venues. The Team supports community health, enforces the XSF Code of Conduct, and ensures moderation actions are coordinated and accountable. ## 2. Scope of Responsibilities The Moderation Team shall be responsible for the moderation of XSF-managed dicussion venues, including chat channels and mailing lists. The team shall work to ensure that the XSF's Code of Conduct (XEP-0458) is followed by participants, and shall also respect and enforce decisions made by the Conduct Team. ## 3. Membership Membership in the Moderation Team is by Board appointment. ## 4. Decision-Making 1. **Shared responsibility:** Moderation actions should be coordinated among multiple team members when possible. 2. **Consensus preferred:** Decisions should aim for consensus; in urgent cases, moderators may act individually. 3. **Escalation:** Issues beyond day-to-day moderation, including serious conduct concerns, are escalated to the Conduct Team. ## 5. Communication 1. The Team shall maintain an internal, secure communication channel for coordination and record keeping. 2. Significant moderation decisions may be reported to the Board or Conduct Team as appropriate.
On Wed, 4 Mar 2026 at 11:20, Matthew Wild <mwild1@gmail.com> wrote:
2. Significant moderation decisions may be reported to the Board or Conduct Team as appropriate.
When I wrote the CoC, I assumed that a moderation team would be the same thing as a conduct team - or rather, the other way around, with the conduct team being visible and proactively moderating as needed. I also assumed Board would want to get a conduct team in place really quickly. Should be Moderation team just be the Conduct team? If not, why not? I'm not wed to any particular structure - whatever works - but I feel strongly this should be documented into the CoC once it's settled. Dave.
On 4 Mar 2026, at 17:34, Dave Cridland <dave@cridland.net> wrote:
On Wed, 4 Mar 2026 at 11:20, Matthew Wild <mwild1@gmail.com <mailto:mwild1@gmail.com>> wrote:
2. Significant moderation decisions may be reported to the Board or Conduct Team as appropriate.
When I wrote the CoC, I assumed that a moderation team would be the same thing as a conduct team - or rather, the other way around, with the conduct team being visible and proactively moderating as needed. I also assumed Board would want to get a conduct team in place really quickly.
Should be Moderation team just be the Conduct team? If not, why not?
I could easily imagine someone being will to act in the relatively tight confines of ‘bad stuff happening in MUCs, let’s head it off’ while not wanting to be responsible for the big ticket items and appeals that the conduct team would be responsible for. I can also imagine that if most stuff is being handled by a moderation team that the need for a Conduct Team distinct from Board is reduced. So I quite like the split, although if there was an active conduct team serving both purposes, that seems fine too. /K
I'm not wed to any particular structure - whatever works - but I feel strongly this should be documented into the CoC once it's settled.
Dave.
On Wed, 4 Mar 2026 at 17:42, Kevin Smith via Members <members@xmpp.org> wrote:
On 4 Mar 2026, at 17:34, Dave Cridland <dave@cridland.net> wrote:
On Wed, 4 Mar 2026 at 11:20, Matthew Wild <mwild1@gmail.com> wrote:
2. Significant moderation decisions may be reported to the Board or Conduct Team as appropriate.
When I wrote the CoC, I assumed that a moderation team would be the same thing as a conduct team - or rather, the other way around, with the conduct team being visible and proactively moderating as needed. I also assumed Board would want to get a conduct team in place really quickly.
Should be Moderation team just be the Conduct team? If not, why not?
I could easily imagine someone being will to act in the relatively tight confines of ‘bad stuff happening in MUCs, let’s head it off’ while not wanting to be responsible for the big ticket items and appeals that the conduct team would be responsible for. I can also imagine that if most stuff is being handled by a moderation team that the need for a Conduct Team distinct from Board is reduced. So I quite like the split, although if there was an active conduct team serving both purposes, that seems fine too.
Agreed. I'm not strictly opposed to the two teams being the same team, but I think there is value in having them separate, although they will obviously work very closely with each other at times. I think it would be easier to scale the moderation team, because it is less of a commitment. And we certainly need more people helping with enforcement than we have now. Formally establishing a non-Board Conduct Team and assigning them sole responsibility for moderation would be a valid alternative route. But I worry it would hinder efforts at improving moderation if we can't recruit enough people. Plus I actually kind of like the Board == Conduct Team situation, as Board is directly elected by the members and therefore automatically rotating (slowly, but our existing work teams rotate far more slowly). Regards, Matthew
El Tue, 3 Mar 2026 16:56:15 +0000 Matthew Wild <mwild1@gmail.com> escribió:
Hi folks,
I would like the board to consider, at their next meeting, the formation of a team for moderation of XSF discussion venues (at least MUCs).
"Why?"
Currently the set of people with moderator/admin status in XSF venues varies from channel to channel, and people are granted permissions on a rather ad hoc basis. This raises questions of responsibility and transparency, and moderation varies significantly between channels.
The goal of a moderation team would be to:
- Formally define a set of people to gain moderation rights across all XSF discussion venues - Spread the responsibility, accountability and decision-making among members - Improve communication between moderators (formation of a dedicated MUC for the team to discuss moderation matters would be sensible)
Currently moderators act primarily as individuals, which leaves them open to being singled out for retaliation, rather than feeling like they have the backing of the XSF. This sometimes leads to no moderation action being taken, when it probably should (if we care about the health of our community). If moderation decisions can be agreed with a team, this will help make our moderation actions more consistent and more fair to both the moderator and the moderated.
"What would be the difference from the conduct team?"
I see the conduct team as a smaller group reserved for tackling only important cases, mostly reactively, in response to reports and appeals as described in the CoC. The moderation team would (ideally) consist of slightly more people. They would be responsible for the day-to-day moderation duties while following the words of the CoC and the direction of the conduct team where provided.
+1 in complete agreement Shall Board accept your proposal for consideration, maybe Board could put forward a prior provisional call for volunteers in case the initiative gets final approval?
Regards, Matthew
On 3/3/26 9:56 AM, Matthew Wild wrote:
Hi folks,
I would like the board to consider, at their next meeting, the formation of a team for moderation of XSF discussion venues
Good idea.
(at least MUCs).
I think it would be good to have consistent moderation across both chatrooms and email lists. As to the latter, I might be the only person who pays (occasional) attention to them or who has access to list moderation. This seems bad for numerous reasons, not least being that my attention is mostly elsewhere these days. Speaking of which (this is kind of an iteam topic), we need to migrate the lists from the bunker to mailman3.com but I botched the job last time and haven't followed through on trying again. Once we migrate the lists (perhaps someone else ought to do this??), we can set up proper moderation. Alternatively, we could ditch the lists and just use chatrooms... Peter
On March 3, 2026 9:01:50 PM EST, Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im> wrote:
On 3/3/26 9:56 AM, Matthew Wild wrote:
Hi folks,
I would like the board to consider, at their next meeting, the formation of a team for moderation of XSF discussion venues
Also +1 on this.
Alternatively, we could ditch the lists and just use chatrooms...
+1000 on this. So annoying to need email when we have chatrooms.
participants (11)
-
Dave Cridland -
Georg Lukas -
Gonzalo Raul Nemmi -
Guus der Kinderen -
Jonas Schäfer -
Kevin Smith -
Kim Alvefur -
Matthew Wild -
Peter Saint-Andre -
Stephen Paul Weber -
Travis Burtrum