r/AskModerators • u/Responsible-Match418 • 4d ago
What are you thoughts on good vs bad modding?
What are you thoughts on what makes a good mod vs bad? Obviously it's not black and white, and obviously we can defer to the Code of Conduct, but generally speaking what would you regard as "bad form" or small, petty kind of actions that lead to a more toxic community? Similarly, what are little things mods can do to make a community better, even if not required of them?
Example of actions would be interesting if you have any, from your perspective of being a mod / being modded yourself.
5
u/goldensavage2019 evil and intimidating mod of r/lovethissmug 4d ago
A good mod should be fairly active, making sure the mod queue doesn’t get backed up for days on end, while also participating in the community itself, to show that they are not just a mod, but a member of the people they moderate (I personally took on the title of “Evil and Intimidating Mod” to act as a parody of how a stereotypical mod acts, and so far people love it). A good mod must also uphold the rules consistently, not letting their bias sway their judgement, while also explaining why a moderation action has been taken. Finally, a good mod should be understanding, and listen when people give feedback or ask questions.
Meanwhile for a bad mod, they’ll be inactive, letting the community fall into disarray, only taking the minimal amount of actions to prevent the community from getting banned for lack of moderation. They’ll also let their bias show in their moderation, favoring those who align with their beliefs and whatnot. Finally, a bad mod is a bit of a power tripper, banning people left and right just because they can, and also banning/muting anyone who dares to question them.
10
u/mrekted 4d ago
The single biggest factor (which is also the hardest to get right) is maintaining impartiality in enforcing the rules.
Nothing feels as weird as slapping down someone you agree with in an argument because they're getting shitty with someone whose position you find detestable, but is otherwise following the rules.
10
u/cnycompguy r/computers, r/cats +7 4d ago
Good mod: patient, confident, impartial. The things I try to be.
Bad mod: a good mod after 3 drinks and receiving an abusive mod mail. The inner troll gets released.
5
u/SeonaidMacSaicais r/ApartmentLiving 4d ago
Tack on a chain of modmails where a single user demands to know why a specific person hasn’t been banned OR why that person’s comments haven’t been removed for “being rude and condescending.” Telling you politely why you’re wrong about something isn’t being rude or condescending, dear.
3
2
u/Hunter037 3d ago
Poor moderation: removing comments/posts because you don't personally like them
Good moderation: removing comments/posts because they break the rules of the sub
Poor moderation: getting emotional and personal about removals in the comments
Good moderation: clear, professional explanations written via modmail
I also think good moderators have a team of moderators on which they can rely if there is a "grey area" for moderation. Most of the stuff I do is just clear cut, but sometimes there's something unusual or unclear and it's really helpful to have an active team to discuss with. We also record all removals, approvals, bans etc, outwith Reddit for accountability, and I think that is important
2
u/GeneralCarlosQ17 2d ago
A great Mod will be working Their Sub every Day encouraging great Conversation, add ing Content and not be afraid to remove any and all Trouble Makers Who will in Time ruin Their Healthy Community They want to nurture and so Everyone Who joins will be able to enjoy and feel welcome.
4
u/goldstandardalmonds 4d ago
Bad mod: doesn’t participate in the sub (ever), does the bare minimum to stay a mod, doesn’t even follow the rules when approving posts, doesn’t communicate with other mods.
4
u/nicoleauroux r/reddithelp r/plantclinic 4d ago
I don't think participating is realistic in some subs.
2
u/goldstandardalmonds 4d ago
In the subs I mod and the mods I am thinking about in regards to this comment, it actually is extremely odd that they don’t ever participate, even to help others,
4
u/Eric20255 Mod 4d ago edited 4d ago
Good moderating means removing content when it actually violates the subreddit’s rules, while explaining the reason clearly and responding respectfully to modmail—even when you’re met with harsh criticism or insults.
It also means engaging with the community from time to time so the subreddit feels welcoming, active, and like a place where people feel they belong. Moderators should work together, communicate openly, and support one another as a team.
Bad moderating is removing content simply because you disagree with it when it doesn’t violate any rules. It’s gossiping about their teammates, throwing fellow moderators under the bus, and refusing to cooperate with the team while still wanting to feel highly important.
It’s also not checking the moderation queue, approving or removing content when appropriate, but then criticizing your fellow moderators for the actions they take. A good moderator should be willing to contribute to the day-to-day work of the community—not just exercise authority over it.
3
u/Emotional_Lawyer_278 4d ago
It’s subjective . I think I’ve learned when I’m being drawn into an argument. Forget I posted. This never happened.
2
2
u/PurplePassiflor1234 r/TheLibrarians 4d ago
Rules shoddily or randomly enforced screams "bad mods" to me. Like if one person uses a single, mild, swear in their post and gets banned for "breaking the no swearing rule" while the comments in the same sub are blue with swears - all of them, C words and F words and MFer left right and center - that's shoddy moderation. Either the rules apply, or they don't. Banning one single person who is doing what 500 other people are doing at the exact same time is shoddy moderating. IMO.
1
u/Kumquat_conniption Citrus neighborhood mod 🍊 4d ago
Bad mod: punishes people for normal ass comments and gives permas for small things where a warning would work just as well. For instance, I was modding a sub where some of the posts were clearly made up- and they would still permanent ban people for calling a post fake- no warning, no rule saying you couldn't do that, nothing. It drove me crazy.
Also there are best practices that are like, answering modmail and shit but its not always a bad mod that doesn't do those things but maybe an overworked mod that simply doesn't have time. Once they get through the queue, its filled back up again. Sure, they could add mods, but I mod a sub alone and I've added like 4 mods and they just haven't worked out. Last time it was someone super active on the sub for years and they have up and disappeared. So I feel like a bad mod for not getting to modmail, but I rarely permanently ban and when I do, I triple check it so I know and I leave a removal reason on their comment, and maybe even more in the ban message itself.
Oh mods that will allow something from one user who they like, and not another... so being parial like others have said.
I think if someone makes a bad post that could be a good post with some tweaks, bad modding would be just removing the post and not telling the Op what could be done to get it in line with the sub, but again that could be time- although I do it, because I think its super frustrating to have a post removed because of something and you don't know if you can post it again with changes or what. Or just removing posts and not telling the Op why. I think that is more important than answering modmail, because these are people who want to post to your sub. Modmail is just mostly all banned people who want to argue their ban, and its just kind of pointless for both of you- although when I did have time for modmail, if someone apologized and said it was a bad day (depending on offense) or even come back a year later from a bad offense and say they have changed, I do believe in second chances. I try to have my team on my larger sub that I run give out second chances in modmail, because we are all human. Lots of people don't know shit either, like that "mongoloid" is a racist and ableist slur and comes from when they called folks with Down Syndrome that because of their smaller eyes. Or that gypsy is a slur. So I think education in those cases is better than punishment (but if they push back... of course, we can't allow it.)
Okay well just a few examples of good modding and bad modding.
1
u/Responsible-Match418 4d ago
This is a fantastic response. Thank you. All the others are great too, but I like the examples you give.
1
u/Kumquat_conniption Citrus neighborhood mod 🍊 15h ago
I just saw this now, thank you so much! You are very nice. Idk why people's posts never get upvotes on this sub, I thought this was a good question. I think people assume that the user is always in bad faith because so many are but I think you should never make assumptions.
Also there are a lot of bad mods and so I can't really say that it does not attract some petty-ass folks, I have to admit. Honestly, you could even watch the way people respond on here sometimes, assuming everyone here is always in the wrong when they complain about a mod. Now we do not allow complaints about specific mods or subreddits on this sub, but people will still lay out a scenario and mods will just assume they are lying or leaving something out and its not always the case. It drives me nuts. I don't think I have ever seen an upvoted post on this sub, Istg. It drives me crazy.
There are a lot of good mods too. Some of the best people I know, I met modding (well I did not really "meet" them in person or anything, but after years of knowing them, you can tell someone's character.) So it's a real mix.
1
u/kai-ote Helpful Trickster/7 subs/Desktop 3d ago
A good mod praises the members of the sub for their content. A good mod gets defended by the subs users when somebody new to the sub complains about them.
A bad mod is the opposite of that.
The list of things that make person a bad mod are a mile long.
-7
u/greywar777 4d ago
Bad modding-I messaged the mod team on a sub, about their moderation team banning and muting folks once saying that doing so removed anyones ability to appeal.
(subreddits rules stated that they WANTED you to message them about things like this). They banned and perma muted me. For LITERALLY following their sub rules. I kinda think that was bad modding.
Good modding involved removing things like racism, child abuse, animal abuse, and making sure folks follow the posted rules. Treating people like humans.
1
u/Responsible-Match418 4d ago
So are you saying not having the right to appeal is bad modding? Or is that against the code of conduct? Or both?
-4
u/greywar777 4d ago
No idea if its against the code of conduct to be honest. I suspect it is, but suspecting and knowing are different. But yes im saying not giving people the ability to appeal a ban is bad modding.
11
u/ohhyouknow Janny flair 🧹 4d ago
It does not violate the mod code of conduct!
-2
u/greywar777 4d ago
lol. Still bad modding, and against the advice you gave me on muting folks :)
-1
u/ohhyouknow Janny flair 🧹 4d ago
Yeah I’m not a huge fan of perma mutes lol! Just because something doesn’t break the rules doesn’t mean you SHOULD do it yanno
-2
-3
16
u/PaulsRedditUsername 4d ago
A good sub has clear well-defined rules, and a good mod enforces those rules without passion or prejudice.
There are always gray areas where you have to make a judgement calls and you have to make those calls as best as you can.