Staff keeps secrets around here. Except when they don't. What is the rule or rubric or method that determines what will or will not be kept secret?
I think it's up to individual users whether they want to make public whether they're on post moderation and the circumstances around it. It's the reason I don't specify which users' posts I've approved. I'd have thought you would be on board with confidentiality, Rigs.
is the rule or rubric not just "user is (un)comfortable with their DMs/post moderation status/etc being made public, so mods do/don't impart information" because that's what i've always seen in practice, but i haven't been here that long.
I didn't say anything about users on moderation and instead posed a general question. I need to know which secrets to keep if I am to keep secrets.
Never say anything to anyone and you will probly not reveal any secrets. Except by accident. Winks and nudges are noticed.
Since this was one of three places you made the same complaint, I was extrapolating on statements you made in a different public place. Which I think is a reasonable standard for ~secrets~: let the person whom the information concerns be the one to talk about it publicly and/or set terms for its publicity, even if one happens to know about it because of, say, mod status.
i mean im on post moderation to try and stem Happy Fun Screaming At Random Kintsugijin Time (.....which was obvious imo bc of posts showing up farther back in threads) so if thats The Beans consider them spilled
i was asking more for... general categories of info from rigs. like, what kinds of things does he think we should know, not what specific things? like, i figured that i'd turn the question back on him.
You misunderstand. I'm not looking for additional facts. I already know lots of facts. I don't know which of them are secret. I don't know how to determine which of them are Sooper Seekrit.
Okay, so, with absolutely no prior knowledge of whatever areas you've had this discussion in: can I ask if you think that the contents of post reports and the Pear Wiggler/Caring Void forums should remain mod-only knowledge or if you think that those contents should be public? And I'm asking this specifically because I'm trying to figure out the bounds of what you consider 'secret', since paranoia hellbrain is crowing about how I can't ever report any posts again because those reports are going to be collected into a big doxx document for ??? reasons to hurt me, specifically. I know this is irrational and honestly pretty stupid, but I'd like to know whether or not my reports to mods need to be worded as if I were delivering them to a completely public audience.
i know you're not looking for facts yourself. i wasn't asking what you wanted to know yourself, i was asking if there were any kinds of things you wanted us to know. like, are there kinds of details you want to spill, but don't know if you can or not? like, do you want to make reports public? the people on post moderation public? the discussions in the modchat public? howling in the caring void public? what shit do you want to publicize?
It's not that I want to make more information public. I want to know what information is or is not public. I also want to know the grounds on which otherwise private information should be made public.
Heck if I know. So, for instance, many forums have a "Don't Discuss Mod Actions" thing, which they say is "policy". I tend to "I will mostly try not to talk about mod things unless the people involved want to talk about them". So if you ask me whether another user is on post moderation, I'm likely to say "ask them?" But if you want to talk about why you are or aren't on post moderation, or why you were on post moderation in the past, or something? You're totally allowed. To a first approximation: With regards to Moderator Actions, users have some reasonable expectation of privacy, mods don't. Official-capacity interactions are a thing you're allowed to talk about. I am also somewhat inclined to case-by-case basis stuff. I might well have actually disclosed who Wildspyer was if they hadn't decided to talk about it. I might not have. I don't know.
Huh. In general, I regard reports and the like as anonymous, but not necessarily secret. Aggregate data ("multiple users reported X") is something I'm inclined to be willing to share. I'll identify specific concerns that were raised in reports. I won't identify who reported things, in general. I don't even know whether the software easily *allows* me to go look at old reports, although presumably there's a way. Basically, though, I tend to think of things as having a basic expectation of privacy. Think something similar in scope to therapist-confidentiality. But note that there could be exceptions. If you post a detailed plan for killing someone in Caring Void, I might well make that information available to them, if I think it's an actual credible threat. But in general? Inclined to treat things as confidential unless stated otherwise.
