I don’t disagree, but the way this is worded implies that curators can take action without a clear reason on other’s content. I think curators should not take actions against other users without a clear cut reason ever. I do think that in edge cases where a curator is trying to decide whether to hide content they should consult others if the content to be hidden is dealing directly with them
Resolving a user conduct flag against oneself is a clear abuse of power and now physically impossible
This is probably true in edge cases where it is debatable whether a given disagreement involves enough personal attacks to suspend, but there is no reason not to immediately remove more blatant stuff, a curator being harassed should be able to immediately suspend the harasser. I see no need for a curator to wait for a second opinion to suspend for repeated blatant insults, hate speech, or threats. And any comment containing doxxing must be hidden immediately
There is an old adage about a doctor not acting as their own doctor, it being ill advised.
Surely, a curator being harassed should be attended by another curator? Or staff even, there being no pretext of neutrality for the curator under harassment.
Not a curator, but wondering how many there are? (Are there too few for curators to assist other curators?)
There are a fair amount of curators, but there is no guarantee of an immediate response, if someone is engaged in harassment is there any reason not to suspend them? If there is a disagreement between 2 normal users, then yes a third party should be called in, but that is not harassment. Recent harassment cases have involved multiple accounts posting like 10 comments per minute, these comments consisting largely of graphic sexual harassment and racist statements and slurs, along with some threatening language. I don’t see why a curator should not be able to stop this on their own observation
There’s been multiple times where I suspended somebody for harassing me on my own content. It was never a debatable circumstance, however. All instances that I can recall involved direct threats and insults that were very clearly inappropriate, vulgar or even violent. There’s a difference between outright harassment and a disagreement or a tiff.
I think if it is ambiguous, let another curator take charge.
I might’ve answered the wrong post. I was agreeing with you, just adding my thoughts. I think sometimes when I answer specific comments it seems like I’m disagreeing or countering something, rather than building off of the comment. Social cues are hard online, I guess.
To be clear: I have not the foggiest idea of the specific situation that low-key appears under discussion by multiple people within this thread.
I think all users are normal; some just have been granted greater capabilities. With greater capabilities come greater responsibilities.
A quite crucial one is to make every attempt to appear impartial, and this is exceedingly difficult when one is a party to a situation. With that in mind, to me best practice would be to let another curator or staff address any situation in which a curator is involved, either as a target or as a perceived participant.
Note that I said “best”, not only. There is best practice and good practice, and each has its own ramifications.
My follow-up question was because I do not know if the number(s) of active curators allow for this.
My follow-up for feasibility would be, is there a way for curators to see which other curators are active online at any time?
I was in no way taking a position regarding any current or past incident, of which I am (blissfully) unaware.
There are different situations being referenced, OP is talking about a case of a curator hiding an ID on their own observation, I was referencing a recent pattern of harassment
When I said “normal user” I mean anyone who created their account for a purpose other than trolling/harassment, regardless of if they are a curator or not
This is true in many cases, I do not believe it holds true in cases of blatant harassment, there is not much concern that you will appear unfair just because you remove the comments calling you the N-word, and allowing any more of that kind of content to be posted would be bad
No such feature exists, profile pages tell the date of last login, so if I click on someones profile I know if they logged in today or not, but there is no list of currently online curators
The response time of another curator would be long enough to allow a lot more harassment to be posted in that time, and more people to see the offensive comments
Right, and it is worth noting that a curator who handles behavioral issues is somewhat more likely to face such situations than a user who is generally not interacting with problem behavior situations.
I guess maybe a distinction we could draw is, for a behavior where a curator would summarily suspend someone without warning on another person’s content, it is probably ok to also do that on their own content (still making sure to generate a flag about it). In a situation where it is appropriate to warn someone that ‘if you continue doing this you will be suspended’ then it is probably also better to have someone else deal with it, because evidently it is less urgent.
I think we should always make sure to generate a flag if taking curator action on our own content, and let someone else resolve the flag; that way it is at least reviewed by someone else eventually.
I am a big advocate for flagging every time you take curator action. I think there should be a record trail if you’re ever taking action.
That’s maybe less of the original discussion here and more an additional thought, but I would like to clarify that in any situation I responded to harassment directed at myself and used my abilities as a curator, I was always flagging the content. And warning. I try to just treat every situation equally and fairly, regardless of who it is directed at. I tend to really only use my curator abilities for situations regarding user behavior so I usually can reuse the same statements or approaches, and I think that makes it more fair when handling things. Removing bias or personal conflicts. And then letting go of the reins if you can’t remove those things within reason.