I am cautiously optimistic and pleased that you have now developed and implemented an official news post moderation policy. We have needed one for a long time and I'm glad you have codified it.
However, this point concerns me: Misinformation (particularly about the OTW) with the potential to harm or mislead others
I need assurances from AO3/OTW that the org will not use "misinformation" as an excuse to shut down valid criticism and discussion about its procedures and policies. Also I need assurances that AO3/OTW will not use "misinformation" as a means to silence volunteers who point out real issues behind the scenes of AO3/OTW's operations. AO3/OTW unfortunately has developed a reputation for being less than transparent in the past. Misinformation arises because people and organizations are not upfront and transparent about what's going on. If misinformation does arise, I hope and expect that AO3/OTW will take steps to address it immediately in an open, fair, and forthright manner.
We have no intention of shutting down valid criticism and discussion about procedures and policies (so long as those discussions stay civil and on-topic — if things get heated and people start insulting others, we will take action on the thread).
We'd always prefer to provide correct information when commenters make statements about the OTW or AO3 that are incorrect. Part of the role of the news post moderation team will be in providing responses to users for general questions and concerns. Concerns that are specific to a particular committee (for example, a question about Legal's opinion on a proposed new bill) will still be addressed by that specific committee, but our team will be giving them a heads up when there's something that needs a reply.
However, it's not always possible for the OTW to provide public corrections about events. AO3 has strict confidentiality policies regarding private user information. For example, if a user is upset about a ruling by the Policy & Abuse committee, and they post incorrect information about the matter in a public comment, then PAC can't comment on it and neither can we. Doing so would violate our confidentiality policies. Similarly, the OTW will not make public comments about a disciplinary matter involving specific volunteers. In such cases, we believe the individuals' right to privacy overrides the right of the public to receive information about the matter, and we may remove such comments.
We hope this addresses your concerns, and thanks for your support!
However, it's not always possible for the OTW to provide public corrections about events. AO3 has strict confidentiality policies regarding private user information. For example, if a user is upset about a ruling by the Policy & Abuse committee, and they post incorrect information about the matter in a public comment, then PAC can't comment on it and neither can we. Doing so would violate our confidentiality policies. Similarly, the OTW will not make public comments about a disciplinary matter involving specific volunteers. In such cases, we believe the individuals' right to privacy overrides the right of the public to receive information about the matter, and we may remove such comments.
I think this is the part I am annoyed about the most. I just don't see why people can't comment on things just because the OTW can't respond publicly.
People are of course still able to comment on the situation elsewhere, such as on Tumblr or other social media sites. However, when such comments are made directly on the OTW website, and the OTW does not address them (while perhaps at the same time responding to comments that are about public matters), this gives the impression that the information in the comment is correct or endorsed. We don’t want to appear to endorse incorrect information, so in such cases we will remove it.
Except you absolutely can address those comments by stating that it breaks your confidentiality policy to address the things being posted about. Which would remove that issue or implying the information is correct or endorsed. The policy that you are stating comes across as trying to sweep problems under the rug/silence people/ignore problems.
In some cases it may be possible to do that, in which case we would not need to remove the comment. However, in other cases leaving the comment up and not specifically refuting it may result in harm to other parties. For example, if there is information in a comment that could lead to commenters harassing uninvolved individuals (who may otherwise be perceived as involved) on other sites outside of our control, then we will hide the comment.
This point in our moderation policy is intended to prevent the harassment of specific individuals, including users and current and former volunteers. If people would like to generally criticize OTW policies, then they are allowed to do so in on-topic posts.
AO3 has strict confidentiality policies regarding private user information. For example, if a user is upset about a ruling by the Policy & Abuse committee, and they post incorrect information about the matter in a public comment, then PAC can't comment on it and neither can we.
What will happen when a user posts accurate information about the matter in a public comment? Would AO3/OTW remove accurate comments too? People who posted about issues in public news posts in the past, did so to draw necessary public attention to frankly serious operational problems. They went public, not because they wanted to, but because a) trying to solve those issues behind the scenes *wasn't working*, and b) volunteers and others were being actively harmed in the process. Bullying and harassment are issues that should never be swept under the rug. Past actions by AO3/OTW have created a trust issue for some users; transparency is always the best option.
If there's not misinformation, then it wouldn't be subject to removal due to this rule. Unless it was breaking one of the other rules, it would stay visible.
And who, exactly, controls what is or isnt misinformation? What group of volunteers will handle this? What steps will be taken to ensure censorship will not be a problem?
Determinations of what constitutes harmful misinformation that violates our guidelines, as with any determination of that a comment violate our guidelines, will be made by the News Post Moderation team.
As we explained in our reply to azarias further down, our processes are set up to maximize transparency and decisions about what has been actioned can be seen by a variety of people.
Additionally, if you are unhappy with a previous moderation action, you can contact Communications who will forward the email to News Post moderators for investigation. Moderators uninvolved with the original moderation action will review the comment(s), take any appropriate actions and then reply to you with their decision.
Comment on OTW News Post Moderation Policy
Topaz_Eyes Sun 26 May 2024 05:13PM UTC
Comment Actions
OTW_News_Post_Moderation (Official) Sun 26 May 2024 06:18PM UTC
Comment Actions
Eli0t Sun 26 May 2024 06:36PM UTC
Comment Actions
OTW_News_Post_Moderation (Official) Sun 26 May 2024 07:11PM UTC
Comment Actions
Eli0t Sun 26 May 2024 07:17PM UTC
Comment Actions
DistantManiacalLaughter Thu 30 May 2024 03:30AM UTC
Comment Actions
OTW_News_Post_Moderation (Official) Thu 30 May 2024 03:52AM UTC
Comment Actions
(13 more comments in this thread)
Topaz_Eyes Sun 26 May 2024 08:28PM UTC
Comment Actions
OTW_News_Post_Moderation (Official) Sun 26 May 2024 08:47PM UTC
Comment Actions
gravityboysshieldgang Mon 27 May 2024 06:16AM UTC
Comment Actions
OTW_News_Post_Moderation (Official) Mon 27 May 2024 06:00PM UTC
Comment Actions