Although this is great and all, I think this sounds a little like a way to get out of things if used wrong, especially "Inflammatory or speculative language that may result in harassment" and "Misinformation (particularly about the OTW) with the potential to harm or mislead others." These both sound kind of concerning, and we need confirmation that there will be no misuse of them. "speculative language" and "misinformation with the potential to harm" could include things that the OTW simply doesn't want to deal with despite needing to. There should be some sort of way that you guys could moderate what is considered "misinformation." I am afraid that criticism will go down the drain labeled as speculative language or misinformation.
As said in our earlier reply to Topaz_Eyes, 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). "Inflammatory or speculative language that may result in harassment" would cover things such as speculating about someone else’s personal life or their opinions about a topic they haven’t commented on. We’ve seen this come up several times when situations begin getting heated, and that type of speculation never leads anywhere constructive.
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!
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.
May an individual volunteer waive such privacy and allow discussion?
In many of these cases, the people involved on the OTW side are bound by confidentiality policies that they’ve signed, which it may not be possible for a user or volunteer to waive for their specific case. If you have questions about a specific case or policy relevant to yourself, please contact the OTW Board and/or Legal committee.
Thank you for answering, however I think it's pretty clear we aren't speaking about hypotheticals here. Last year, volunteers including myself and Kutti went public about some very bad treatment from the OTW, and part of that discussion was held in the AO3 newspost comments because attempts to handle problems privately within the OTW failed. I am concerned that this new policy will be used to stiffle such discussions in the future, which would endanger rather than protect volunteers.
I very strongly support the creation of a mod team and a mod policy for newsposts. Your team's been needed for a very long time. I also know that the OTW is creating a whistleblower policy and volunteer code of conduct which will hopefully prevent repeats of last year's issues. However, the OTW is starting from a position of low trust due to past bad behavior, hence the pushback you're getting to an otherwise reasonable policy. What safeguards will be put in place to prevent criticism of the OTW from being shut down?
(Personally, I would recommend countering misinformation by simply providing correct information -- the OTW has a history of stonewalling outsiders. I understand that's easier said than done, though.)
As said above to Topaz_Eyes, if there's not misinformation, then it won't be subject to removal due to this rule. If you want to post verbatim copies of communications you've received from the OTW, then doing so is allowed under this rule. It is highly unlikely to receive a public response from the OTW due to the various privacy policies we have, but your comment would not be hidden (unless it violates a different rule).
Where we would consider it misinformation is if someone began posting factually untrue information, such posting as making false statements about content in emails from the OTW, or if they began erroneously assigning blame to specific individuals (particularly unrelated third parties) in a way that could incite harassment against that person.
The news post moderation team is structured in a way to promote transparency. Copies of all comments are sent to multiple parties, so they are more available for later review than was previously the case. Comment moderation decisions are all visible to the core news post moderation team and committee liaisons, who form a broad cross-sectional sample of the OTW with volunteers who are not only from many different committees, but are also of a variety of seniority within the OTW itself. Due to the way we expect liaison work to occur — with liaisons joining and leaving as necessary to cover posts for their committees — the decisions made by the team will be open to a broad amount of scrutiny from a changing set of volunteers within the OTW.
We're aware that a lack of transparency by the OTW has indeed been a problem and has lost us trust from many users. We're committed to earning it back. Both transparency and privacy are important to us. The balance between the two can be a difficult tightrope to walk, and it's likely there will still be times when users are unhappy with our decisions, but we're committed to maintaining both.
Comment on OTW News Post Moderation Policy
deatharcana Sun 26 May 2024 05:46PM UTC
Comment Actions
OTW_News_Post_Moderation (Official) Sun 26 May 2024 06:34PM UTC
Comment Actions
azarias Sun 26 May 2024 07:12PM UTC
Comment Actions
OTW_News_Post_Moderation (Official) Sun 26 May 2024 09:05PM UTC
Comment Actions
azarias Sun 26 May 2024 09:30PM UTC
Comment Actions
OTW_News_Post_Moderation (Official) Sun 26 May 2024 10:23PM UTC
Comment Actions
(3 more comments in this thread)