The following two proposed rules are up for community vote. See this thread for discussion of each rule, and this post for the approved wording of each proposed rule. For each rule, the rule will pass with 60% of votes supporting it. Polls will be open for 7 days (until Friday night 7/30 Eastern).
Proposed Rule 1: A stickied and locked thread shall be created in the About Unstuck forum listing all current moderators, the date they were appointed, and the date their term ends unless they choose to resign early.
Proposed Rule 1
Yes
No
0voters
Proposed Rule 2:Moderation Terms. The forum will be moderated by a rotating team of moderators, which is intended to promote consistent change and a spirit of community moderation. Moderators will serve for a term of approximately six months. Moderators’ terms of service will be staggered such that moderator terms end on a “Rotation Date”. The first Rotation Date will be September 1, 2021, and future Rotation Date will occur every two months. On each Rotation Date, any moderator who has served in their current term for at least 6 months will rotate out as a moderator and take a mandatory break from serving on the moderation team until the next Rotation Date.
Nominations and Elections. Two weeks prior to each Rotation Date, a nomination thread will be created in the About Unstuck forum requesting volunteers to serve as a moderator. Anyone who volunteers in the thread and receives at least 10 likes to their post will be nominated. After the nomination thread has been open for 3 days, the nomination thread will be closed, and another thread will be posted in About Unstuck with an individual poll for each nominee, which will will remain open for 3 days. Any nominee who receives at least two-thirds approval will be added to the mod team immediately. This means they should be in place for roughly 1 week prior to the Rotation Date, and a moderator’s term will last approximately 6 months and 1 week. For the sake of clarity, if a moderator’s six-month term ends on a Rotation Date of July 1, then they would be eligible for nomination in the mod approval process that leads up to the next Rotation Date (September 1). This rule replaces and makes all prior rules regarding mod terms null and void.
(Out of my admin account) My interpretation of the rule is that if Rule 2 doesn’t pass, then the current rules regarding moderator terms would apply. As far as I know, this is the current status:
So in a world where Rule 1 passes, but Rule 2 doesn’t, each moderator would be listed in the log, with a specified end date that is 6 months from their most recent election. And in that world, I would say that the 6 month clock should start on 8/1 (basically the end of this polling period). Am open to other views - this is just my own non-Admin opinion. (I think the world where Rule 1 and Rule 2 both pass is fairly clear.)
If proposed rule 2 here doesn’t pass, then if nothing else, rule 1 is a good idea so the mods can remember when to put up their re-election posts, should they wish to take on another term. As the rules are now, no mod is indefinite. We are all subject to reelection, which I think is fine.
No worries. The only thing really in question here is if volunteer mods are obligated to take a 2 month break between terms, or if they can just be re-elected. Rule 1 is something we should have already been doing but that no one had bothered. Codifying it so everyone remembers is a good idea.
If the principle has been adopted that mods should only be serving a maximum of 6 months (ish) surely the present incumbents, having already served far in excess of that, should step down (following ratification of that principle) for a minimum of two months?
If that is what you wanted the rule to require, then you should have brought that up in the RFC process. It’s too late to add that requirement now. The rule as written seems pretty clear that the two month break applies after a mod’s 6-month term is up. (note it says - “any moderator who has served in their current term for at least 6 months” not “any moderators who has served for at least 6 months”). Thus, when Wookie’s current 6-month term is up, he would be required to take a 2-month break
It’s a clarification of, not an addition to the requirement.
But we agree that it states “any moderator who has served in their current term for at least 6 months”. wookie’s current term clearly began when he was voted in as a mod more than 6 months ago.
This seems academic. Don’t the current mod terms run out at almost exactly the same time as this rule vote? I am assuming that if this vote passed, there’s not going to be a 2/3 majority to reappoint an existing mod anyways.
Right. Pretty sure the point he was making was that his current six month term is almost up, and with the current proposed rule, when it’s up he’ll take his vacation.
Yes. I just don’t see why we should add to the rule that wookie must step down immediately. No reason to make this vote more personal and aimed at one mod than it already is.
To be clear, as written Wookie and skydiver would step down from current terms on September 1, 2021, and be eligible to volunteer again with the term that starts 11/1/21. The recently appointed mods would end up serving roughly 7 1/2 month terms concluding March 1, 2022. The 9/1/21 date was included in the proposal wording so there wouldn’t be questions around this.