Return to Answer

If the issue is raised on meta about a flag I handled then I will provide an answer just as if it was any other flag by any user. I will share as many details as allowed to share publicly and try to give my point of view of the situation. If concerns have been raised about content moderation, then the community should be entitled to some explanation.
I will explain that I acted in the best interest of the community. Multiple exact same answers linking to the same product are not allowed, but if the author is willing to disclose their affiliation and explain how this product solves the original problem then the best answer can be undeleted.

If the issue is raised on meta about a flag I handled then I will provide an answer just as if it was any other flag by any user. I will share as many details as allowed to share publicly and try to give my point of view of the situation. I will explain that I acted in the best interest of the community. Multiple exact same answers linking to the same product are not allowed, but if the author is willing to disclose their affiliation and explain how this product solves the original problem then the best answer can be undeleted.

There is a need to educate new users better and make all the meta-information more easily accessible. I believe that most of the disappointment of the new-comers stems from the wrong expectations. This is not a help portal where you can ask someone to fix your problem. This is the place where you can find answers by looking through existing questions. Only when you can't find an answer, you should assume you have a brand new problem which merits a fresh question. We need to help new users understand this.

First, I will investigate the comment and the context to see if the word was used in an abusive/offensive manner. If I can't find any sign of inappropriate misconduct I will decline the flags. I will then proceed to analyse the whole comment thread to see if any of comments provide useful on-topic information and I will delete any that are no longer needed. If the users do not stop commenting I will comment-lock the post to let the users know they should back-off.

1. If a feature is planned, then the company should ask moderators first if they think it will be well-received by the community. Ideally, the company should do market research and ask for opinions of the community first by asking on Meta. Then the moderators' job would be to watch the discussion and make sure that it is civil and polite. If the feature is really unpopular the company can expect some backlash, which is important they ask for feedback before releasing it.

   The sentiment right now is that the unpopular features are released without asking the community if they want it or not. Stack Overflow's community is composed of developers and designers. We have plenty of valuable input the company can use to improve their product. All they need to do is ask for it and listen.

2. As a moderator, my role would be to act as a representative of us all. If I think that the decision will not be properly acclaimed by the users then I should voice my concerns to the company and try to convince them to go another way. I reserve the right to be wrong, so if the decision is really controversial then it should be announced on Meta so that a broader audience can speak up and discuss the pros and cons.

There is a need to educate new users better and make all the meta-information more easily accessible. I believe that most of the disappointment of the new-comers stems from the wrong expectations. This is not a help portal where you can ask someone to fix your problem. This is the place where you can find answers by looking through existing questions. Only when you can't find an answer, should you assume you have a brand new problem which merits a fresh question. We need to help new users understand this.

First, I will investigate the comment and the context to see if the word was used in an abusive/offensive manner. If I can't find any sign of inappropriate misconduct I will decline the flags. I will then proceed to analyse the whole comment thread to see if any of the comments provide useful on-topic information and I will delete any that are no longer needed. If the users do not stop commenting I will comment-lock the post to let the users know they should back-off.

1. If a feature is planned, then the company should ask moderators first if they think it will be well-received by the community. Ideally, the company should do market research and ask for opinions of the community first by asking on Meta. Then the moderators' job would be to watch the discussion and make sure that it is civil and polite. If the feature is really unpopular the company can expect some backlash, which is why it's important they ask for feedback before releasing it.

   The sentiment right now is that the unpopular features are released without asking the community if they want it or not. Stack Overflow's community is composed of developers and designers. We have plenty of valuable input the company can use to improve their product. All they need to do is ask for it and listen.

2. As a moderator, my role would be to act as a representative of us all. If I think that the decision will not be properly acclaimed by the users then I should voice my concerns to the company and try to convince them to go another way. I reserve the right to be wrong, so if the decision is really controversial then it should be announced on Meta so that a broader audience can speak up and discuss the pros and cons.

Spam is spam. We should always look for the good in people and try to give them the benefit of doubt whenever possible, but we can't tolerate inappropriate content. If the answers were added only to promote a site or product, do not disclose the affiliation, or they do not directly answer the question then they should be removed. If there is a way to salvage useful answers, then adding the affiliation for the user could be the option, but the important thing here is recognize what the intention of the poster was. If they only want to promote their product/library then it is not acceptable. If they wrote the library to fill in the niche and they meant well, then we can work together to salvage the answers.

If the issue is raised on meta about one of the flags I handled I will provide an answer just as if it was any other flag by any other user. I will share as much of the details as I allowed to share publicly, and try to give my point of view of the situation. If concerns have been raised about content moderation, then the community should be entitled to some explanation.
I will explain that I acted in the best interest of the community. Multiple exact same answers linking to the same product are not allowed, but if the author is willing to disclose their affiliation and explain how this product solves the original problem then the best answer can be undeleted.

Spam is spam. We should always look for the good in people and try to give them the benefit of doubt whenever possible, but we can't tolerate inappropriate content. If the answers were added only to promote a site or product, do not disclose the affiliation, or they do not directly answer the question then they should be removed. If there is a way to salvage useful answers, then adding the affiliation for the user could be the option, but the important thing here is recognizing what the intention of the poster was. If they only want to promote their product/library then it is not acceptable. If they wrote the library to fill in the niche and they meant well, then we can work together to salvage the answers.

If the issue is raised on meta about a flag I handled then I will provide an answer just as if it was any other flag by any user. I will share as many details as allowed to share publicly and try to give my point of view of the situation. If concerns have been raised about content moderation, then the community should be entitled to some explanation.
I will explain that I acted in the best interest of the community. Multiple exact same answers linking to the same product are not allowed, but if the author is willing to disclose their affiliation and explain how this product solves the original problem then the best answer can be undeleted.