The discussion revolves around the need for moderation queue tools in Discourse. desrocchi explains that they have emulated a moderation queue by modifying settings, but it has limitations, including:
Not being a native platform option
Trapping users who didn’t earn TL1 before implementation
Moderators putting users in the queue for all categories, not just the ones they manage
Moderators seeing messages from categories they can’t read
desrocchi clarifies that the goal is to prevent flame wars by putting specific users in the queue temporarily, without globally silencing them. codinghorror and pfaffman question why users are being singled out, while desrocchi emphasizes the need for more detailed moderation tools.
DNSTARS and pfaffman suggest that globally silencing users might be a more efficient solution, but desrocchi explains that this is not ideal for their non-profit association’s forum, where categories have different access levels.
awesomerobot notes that category-specific moderation is not a common use case for Discourse, but has been discussed previously. desrocchi reiterates the need for a “put in queue” button on the user administration page, rather than relying on ad hoc configurations.
We have modified the settings on our installation in order to create a TL0 that would force selected users through the moderation queue, but even though it works it has drawbacks and limitations.
it is not an option of the platform, it needs to be emulated through existing settings
users that didn’t earn the TL1 before the implementation of the queue emulation are all trapped in the queue and need to be elevated manually
moderators of specific categories put users in the queue for all the forum, not just the categories for which they are responsible
moderators find in the queue messages for categories they are not even allowed to read
Can you please expand on these options? I feel like they are really needed and the platform is severely lacking in these aspects.
So your complaint is that you want to force specific “selected” users through the moderation queue? What is it about these particular users that you don’t like?
I don’t get why you’re being sarcastic about this…
Sometimes people start flame wars, usually involving only 2 or 3 people, putting them in queue would prevent the forum from being flooded in the hours when a mod is not present.
People would be put in the queue only until the flame (or whatever other reason they’ve been moderated for) has passed.
If a flame is going on in the category I am responsible for, I would want to put in queue the people only in the categories (or a specific category) I control.
Does that leave 5 other mods wanting the same tool to manage the same person on 5 categories getting banned from each one in turn? Just silence the person for 24h and save the other mods the work surely?
Why would you not want them globally silenced? If you are concerned that they would open another topic, why would they not open another topic in another category?
Because this is the forum of a non profit association, not a public forum.
I get to manage the general area where everybody can talk about pretty much anything, but there are categories accessible only to coordinators or theme managers.
If a coordinator comes in the general area and gets involved in a flame I cannot prevent him from partecipating in the coordinators section. And if I put them in queue I should not be able to see messages sent to the coordinators category (to which I have no access).
It sounds like the categories are almost treated like separate communities? That’s not an incredibly common way to use Discourse, which is why we don’t currently have category-specific moderation features.
Generally if someone is acting poorly it’s a detriment to the entire community, regardless of category, which is why the standard action is to silence them globally.
