Community Building Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for community managers, administrators, and moderators. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I have a sub in which the other mods are not entirely reliable. There is a spam filter and the sub runs smoothly for the most part without moderation, but is/are there better ways than to just hope for the best?

share|improve this question

closed as too broad by Monica Cellio, Andy Aug 14 '14 at 16:33

There are either too many possible answers, or good answers would be too long for this format. Please add details to narrow the answer set or to isolate an issue that can be answered in a few paragraphs.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

See if you can get somebody else that you trust to fill in for you. – bjb568 Aug 14 '14 at 1:49
Your usage of "sub" makes me think this is dealing with the Reddit platform. Is this correct? – Andy Aug 14 '14 at 1:51
It would also be helpful to know how moderators are appointed (and replaced) in your community. The underlying problem is, after all, the other moderators' lack of reliability. – user98085 Aug 14 '14 at 1:55
@FEichinger I am the head moderator so I have the power to appoint and replace at my own free will. But when I say that other mods are not entirely reliable, it is not that they are bad mods. It is just that, well you know, most people have lives and the other mods ability to moderate is not always consistent. – StupidBreadCooker Aug 14 '14 at 2:07
How many mods do you have? Is that number typical for your community's size, activity level, and community type? How long an absence are you talking about -- and just one, or recurring? Adding these details would strengthen your question and help us give better answers. Thanks. – Monica Cellio Aug 14 '14 at 3:28
up vote 2 down vote accepted

There are at least two styles of moderation that I can think of right now, so I'll try to address them both.

Time-based moderation

My go-to would be to find some sort of protégé in the mod community and actually and publicly charge him/her with your moderation duties for the term. This way, people know who to come to and there is an explicit sense of responsibility on the person you charge.

Big Ball of Modly-Wobbly Stuff

This one is trickier. There's no real single source of responsibility here. In this case though, I think the mod community will be able to handle one person leaving (depending on how large it is). If it is very small, the time-based suggestion should work, too.

share|improve this answer

in which the other mods are not entirely reliable

First of all, is there anything you can do about this? You have bigger problems than taking a vacation if this is true. If you have several examples of them acting up, you can tell a higher-up person. If you don't feel like you can trust the other moderators, then it might be best to just leave.

Other than that:

  • See if you can check in every day or two sometime (maybe at night). I don't know where you're going, so this might not always be an option.
  • If there's a mod on an unrelated part of the site that you trust, you might ask them to help. You could phrase it to be a temporary substitute so you don't "stress the other moderators." :)

You need to either fix this situation or get out of it as soon as you can. Not trusting the other mods is a bad thing and can hurt your reputation and your site that you moderate.

share|improve this answer
Very good point about trusting the other mods. It is exactly trusting your teammates; you can't operate effectively without this trust. – Sean Allred Aug 14 '14 at 2:05
There is too sides to trust “trust not to do something bad” and “trust to visit the site and do something”. – Ian Ringrose Aug 14 '14 at 8:49

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.