To whom it may concern,
After the recent moderator election I was rather happy with the choices made. As always, I took my part in the election, carefully read the statements of all candidates and tried to make the best choice based on the limited information I was presented to.
However, it has come to my attention that at least some of the newly elected moderators migth not be exactly up to the challenge. Specifically, what caught my attention was that message, that was a result of a particular argument that appeared in one of the SO chatrooms.
The thing is, it would be perfectly fine if it came from one of the debating parties. People here are very passionate individuals, discussions get heated - sure. However, this came from a moderator.
This wasn't of course just a lone message. The context for that was a message from one user that was ultimately deemed inappropriate by the moderators. As it often happens with such cases, the actual problem was blown out of proportion. Sometimes this happens because someone suddenly chooses to reach into chat transcript to find and analyze all possibly inappropriate messages. Sometimes, like this time, a person doesn't stop after a ban is inflicted on someone. What was done in this case is the person first said that
We don't prevent you from saying what you want.
Followed by locking the room to make a personally appointed statement, followed by what turned out to be a provocative demonstration of power.
I find this kind of behaviour unacceptable. A moderator should be a person above such discussions. Becoming a moderator implies that the user promises to moderate, that is keep the neutral side and make the discussion remain civilized. Actively provoking like in the observed case, when it's full known that the person possesses moderator privileges and is essentially threatening to use them is I think a strong indication that the person might not be perfectly fit for the role.
Of course it feels bad to be confronted with such a thing. That might mean that the community has failed at picking an appropriate curator. However, we're all only human. There has been at least one precedent when a person chosen as a moderator turned out to be not exactly as perfect as it might seem at first glance.
I could perhaps pass that through closed support channels, but I actually believe in transparency. As a community who made democratic choice, every member of such community has the right to see clearly the actions taken by ones which we bestow our trust upon. But what has been given by community, can also be taken away. Perhaps this is a time to consider such an action.