So, let's start this off with the point of this essay: project maintainers SHOULD NOT be moderators. (not without explicitly applying and going through the process)
Okay, let me make this clear. A mainatiner is not always trusted by the community, especially not when they're not involved in it. Moderators need to have the trust of the community that they will act in good faith and in the interest of the community. A project maitainer is not in any way required and usually does not get involved in the community.
Giving someone moderation permissions should not be based on whether the project manager trusts the person. The person needs first and foremost to build trust in the community, generally by being a probationary moderator first.
A project maintainer should not be expected to have the spoons, energy and temper needed to moderate the community. Even if the Forge team is not expected to moderate, the ability of doing so creates a false sense of responsability. Moderators are generally tested first, to see if they are able to properly handle the community. By giving a mainatiner moderation powers, you expect them to be able to deal with the community in the same way - adding another source of stress and less guarantee that their actions will be appropriate.
Oh boy, this is a great one. No, we don't need more backup moderators. Forge is currently throwing the role of "backup moderator" all around, from Triage to the Forge team. That's, again, a bad idea, even if they're just backups. Refer to point 2.
If the lack of a moderation team is the problem, then we should focus on that, not on seeing how to give more roles moderation powers.
Moderating should be opt-in. A moderator should explicitly apply for the position. The position is a huge source of stress in a lot of situations (case in point: Quilt drama)
The normal process for becoming a moderator is Trainee (probationary) -> Moderator. That is not only to build trust, it is to test the moderator and see how they choose to use the powers.
Why should the Forge team skip the Trainee step? Why is there a back door, a short circuit?
More "moderator is developer" and vice versa... yay The entry point for that channel is NOT in any way normal. As many have pointed out, Forge has a very weird ladder to climb.
We avoid bringing in more moderators because they can't be trusted to have access to the dev channels. So let's solve that?
Not everyone wants to be involved in project development, some may just want to moderate the community and make sure everything is peaceful.
The senior-triage channel should be... just for Senior Traigers and Collaborators.
Hierarchizing the community team and the development team is like comparing apples to pears. The duties are completely different. Project maintainers should not have the power to overrule moderators when it comes to community moderation and management, and vice versa.
8. "Basically what you are arguing with that stance is that you do not trust the core team {specifically curle and myself} to be able to manage theoretical unruely team members"
No-one mentioned that, yet it seems like Lex feels that his moderation powers are threatened by the core team not having moderation powers.
Since that was brought up, then yes, I AM threatening his moderation powers. And I'm using this opportunity to prove why project maintainers should not have implicit moderation powers, by referring to Lex's actions. No, this is not ancient history, it all happened within the last 8 months:
For context, the moderated member has spammed the word "larp" in every channel. Lex has gone and called them an "asshole", and the member was - obviously - not happy. To that, Lex has muted them, reason being:
Have another time out, I Dare because this is my server, and based on your actions.
The problematic part is "this is my server". No, you can't call someone an asshole in public because it's "your server".
For context, the moderated member has posted screenshots of their issue. No, they weren't told to stop posting screenshots, nor is it against the rules, yet Lex has warned them for
Stop Posting Pictures it doesnt fucking help and is a pain in the ass for people to read
Posting a photo of your issue is NOT against the rules.
Context for this has been purged, but the member seems to have been spamming. Now, they were warned once, and then muted with the following reason:
Continuing to be stupid/spam. The bot dms you so you know exactly whats going on.
The only problem in this context is the assumption that the bot DMs you. No, it does not always do so. If you disable direct messages from non-friends, you will not get a DM, nor will you get one if you block the bot (and considering the bot in question is Dyno, which many servers abuse, it makes sense why you would do it)
Oh boy... So, lukebemish has been arguing with Lex about his aggressive and hostile approach at implementing "hacky" features he doesn't agree with. Lex has muted them because they annoyed him.
THIS is one of the main reasons a project mainatiner should not be a moderator. They have control over the project, and will defend their decision w.r.t. the way the project works and will end up moderating an individual that doesn't agree with them.
Do I even need to explain this? Let's take a look at the ban reason:
Goodbye, Nothing of value was lost. Its not our problem you refused to update after 6 years.
No, it is not okay to tell someone they don't matter, not in public at least.
Cases 2388 and 2386 - https://discord.com/channels/313125603924639766/590296803920969780/1055185256241709127
I'm getting tired of the totalitarism... The moderated user has pointed out Lex's concerning impulsive behaviour he's known for, and they requested appropriate actions to be taken against Lex - a sentiment to which I frankly relate. They were first muted and then banned for daring to speak up.
I have given you a task for when you want support. Do it. We don't care about the code you have. We care about your intentions. Refusing to provide more information is not against the rules. The warn was not needed, and the only needed action was to state we won't support them any further.
Off-topic conversation with no point in #squirrels is not against the rules.
Now, let's also talk about another piece of new history - the #squirrels NSFW situation.
Lex has decided to make the squirrels channel NSFW due to a new Discord guideline that would only take effect within a month prohobiting gun discussion - and as well all know, Lex loves guns. Lex has almost immediately made the channel NSFW, as soon as Discord announced the new guideline. He didn't consult the moderators at all, saying that it's his server, and that he does not need to consult anyone about what he does.
Community managment is all about collaboration within members, not about who's the highest in the food chain gets to decide what to do like a communist leader.
The new guidelines were later retracted by Discord within a week - which was expected - so the channel was NSFW for a week for absolutely no reason.