triadruid: Apollo and the Raven, c. 480 BC , Pistoxenus Painter  (Default)
triadruid ([personal profile] triadruid) wrote in [site community profile] dw_suggestions2009-08-05 01:17 pm

Allow Maintainers/Moderators to Post As Community

Title:
Allow Maintainers/Moderators to Post As Community

Area:
community moderation

Summary:
Community owners (and maintainers/moderators, if given the right privs) should be able to post in their community AS the community account. Doing so would create a more "official" posting mode, and possibly allow for in-community moderator discussion (see below).

Note: This is a collation of several comment-level suggestions and discussions lately in <user name=dw_suggestions>.

Description:
Right now, community owners/maintainers/moderators have to tag their posts, thread titles, or otherwise indicate when they are making an "official" post in the community, as opposed to their own personal account as a 'member' of the community. It also creates difficulty in finding all such posts at once, and it is not possible for one maintainer to update another's post, if information changes.

Creating a permission for posting "as" <user name=community> IN <user name=community> would solve several of these problems. It would also create the possibility to allow Private-locked posts that only maintainers/moderators could see, for tracking trolls, banned users, discussing changes to policy, or whatever.

Difficulties in implementation would obviously include anything in the site code right now that assumes community accounts cannot post. It would also be difficult to decide what the default, retroactive setting would be. My personal preference would be owner-only, but I could see allowing full-priv maintainers to do so as well, especially when the owner has disappeared/abdicated (more of a problem on LJ than DW).

Poll #941 Allow Maintainers/Moderators to Post As Community
Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 62


This suggestion:

View Answers

Should be implemented as-is.
46 (74.2%)

Should be implemented with changes.
9 (14.5%)

Shouldn't be implemented.
3 (4.8%)

(I have no opinion)
4 (6.5%)

(Other: please comment)
0 (0.0%)