Op-Ed: I am the Alpha and the Omega

Who Moderates the Moderators on LinkedIn?

A certain luxury is afforded to group moderators and, IMHO, they appear to exercise far too much control over group content, membership, even the very tone and color of the comments posted. On occasion, one observes a wide range of unexplainable responses or reactions from moderators to members' posts. 

But does this represent a problem for group members? I believe so.

There comes a time when moderator "responses" need to be challenged and even constrained by limits, applied to reduce or prevent inconsistent actions...as well as any possible conflict of interest.

Sometimes, members are banned for no real, clearly evident, legitimate reason. They simply “disappear”. I’ve received PMs from some of these individuals – asking me what the heck happened. Others accept self-exile and self-imposed silence to remain a member of the group. I’ve received PMs from these individuals, too. Under certain group moderators, it is safer to keep quiet than utter a monosyllable of challenge.

An example of conflict of interest might be a harsh or unwarranted response to comments from the possible competitors to a moderator's core business. Any competitor - as a member - would have to think carefully in any direct response to a moderator's comment.  

I completely agree that, on occasion, banning is the only action left to the moderator. However, if personal motivations and bias are allowed to govern the moderator’s actions, then the moderator must be held accountable.

Freedom of speech is extended to all on LinkedIn but of course, under the watchful eyes of the moderators. But the question begs itself - who watches the watchers? Who moderates the moderators? Qui custodiet ipsos custodes?

In a certain French ISO9001 group, a moderator likens his style as a dictatorship. In another group, the moderator would ban individuals merely for pissing him off, and has inexplicably chided ("leaned on") a group member for posting responses as questions - demanding that the member stop posting questions as a response and to start providing solutions. Yet, the moderator routinely comments in a wearyingly, predictably, repetitiously disdainful style, without relent.

Is this fair? Is this professional?

I think not. Some may believe these “tough guy” approaches will chase off the snake-oil salesmen or establish a proper technical tone for forum content. I don’t think it does. It unduly affects the entire atmosphere of the discussion forums and of the group. 

Direct response to the moderator regarding inappropriate  actions can - hopefully - nip an emergent issue in the bud but one can hardly gainsay the moderator. Where would that action lead?

In closing...
An appropriate definition for "moderate" as an adjective could include, "kept or keeping within reasonable or proper limits; not extreme, excessive, or intense", and as a verb, "to reduce the excessiveness of ". 
 

IMHO, moderators need to maintain a standard for online professionalism. Nothing less should be acceptable. Direct response to the moderator regarding their own inappropriate actions can - hopefully - nip the emergent issue in the bud but there is a risk. One risks being moderated...and even being banned.

What would you do about it? What should you do about observed moderator practices that are imappropriate? Should anything be done?

Follow my blog...

www.lawrence-international-llc.blogspot.com