Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

703

I was about to add as a moderator on , because he owns and , thus he would be very suitable for .

Unfortunately, he has reached his 30-subverse moderation limit.

I understand that the purpose of that limitation is preventing powermod abuse like on Reddit, but:

  • I don't ever expect a Poal veteran like Starjello to use moderative powers irresponsibly.
  • According to the terms of service:

you agree to represent the best interests of the community you moderate. Continuous failure to do so may result in your removal as a moderator.

If someone who moderates many subverses happened to use their moderative powers in ways that damage the community's integrity, their moderative privileges would be revoked anyway.

I think the limit should be increased to 50 or maybe even 100 in future, if Poal.co is much bigger. Allowing good users like Starjello to moderate more than 30 subverses could make moderation more efficient.

I was about to add /u/starjello as a moderator on /s/Darwinism, because he owns /s/HBD and /s/Eugenics, thus he would be very suitable for /s/Darwinism. Unfortunately, he has reached his 30-subverse moderation limit. I understand that the purpose of that limitation is preventing *powermod abuse* like on Reddit, but: * I don't ever expect a Poal veteran like Starjello to use moderative powers irresponsibly. * According to the terms of service: > you agree to represent the best interests of the community you moderate. Continuous failure to do so may result in your removal as a moderator. If someone who moderates many subverses happened to use their moderative powers in ways that damage the community's integrity, their moderative privileges would be revoked **anyway**. I think the limit should be increased to 50 or maybe even 100 in future, if Poal.co is much bigger. Allowing good users like Starjello to moderate more than 30 subverses could make moderation more efficient.

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (13).
[–] • 1 pt

I don't think users could actually manage that many subs really. I limit was originally less than 30.

[–] • 0 pt

I don't think users could actually manage that many subs really.

But if those subs are lesser active, it should be possible. (There were no posts in since a few days.)

Also, one user does not have to manage all thirty subs, because they have multiple moderators.

Maybe, established users above a score threshold such as 4000 or 10000 (i.e. ) could be allowed to have higher limits.

[–] • 1 pt

Maybe, its something to think about.