Should c/Conspiracies jointly petition admin for new moderation as opposed to it remaining an unmoderated Wild West?
Please answer YES or NO in separate main comments below, with any reasoning as desired.
This poll methodology is recognized to be unscientific but is better than nothing. Thank you for your responses.
Add: There is now a megathread. I would still appreciate contributors taking the time to add a YES or NO here to gauge interest on this specific question (thank you early adopters).
YES. c/Conspiracies has significant contribution and no active moderation. New moderation would allow featured content (stickies), access to building the wiki including its roundtable history, better ability to facilitate roundtables and other meta discussion, and enforcement of the sidebar rules. Of particular note, in recent hours we've had a repeated contributor with whom many are familiar who shows much potential for bringing the Conspiracies forum into disrepute via platform-deprecated allusion to criminality,
and this strongly directs active moderation.[Add: which was finally handled by u/Paleo via admin tools.] If there is evidence the community favors new moderation, we can present that to Meta and have a likelier response window than individual query might yield, even if it's known that we will take time to determine who the moderation team should be. IMHO if there is not significant evidence the community favors new moderation, it will be unlikely to trace back the path to its former glory and will be easily slid into disreputable and closed-minded tracks. I encourage everyone to speak their minds, and also if possible to comment YES.Woke and Censorship-pilled.