From appointment on 2026-01-30 17:10:26 (GMT) through 2026-02-01 00:00:00, u/Thisisnotanexit engaged 360 mod actions. A few duplications, a single unspecified "other" action, and a handful of "ignores" that were appended to other actions, are not filtered out in the counts below, making them imperfect but sufficient totals.

Accounts listed with actions and counts [and percent adverse]:

amberscornful removed post 1 [100%]

Antero ignored reports on comment 1, removed comment 2 [67%]

BeefyBelisarius ignored reports on comment 1 [0%]

BuckeyePatr1ot ignored reports on post 1 [0%]

ChippingToe ignored reports on comment 1 [0%]

CrusaderPepe ignored reports on post 6, removed post 6 [50%]

defenderOfMontrocity ignored reports on post 1, removed post 1 [50%]

Dps1879 removed post 1 [100%]

Dregan_ya ignored reports on comment 1 [0%]

DresdenFirebomber approved comment 1, banned 1, ignored reports on comment 5, ignored reports on post 5, removed comment 53, removed post 9 [85%]

ErnestWorrell removed comment 1 [100%]

FallenNephilim ignored reports on post 1 [0%]

freedomlogic ignored reports on comment 1 [0%]

gaw-mods-are-gay approved comment 1, removed post 1 [50%]

Graphenium removed comment 2 [100%]

guywholikesDjtof2024 approved post 1, ignored reports on comment 4, ignored reports on post 7, other 1, removed post 7 [35%]

Halivxu ignored reports on post 1 [0%]

HangYourself banned 1, ignored reports on comment 14, removed comment 40 [75%]

hl65 removed post 1 [100%]

jamesbillison approved comment 4 [0%]

JosephGoebbel5 ignored reports on comment 2, ignored reports on post 9, removed comment 16, removed post 17 [75%]

JosephMalta banned 1, ignored reports on comment 1, ignored reports on post 1, removed comment 8 [82%]

KarlSumeran removed comment 1 [100%]

LastEvidence removed post 1 [100%]

lightupthesequence removed post 1 [100%]

LilyThread removed post 1 [100%]

Mindhunter removed post 1 [100%]

Mrexreturns ignored reports on post 1, removed comment 1 [50%]

Neo1 ignored reports on comment 3, removed comment 2 [40%]

newfunturistic ignored reports on post 2 [0%]

normandis removed post 1 [100%]

Psalm50 removed post 1 [100%]

qboro_nyc removed comment 1, removed post 2 [100%]

RealityWiener removed comment 3 [100%]

RealWildRanter ignored reports on comment 2, ignored reports on post 5, removed comment 4, removed post 5 [56%]

StolenCBSContent1 removed post 1 [100%]

SystemGayAlt ignored reports on comment 1, removed post 1 [50%]

TallestSkil ignored reports on comment 1, removed comment 2 [67%]

TCDforver ignored reports on comment 1, removed comment 2 [67%]

thatware removed post 1 [100%]

Theunpopular1 ignored reports on comment 1, removed comment 1 [50%]

Third-Eye-Vision removed post 1 [100%]

Thisisnotanexit ignored reports on post 1, stickied post 2 [0%]

TurnToGodNow approved comment 1, ignored reports on comment 31, ignored reports on post 3, removed comment 22, removed post 1 [40%]

Vlad_The_Impaler ignored reports on comment 1, removed comment 3, removed post 1 [80%]

WeedleTLiar ignored reports on comment 1, removed comment 1 [50%]

Xsaymoklash removed comment 1 [100%]

This suggests to me that (1) all accounts at 0%, 50%, or 100% are the result of very few actions and, when adverse, are likely minor points that the account holder learned from; (2) all accounts between 0% and 50% are likely to have been subject to reporting abuse; and (3) all accounts between 50% and 100% are likely to need to review the rules better. Reviewing the list with these categories in mind yields categorizations that objectively agree with the rough impressions I had previously formed of these accounts. Though others are free to disagree, this indicates objectively at a first pass that moderation is being conducted moderately, i.e. with thought and attention rather than reflexively. While each person's conception of rules is different, I'm at least gratified that my own are not too different from those implemented, suggesting that refusal to follow the rules as stated is indeed a choice that can be disciplined, not a misunderstanding.

I propose that the community uses objective tests such as analyses like the above to make decisions about Not Feeding The Trolls. In particular, I said at Meta that two accounts, u/DresdenFirebomber and u/JosephGoebbel5 (in that order) are the first and second most likely to post large numbers of objectionable contributions at once, triggering the antiabuse filter when someone attempts to downvote conscientiously and thereby annulling the downvotes. I propose that, when a community member identifies another as a trolling account by some formal definition, one should not interact at all with such a person except for downvotes, and possibly rare attempts to wake the person up from troll behavior. (Note that even "troll" is not the best word, because dehumanizing, but it does have technical applicability.) I don't know whether paid shills are receiving anything for downvotes, so I can't comment on whether downvoting or ignoring is better.

I said I'd comment separately on appeals people have made about the reasons for mod actions. This survey doesn't cover that but I haven't seen anything untoward. I'll probably handle that by general public questions and comments in specific places rather than in a compiled report.

Other note to TINAE: We're probably ready for rotating stickies now, I find about 1-4 new stickies per day at a set check-in time, with unstickying after 2-4 days' time, are pretty good rules of thumb. This allows viewers of the main page to go directly to the best content and has no adverse effects (other than the mod getting accused of favoritism!).