I dug up this guide that still has a lot of helpful tips.

Author: jericson

_posts/2025-01-20-employee_moderation.md

@@ -0,0 +1,110 @@
+---
+layout: post
+title: Thanks for the diamond. Now what?
+tags: stack_overflow moderation
+---
+
+Below is a guide I wrote for new employees at Stack Overflow to help
+them avoid having a bad time moderating the sites. This is an early
+draft so it might not reflect what Stack Overflow uses internally
+now. The principles, however, remain relevant for each new
+organization I have been a part of. 
+
+---
+
+## How to use your new superpowers.
+
+When community managers, developers, and other employees need
+"administrative access" to one of our sites, we give them similar
+privileges as moderators chosen from within the community. The diamond
+♦ that appears next to your activity can sometimes generate a bit of
+apprehension about your role in the site. Whether you are speaking in
+an official capacity or are simply participating as "just another
+user", it is helps to remember that your words and activities carry a
+little more weight… and will likely be more scrutinized than the
+average user's. The tips below are designed to avoid the appearance of
+omnipotence and those sticky situations where a conflict of interest
+is perceived.
+
+* **Remember that users will assume what you say is "Official Policy”**
+
+  We all have opinions to share and "default public" generally means
+  we should be part of the conversation. But users will treat what you
+  say as canon. So, when you are delving into controversial issues
+  that either have not been decided, or where your view may diverge
+  from any actual official guidance: **Try to make it clear that you
+  are simply sharing an opinion that is not the "official” word on the
+  topic.** You don't need to plaster a disclaimer on your posts, but
+  make sure that you are not (unintentionally) ending the conversation
+  with the final verdict of policy where there is none. You will be
+  quoted as policy. Often.
+
+* **Get Backup, and never moderate your own activity.**
+
+  Or anyone coming anywhere near it. A good rule of thumb: When users
+  disagree with you, avoid doing anything a regular user cannot
+  do. Avoid closing their posts. Don't flag (delete) comments that do
+  not agree with you. If you genuinely feel moderator intervention is
+  needed, call on someone else to look into the situation. Generally
+  speaking, take it to the the community team chat room. We're happy
+  to mediate sticky situations. Assuming the person agrees with you,
+  they'll solve the problem without the appearance of "censorship” or
+  "abuse of power”. Once someone starts shouting those words,
+  everything else gets harder.
+
+* **When you're not making progress with someone, you're probably
+  making things to argue with.**
+    
+  If you find you've had two back-and-forths in the comments with no
+  movement toward the middle, you can probably give up on convincing
+  this particular person. Which means that more comments probably just
+  make the whole interaction (about their presumably wrong-minded
+  point) more visible to others. Leave `em with the last word, and
+  move on.
+
+
+* **Don't take it personally.**
+
+  Joel says in his [Seven steps to remarkable customer
+  service](https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2007/02/19/seven-steps-to-remarkable-customer-service/)—
+  "There is only one way to survive angry customers emotionally: you
+  have to realize that they're not angry at you; they're angry at your
+  business, and you just happen to be a convenient representative of
+  that business." Most of the time, users are not yelling at you;
+  they're lashing out about the situation. Don't yell back. You will
+  also be yelling at the people listening in over their shoulders.
+
+* **Agree with anything you possibly can, and don't be afraid to
+  apologize.**
+
+  Whenever possible, lead with something the other person can agree
+  with:
+
+  > You raise a great point about the need to deal with all these
+  > giant hamsters - they make me crazy. But I'm not sure that your
+  >'Napalm Catapult' plan is the best approach because…
+
+  Someone else feeling bad is usually a good enough reason to say "I'm
+  sorry,” even if you haven't done anything wrong.
+
+  > Sincere apologies - it truly wasn't my intent to imply that. I
+  > should have been clearer that I agreed with your approach, but
+  > thought that the implementation would cause other problems….
+  
+  And, of course if you did slip up, apologizing is just the right
+  thing to do. It bears repeating: **Failing to apologize when you are
+  in the wrong causes much more damage than taking blame when you did
+  nothing wrong!**
+
+## Key powers employee moderators have:
+
+* Close, delete, and reopen votes are unilateral and instant (you need
+  to be really comfortable playing Judge Dredd here).
+* Flagging a comment deletes it.
+* You have the power to edit any comment at any time.
+* Deleted comments can be shown and undeleted.
+* All user profiles are editable.
+* Reviews, tag synonyms, and tag wiki edits are unilateral.
+* Every site becomes a possible migration target.
+* You can create private chat rooms and see deleted chat items.
+* All privileges are granted without the need to earn them.