Live data from Hacker News

Is Stack Exchange in violation of NY labor law by using volunteer moderators?

meta.stackexchange.com

51–60 of 155 posts

Re: Is Stack Exchange in violation of NY labor law by using volunteer moderators?

#51
post #29

Seems like there's also a good case for Reddit moderators to not be volunteers as well. To be honest I've always thought the community moderated model has seemed like somewhat of a loophole that was eventually going to be closed. It's having your cake and eating it too. IMHO you can either have UGI with a professional moderator team OR you can have professionally made content with no moderator team.

Maybe Reddit should be turned into a shopping mall type of business where subs can be run however the sub mods want, but they have to pay a monthly rent to Reddit. I wonder if that would make things better or worse there?

It would kill 99.9% of the subs there and utterly change the culture.

Re: Is Stack Exchange in violation of NY labor law by using volunteer moderators?

#52

This would break a lot more services, including a substantial number of Open Source projects and communities (specifically, any that are primarily run by a company rather than a non-profit).

No it wouldn't. It's not just the fact that people are doing unpaid work. There are a number of other requirements that have to be met, which SE seems to meet with regards to how it handles moderators. Just being an unpaid moderator doesn't run afoul of the laws.

I'd really appreciate if you'd be willing to expand on this.

It's not clear to me what the difference is between the moderation happening on StackOverflow and the moderation happening on Wikipedia, other than that Wikipedia is non-profit. But having non-profit designation be the key factor in deciding whether or not someone can volunteer seems like a rule that would have some really negative side-effects.

The 5 points I see online are:

- Degree of Control Exercised

- Profit, Loss, and Investment

- Skill and Independent Initiative

- Integral Part of Business

Are there others that I'm missing?

Re: Is Stack Exchange in violation of NY labor law by using volunteer moderators?

#53
post #29

Seems like there's also a good case for Reddit moderators to not be volunteers as well. To be honest I've always thought the community moderated model has seemed like somewhat of a loophole that was eventually going to be closed. It's having your cake and eating it too. IMHO you can either have UGI with a professional moderator team OR you can have professionally made content with no moderator team.

I just became aware of this whole "powermod" phenomena where individual mods oversee many subs. Like 30+. I just recently learned about them but I guess they're sort of admins favorites since they essentially do their bidding while still looking like "part of the community". Totally feels like they're trying to have their cake and eat it too.

Re: Is Stack Exchange in violation of NY labor law by using volunteer moderators?

#54
post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe Reddit should be turned into a shopping mall type of business where subs can be run however the sub mods want, but they have to pay a monthly rent to Reddit. I wonder if that would make things better or worse there?

It would kill 99.9% of the subs there and utterly change the culture.

Do you think it would make things better or worse?

Re: Is Stack Exchange in violation of NY labor law by using volunteer moderators?

#55

Why just moderating? In a sense, it's every action you do that adds value to the site by drawing people in or improving their experience. When users write a comment (such as what I'm writing right now on Hacker News), they are acting as writers who generate text for people to read. When they submit a link, they are locating content for people to read. When they upvote or downvote, they are acting somewhat like editor…

It's not about unpaid work though, it's employee-like unpaid work. https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/337123/345240 has some interesting discussion of this. In practice, that means that normal commenters or people using social media aren't relevant for two reasons: * There's minimal control over their actions from the 'employer'. There's some basic rules on what content is not allowed, but nobody says "you must write a…

My karma score is pretty big evidence against the theory that there’s no permanent relationship. Users can become highly invested in particular communities!

I also abide by fairly strict code of conduct / moderation policies when writing on certain platforms. If I don’t abide by the community rules my posts can be flagged or even my account banned.

Paid writing is absolutely a trade, so I can’t see how any policy that sweeps up moderation can’t also equally apply to comment writing.

The government has a nasty habit of taking a concept like “work” or “income” and then applying it to literally everything so that they can regulate and tax literally everything. To the point where the IRS had to define specific exceptions for family chores lest they be deemed as barter and requiring the payment of payroll taxes.

Luckily in this case we have the 1st Amendment which should provide a pretty strong defense against any attempt to limit basic community social activities and the necessity of moderating those interactions.

Despite the fact that [I would hope] my comments on HN accrue significant value to the HN site, and that those comments are indeed work of the kind that some people even get paid for, my 1st amendment right to post here should override the interest of the State in establishing minimum wage requirements. Would love to hear a constitutional law scholar’s thoughts on this!

Re: Is Stack Exchange in violation of NY labor law by using volunteer moderators?

#56

Why just moderating? In a sense, it's every action you do that adds value to the site by drawing people in or improving their experience. When users write a comment (such as what I'm writing right now on Hacker News), they are acting as writers who generate text for people to read. When they submit a link, they are locating content for people to read. When they upvote or downvote, they are acting somewhat like editor…

It's not about unpaid work though, it's employee-like unpaid work. https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/337123/345240 has some interesting discussion of this. In practice, that means that normal commenters or people using social media aren't relevant for two reasons: * There's minimal control over their actions from the 'employer'. There's some basic rules on what content is not allowed, but nobody says "you must write a…

> That's not true for moderators: they have specific tasks they must complete, and they must continue to be active, or they lose their moderation status.

That’s not correct: especially on the small sites, it’s acceptable for moderators to be inactive for long periods of time. It’s not great, but it’s understood that moderators have lives, and that they’re … not employees. I can state this confidently because I used to be a moderator on smaller sites, and I finally resigned from one (without having been in any way encouraged to) after almost a year of inactivity.

Re: Is Stack Exchange in violation of NY labor law by using volunteer moderators?

#58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Calling them transphobic when you "haven't been paying too much attention" is uncalled for. You really should make an attempt to understand the situation before making such accusations.

I'm sorry, maybe I was mistaken that the ex-moderators were engaging in the transphobic behavior of misgendering trans folks?

You are indeed mistaken about this fact, and it's somewhat telling that this is the version of the story which reached you. Go ahead and read the explanation from the moderator herself - https://judaism.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5193/stack-....

Re: Is Stack Exchange in violation of NY labor law by using volunteer moderators?

#59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Calling them transphobic when you "haven't been paying too much attention" is uncalled for. You really should make an attempt to understand the situation before making such accusations.

I'm sorry, maybe I was mistaken that the ex-moderators were engaging in the transphobic behavior of misgendering trans folks?

As far as has been publicly stated, nobody was advocating misgendering, there was only a question over details of the policy. See footnote 1 to the OP here

https://judaism.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5193/stack-...

"as a professional writer I, by training, write in a gender-neutral way specifically to avoid gender landmines, and sought clarification that this would continue to be ok"

Post reply on HN