Veknoid_Outcast said:
I'd actually like clarification on this also. If this is true, it may be counter-productive. One, it would lead to bottlenecks, particularly when head mods are unavailable. Two, it would concentrate a lot of power in the hands of a select few, thus diminishing what Pemalite correctly identified as the strength of the mod team: "The thing is... The mod team is comprised of many individuals who all have differing biases... So the mod team can argue a position and come to a conclusion that we can all agree on, making any individual biases ultimately irrelevant." |
It all depends a bit on the situation, but generally speaking, my experience isn't that you need the permission of a head mod to take action. If it's a particularly sensitive matter, or a borderline issue, it's encouraged to wait for their input, but outside of that I wouldn't say it's required by any means. Usually what will happen if one brings up an issue in mod chat, is that we look for a consensus between whoever is around at the time, or at least wait for a second opinion if nobody is currently around. If it's a particularly straightforward matter, it's also fine to simply take action, provided you at least mention it in mod chat, so it can be looked at later. I've done this quite a few times myself, and as long as it's noted for the record, the head mods have never taken issue. There may be some input on things they would have done differently in some cases, but I certainly wouldn't say that we're not given the freedom to do our jobs adequately.
