Contributors + community · Working hypothesis
Group moderator
A person assigned to steward one or more group conversations. The need for moderation is documented; who performs it, whether they are HOL staff or trusted members, and response expectations are unresolved.
Primary goalKeep participation useful, respectful, and safe while giving contributors clear outcomes.
A path through the work.
A proposed sequence from the working persona. Access, approvals, and handoffs still need HOL review.
Review pending group contributions
approve or reject with explanation
handle member reports
hide harmful material
communicate a reason where appropriate
escalate serious or out-of-scope issues
review queue volume and unresolved cases.
What could get in the way.
A queue with context, consistent rules, manageable volume, role-specific authority, escalation support, and a visible audit trail. Region-level field notes need privacy review before publication.
Role relationship.
Scoped group moderator in the working model, without platform-wide authority. A group owner may also moderate if HOL chooses that design.
What this rests on.
Moderation questions in Howie's directive, the pending field-note state, and the roles proposal.
Working hypothesis; not a finding from member interviews or an approved production role.
What we need to learn.
Staffing, policy, turnaround expectations, appeals, and escalation ownership.