Thread:Sakaros/@comment-1998339-20190214024452/@comment-104549-20190214230829

I was drafting a message when I saw his on your wall; I weighed into the discussion there.

Moderators have Chat powers (e.g. kick, ban). They can also protect and delete pages and delete images. The major power Admins have that Moderators don't is blocking and/or banning users, so if that's an issue, you'll have to kick it up to Sav or me.

My general philosophy (overall, but specifically on the admin team) is "don't threaten a consequence you can't personally deliver". Often, I would use "Further [bad action] may result in a temporary block or permanent ban in accordance with the Blocking Policy", because I'd have to kick it up to Sav for the actual consequence (or not); the change since I became an Admin is now, when warnings are exhausted, it's "Further [bad action] will result in...", because now I have block/ban power and I can deliver the consequence myself. That said, Sav trusted my judgment, so I felt comfortable dropping the "may" caution; I trust your judgment, so you can feel comfortable using a "may" caution too.

Moderators also take the lead on noting policy violations, especially to new users who probably just need it explained; obviously I took the Image Policy and ran with it, but they're all fair game if you notice a violation. You've probably noticed I use a standard template for Image Policy warnings (and now I have one for duplicative/nonexistent categorization, though that requires a little more customization), but when I notice other policy issues, I usually write the message from scratch.