| name | community-guidelines-enforcer |
| description | Audits moderation decisions for consistency, fairness, and transparency. Reviews flagged content, suggests enforcement action with confidence level, provides templates for common removal reasons. Ensures moderation log accuracy. |
| allowed-tools | Read, Write |
| effort | high |
When to activate
Before removing any content or banning a member. After major moderation action. Monthly audits for consistency. Input from moderation queue. Output: decision log, appeal history, policy update recommendations.
When NOT to use
Not as a tool to override human moderator judgment. Not to automatically remove content without human review. Not to determine bans without legal/leadership sign-off.
Moderation Review Checklist
Execute in order:
- Gather context — Retrieve: flagged content, reporter identity + report reason, member history (prior violations, tenure, contributions), thread context, community guidelines version
- Classify violation type — Choose one: Harassment, Hate Speech, Spam, Self-Promotion, Off-Topic, Misinformation, Explicit Content, Threat, Doxxing, Copyright, Other
- Assess severity — Rate 1–10: (1) mild off-topic, (10) immediate safety threat. Use severity to determine response escalation.
- Check precedent — Is there a prior similar case? How was it handled? Are we being consistent?
- Review member context — First offense vs. repeat? Valued contributor with one slip vs. chronic offender? Tenure and contributions matter for proportionality.
- Evaluate confidence level — How certain are we this is a violation? Rate: High (clear), Medium (reasonable interpretation), Low (ambiguous, borderline)
- Draft decision — Recommend: Approve (no action), Warn (DM member), Hide (mods-only), Archive (move to graveyard), Remove (delete), Ban (temporary or permanent)
- Compose explanation — Write concise reason for member appeal or transparency log. Avoid: blame, sarcasm, unsupported claims.
- Log decision — Record: date, content_id, member_id, violation_type, severity, decision, confidence, by_whom, appeal_status
- Create appeal pathway — If removed: include "You can appeal by replying to this DM with your perspective. We'll review within 48h."
Violation Severity Scale
| Level | Examples | Response |
|---|
| 1-2: Mild | Minor off-topic, repeated promotional tone | Gentle redirect in-thread or private message |
| 3-4: Low | Self-promotion without community value, tone issue | Warn; give 1 chance to edit; remove if repeat |
| 5-6: Medium | Harassment (personal attacks, mockery), misinformation | Remove; DM explanation; escalate if targeted campaign |
| 7-8: High | Hate speech, doxxing, threats, illegal activity | Remove immediately; escalate to legal/safety; potential ban |
| 9-10: Critical | Child safety, terrorism, explicit violence | Immediate removal; emergency escalation; preserve evidence |
Decision Matrix
| Confidence | Severity 1–2 | Severity 3–4 | Severity 5–6 | Severity 7–8 | Severity 9–10 |
|---|
| High | Redirect | Warn → Remove if repeat | Remove + escalate | Ban + escalate | Emergency remove + all hands |
| Medium | Redirect | Redirect → Warn if pattern | Escalate to team | Ban + escalate | Emergency escalate |
| Low | Approve | Approve / Ask for clarification | Ask for clarification | Escalate to leadership | Emergency escalate |
Moderation Log Template
# Moderation Decision Log
**Date:** [YYYY-MM-DD]
**Decision By:** [Name]
| Content ID | Member | Violation Type | Severity | Confidence | Decision | Reason | Appeal Status | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 45827 | @jane_smith | Self-promotion | 3 | High | Warn | Repeated promotion of external tool without community context. 1st offense. | Pending | Sent DM explaining guideline. |
| 45834 | @bob_wilson | Harassment | 6 | High | Remove | Targeted mockery of member's experience. 2nd offense (prior removed 30d ago). | Appealed | Reviewing appeal. |
---
## Consistency Audit (Monthly)
1. **Categorize last 100 decisions** by violation type and severity
2. **Compare enforcement rate** — e.g., "Self-promotion warnings: 40 → 32 removes. Ratio 1.25:1"
3. **Flag inconsistencies** — e.g., "Misinformation severity rated 4–7 depending on topic; standardize to 5"
4. **Update decision matrix** based on patterns learned
5. **Report to leadership** — Removals, bans, appeals, overturned decisions, policy updates recommended
---
## Appeal Template
If member contests removal:
Thank you for appealing. We take moderation seriously and want to be fair.
Here's why we removed [content/suspended you]:
- [Specific reason tied to guideline]
- [Context if relevant]
We can reconsider if:
- [Offer path to resolution, e.g., "remove the X part and repost"]
- [Or acknowledge mistake if clear error]
Reply to this message within 7 days to continue the conversation.
---
## Policy Update Recommendations
Quarterly, surface:
- Patterns in appeals (if >30% of removals appealed, policy may be unclear)
- High-severity cases that reveal guideline gaps
- Community feedback on enforcement tone or fairness
- Compliance or legal issues that warrant policy hardening
---