What would happen if the mods went on strike?

The end result would be that they’d just strip them of their moderator roles and hunt for someone else—someone foolish enough to take on the job for free under these exact same conditions.

stormyraven14 said:As we all know, a strike is simply a refusal to work due to unacceptable working conditions.

If we consider a scenario where a handful of moderators—just as an example—disagree with a specific rule and decide to go on strike, what would the fallout be?

According to them, of course.

In the US, with hundreds of thousands of people looking for work, the result of such a strike would likely just be a termination, followed by hiring even cheaper labor from the unemployment office. Is that a possibility here too?

What I mean is, if the majority of the moderators disagree with something but are "forced" to enforce it, would they get screwed over for not following orders?

Just like in the rest of the democratic, free, and liberal world, that strike would pass peacefully—much like a grocery shopping trip in the 1940s.

First, the administration would threaten them with termination. Then, the moderators union would emerge, eventually reaching a deal with the administration because, let's face it, everyone has a price. After that, the remaining dissatisfied group would organize into what I call the "Real Moderators Union."

The administration would call in the strikers, and the mods would verbally tear them apart on the forum. The admins would then demand protection for the forum, calling in all sorts of authorities to try and restore order.

Over on the East Coast—excuse me—on certain sub-forums, riots would break out. The mods would arm themselves, and the admins would respond with airstrikes.

Within a week, the forum would be swarming with trolls attacking everyone in sight, mostly those "peacekeepers" trying to grab whatever little they can for themselves.

There would be plenty of refugees, as people fled to other forums seeking safety.

Chaos would spread through the sub-forums, and within a month, the whole forum would be torn apart.

Not really.

They’d just end up replacing those mods with even worse ones—same old story, honestly...😬

Rachel Brooks63 said:None at all.

It’s just replacing one set of mods with an even worse group—business as usual, really... 😬

So, what I'm hearing is if I pull two or three strikes, I could end up as a moderator on the car forum too?

hmmmmmmmmmm 🙂

stormyraven14 said:So—after two or three strikes, I get a moderator gig over at Cars?

hmmmmmmmmmm 🙂

You're too optimistic 👋
—I'd probably need at least fifty or sixty strikes before they even look my way.😢

stormyraven14 said:As we all clearly understand, a strike is essentially just refusing to work because the working conditions have become unacceptable.

Let’s play a hypothetical scenario here. Suppose a handful of moderators—just for the sake of argument—disagree with a specific rule and decide to go on strike. What would the fallout actually be?

According to them, obviously.

In America, with hundreds of thousands of people looking for work, the result of a strike like that would simply be getting fired and replaced by someone even cheaper from the unemployment office. Is that how things work here, too? Is that an actual possibility?

What I'm trying to get at is this: if the majority of the moderators disagree with a policy but are "forced" to enforce it, would they end up screwed for not following it themselves?

I honestly think a "work-to-rule" situation in this context would be the absolute peak of 🤣 Grey Forum 😁

Elizabeth Anderson63 said:you're sweet, 👋
but I'm looking for at least 50 or 60 strikes... 😢

For cars? Honestly, don't aim too high if you ask me.
Just sign up for politics—that way, right when things start getting chaotic, you'll probably end up being handed a baton. And maybe a taser 😁

Nothing would actually happen...
Anderlon would just redirect everything to a 503, 408, or 504 error and leave it sitting there until the moderators union started blowing up their inbox demanding the forum be brought back online. 😬
As for the users? They wouldn't even realize anything was wrong. To them, that would basically just feel like a normal Tuesday.😍

It really all comes down to the specific rule in question and the underlying reasons why they're dragging their feet on enforcing it. Sometimes it’s because the rules themselves have been updated, and other times it’s just because there’s a change in the moderators union.

It makes absolutely no sense.

Who would they even strike against? Are they going after themselves?
They aren't getting paid, and there's nothing keeping them in those mod roles... unless their entire career consists of being an unpaid supermod on a forum where the main job is just dealing with 404s, 503s, and 504 errors...

What are your thoughts—is this someone with true potential? 😬

rustydrifter10 said:It all comes down to the specific rule and why they’re refusing to enforce it. Sometimes the rules shift, and sometimes the moderators change.

[Narrator Voice]

And occasionally... just occasionally... the admins themselves get swapped out. Usually because they simply couldn't keep the moderators in line! 😉

Douglas Barnes13 said:[NarratorVoice]

And sometimes... just maybe... the admins decide to shake things up. Usually because they just couldn't keep the moderators on a tight enough leash 😉

Honestly, anything can happen. At the end of the day, whether any of those scenarios actually play out depends entirely on what the owner wants or how the top-tier super-mods and admins feel about it.

Thomas Morgan67 said:Chaos would just bleed into the other subforums, and within a month, the whole forum would be torn apart.

I mean, how could they tear apart a forum that’s clearly already falling apart? 😁

Matthew Anderson said:How could they possibly shut down a forum that’s clearly already falling apart? 😁

To be honest, when I first sat down to write this, I hadn't fully grasped just how much of a mess this forum has become.😲

Andrew Jackson, we might need a fresh start.