As we say goodbye to the old year and welcome the new one, we have a tradition of sharing moderation stats for the preceding calendar year.

As most of you here are aware, sites on the Stack Exchange network are moderated somewhat differently to other sites on the web:

We designed the Stack Exchange network engine to be mostly self-regulating, in that we amortize the overall moderation cost of the system across thousands of teeny-tiny slices of effort contributed by regular, everyday users.
-- A Theory of Moderation

That doesn't eliminate the need for having moderators altogether, but it does mean that the bulk of moderation work is carried out by regular folks. Every bit of time and effort y'all contribute to the site gives you access to more privileges you can use to help in this effort, all of which produce a cumulative effect that makes a big difference.

So as we say goodbye to 2021, let us look back at what we accomplished as a community... by looking at some exciting stats. Below is a breakdown of moderation actions performed on Sustainable Living over the past 12 months:

Action Moderators Community¹
Users suspended² 2 10
Users destroyed³ 269 0
Users deleted 1 0
Users contacted 3 0
Tasks reviewed⁴: Suggested Edit queue 14 15
Tasks reviewed⁴: Reopen Vote queue 0 1
Tasks reviewed⁴: Low Quality Posts queue 2 4
Tasks reviewed⁴: Late Answer queue 11 8
Tasks reviewed⁴: First questions queue 6 14
Tasks reviewed⁴: First Post queue 32 54
Tasks reviewed⁴: First answers queue 7 26
Tasks reviewed⁴: Close Votes queue 5 8
Tags merged 4 0
Tag synonyms proposed 5 0
Tag synonyms created 3 0
Questions reopened 2 0
Questions protected 4 1
Questions migrated 2 0
Questions merged 1 0
Questions flagged⁵ 0 15
Questions closed 25 0
Question flags handled⁵ 13 2
Posts undeleted 0 2
Posts locked 0 9
Posts deleted⁶ 46 47
Posts bumped 0 59
Comments undeleted 1 0
Comments flagged 1 15
Comments deleted⁷ 160 128
Comment flags handled 15 1
Answers flagged 9 58
Answer flags handled 46 21
All comments on a post moved to chat 3 0


¹ "Community" here refers both to the membership of Sustainable Living without diamonds next to their names, and to the automated systems otherwise known as user #-1.

² The system will suspend users under three circumstances: when a user is recreated after being previously suspended, when a user is recreated after being destroyed for spam or abuse, and when a network-wide suspension is in effect on an account.

³ A "destroyed" user is deleted along with all that they had posted: questions, answers, comments. Generally used as an expedient way of getting rid of spam.

⁴ This counts every review that was submitted (not skipped) - so the 2 suggested edits reviews needed to approve an edit would count as 2, the goal being to indicate the frequency of moderation actions. This also applies to flags, etc.

⁵ Includes close flags (but not close or reopen votes).

⁶ This ignores numerous deletions that happen automatically in response to some other action.

⁷ This includes comments deleted by their own authors (which also account for some number of handled comment flags).

Further reading:

Wishing everyone a happy 2022! ^_^

1 Answer 1


I'd like to add some context around "Questions closed," and why the numbers look the way they do:

Action Moderators Community¹
Questions closed 25 0

Per an earlier discussion on meta, there was some consensus that the question closing threshold on Sustainability.SE should be three votes instead of the standard five. While that post is still , the moderators had a discussion and implemented this strategy:

  • Normally, a close vote from a moderator is binding (i.e. regardless of how many non-moderators vote to close, once a moderator votes the question will be closed).
  • In order to foster community participation, we try to avoid unilaterally closing a question (unless there's a problem such as spam, code of conduct violation, etc, in which case we'd delete the question).
  • However, we are community moderators, so our voice as community members also counts.
  • Thus, when we see that a question has two close votes already, if we agree that the question should be closed, we'll cast our binding vote as the third.
  • In this way, we have the effect of three-vote-close while we're waiting for the implementation.
  • That's why it looks like the moderators are doing all of the closing -- had three-vote-close already been implemented, you would see more of the closing coming from the community.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .