I see that moderators have been created now.

Oddly, I can’t see any transparent process by which this was done. Who was in the running? Was there an election I missed? Some kind of debate? Or was it just a case of “who you know”?

Looks like the old Starling and (briefly) FTT moderators.

Surely it is entirely for the site creator to decide whom to appoint as a moderator? I don’t see any need for a debate on it personally.

Remember, let’s all be kind to one another :ok_hand:


When I decided to set this up, I first reached out to @Dan to get his opinion on this - always good to have a second opinion just to make sure I wasn’t stepping on any toes!

@Graham, I recall helping mod FTT at one stage, and I asked for a hand. Both Dan and Graham were part of the site before it was shared elsewhere.


I completely agree about it being the site owner choice

I may be wrong but I don’t detect anything in @tbutz post to suggest anything unkind, the transparency comment struck me as rather “tongue in cheek” actually :slight_smile:

I wasn’t being unkind. I was genuinely interested, and I hoped to spark a response so we could have a clear understanding of the process by which Moderators were being selected. I wasn’t picturing shadowy meetings and dangerous cabals.

Whilst I agree it’s up to @Mathew who they choose, as site owner/creator, I think there is a fine line to tread when it comes to such decisions, and any hint of nepotism can sour people very quickly if this is to be a genuine place for discussion and not some kind of feifdom. We all saw how a simple topic having prominence on FTT went…

Anyway, I don’t want the job myself (I have seen the nonsense they have to deal with!), but if someone else were interested, is there space for another? Is there a process?

1 Like

It’s early days, but I think we’d probably open it up to see who’d be interested in the role at a minimum.


Fair play it’s up to you @Mathew who you want and good to see two moderators @Graham and @Dan as moderating can be fun.


I moderate on two forums [not fintech] and am only there because I offered to help the owners out who might otherwise have struggled. I also have a little knowledge of the subject areas, which counts me out for fintech. It can be fun and only occasionally nasty and I enjoy it. R-


I too have moderated on two forums.

One needs commonsense and the patience of a Saint sometimes.

My personal thanks go out to anyone with the required attributes to keep things on track. One would hope though, contributors have the ability to moderate themselves and analyse their responses before they hit the post button. What one person thinks is acceptable commentary, someone else may have the complete opposite view. Finding the middle ground is not always easy.

1 Like

Maybe I’m not fit for this position (or so my other half tells me) :confused:


You are fine @Mathew and it’s good to get moderators to help your out.


I moderated FTT until the end, and would be happy to join the team here if you need another pair of hands.

I’m also a Discourse contributor and have written plugins and themes. So I can help out on the tech side if you have any questions - although looks like @Mathew knows what he’s doing :+1:


The editorialising of FTT (the Starling banner) was definitely a mistake, and I should have taken that up with Liam, as I could see it was putting people off, and making the site feel partisan.

But my approach with modding on FTT tended to be light touch. I quickly removed obvious spammers, but I deliberately avoided being heavy handed with topic split/merges or tone policing.

Modding is a very difficult balance to strike, and if mods intervene too much, it can cause aggro to spiral very quickly.


Ain’t that the truth. R-

I have to say, your approach to moderation is one that I admired. Had it not been for the shield next to your name, I’d never have guessed you were a moderator from your interactions. You certainly struck the right balance of separating moderation duties from discussion engagement. There was never a single hint of superiority, and I liked that.

Light handed approaches like that more often than not work better, I think. With that said, things never seemed to get quite as heated as on Monzo to warrant a firmer hand.


Thanks, @N26throwaway

The Monzo forum has deep-seated issues which we could discuss all day long…! (I’m not gonna go down that road on this friendly topic)

We’re lucky to have fintech-neutral and politically-neutral (so far) forums like


Thank you Chris for helping me discard the post I was about to hit the button on. I have no wish to revisit what is or isn’t wrong with that particular forum.


I second this! Dan and Graham are excellent choices. Decent folks. And I think a fresh start is best here, rather than trying to be a cut & paste of FTT.

There’s been a lot of good engagement from folks on here so far, not just from FTT, from the Monzo community too, and I’d love to see that continue and prosper. A completely fresh start, I think, is the best way forward to nurture what’s been started here.


I’d have to totally disagree with that, personally, but then again I’m far more of a fan of hands-off moderation as far as is acceptable. The Starling banner was a different matter, but seeing as that was an admin decision, I’m not sure how accountable (if at all) the mods were for it.

I must say I found your approach to modding there perfect. Things remained civilised but free speech was allowed to run its course, and I thank you for facilitating that.

I’d agree with all of that, also :slight_smile: