Promotion implies higher rep needed for privileges, and nobody has such

One of the consequences of being promoted out of beta is that much higher rep is now needed for all privileges - so high that very few users have such rep. Currently we have no 10K users and hence nobody has access to moderation tools. I think many users were employing some of these tools to help organize the site - keeping an eye on posts from new users, watching recent edits, etc. It's a great loss that we can no longer access them. It would make more sense to gradually increase the required privilege levels as the site grows. Can anything like this be done?

NOTE $\$ I find it strange that some people have downvoted this. Perhaps I should elaborate. This is not something I use much personally. Rather there are many helpful users who have more spare time than I who graciously spend their time retagging questions, adding better titles, etc. I presume that one way they efficiently locate many of these posts is via the mod tools. Unlike Qiaochu and I, many of these folks are a long way from reaching the new mod privileges. So it is a shame that we may lose their organizational skills due to the changes. Access to this data is helpful to the community at large. It's not even clear why such data is not accessible to everybody. I think it should be since it helps everybody to improve the site. At the least the data should be accessible to some non-infinitesimal portion of the community.

Note that the mod tools don't grant any new powers - they merely give access to lists of data that anyone could collect otherwise - though much less efficiently without special scraping scripts, etc.

• I suppose we'll have to wait for Qiaochu; he's the nearest to the mark, and he accumulates rep quite quickly. :) – J. M. is a poor mathematician Oct 25 '10 at 22:38
• Have the moderators pro tempore lost their moderator access now? – Rahul Oct 25 '10 at 23:02
• While this is being worked out, perhaps we should encourage people to start voting more. – Aryabhata Oct 26 '10 at 7:00
• @Jeff Atwood: as Bill says, "access to this data is helpful to the community at large. It's not even clear why such data is not accessible to everybody. I think it should be since it helps everybody to improve the site. [...] Note that the mod tools don't grant any new powers - they merely give access to lists of data that anyone could collect otherwise." Although I personally did not find the 10K tools useful in the beta, others might. Can you (or SE) explain why these features require huge reputation to use when they are just a digest of public information on the site? – T.. Oct 28 '10 at 19:25
• On second thought I recall that there may be a few pieces of data that wouldn't otherwise be accessible. However, most of the data in the 10K mod tools is accessible to everybody (but would require great effort to collect it without the aid of the platform). – Bill Dubuque Oct 28 '10 at 21:51
• It would be quite easy to display the public information in the 10K-tools to all users, with a separate decision as to whether otherwise invisible data (such as flags) should be displayed for all, some or none of the users. One just has to move the privilege check from "tools" to "flags" (or junk it entirely). This is a matter of not withholding something already built and working and formerly available, not a pie-in-the-sky feature request for the SE developers. – T.. Oct 29 '10 at 0:04

As far as privileges and capabilities are concerned it would be good to avoid having some animals be more equal than others, and also to have as little dependence on moderators as possible. Whatever reputation-based privilege hierarchy does exist should be as"flat" as is possible within the software setup at any given moment, with features granted to a large population of users (e.g., all of them). Problems can worked out by means that do not rely on macroscopic human intervention and instead utilize the micro-scale voting and tagging mechanisms with aggregation of the micro-information by algorithms.

In the meantime, within the current reputation and moderation system and its escalator of privileges, there are users below 2K (muad comes to mind, and there are others) who in the beta had been actively using edit capabilities to improve questions, add or fix TeX, etc --- and now can not contribute in that way. Also, editing is a way for some users to participate who are not as active in the Q & A. Narrowing the population with this capability would be a step backward from the beta-test.

• +1 for the Animal Farm reference. – Pete L. Clark Oct 26 '10 at 21:38

This is touched on in