[throwawaysugar]

> Not saying dang never blocks users/comments, but it's exceedingly rare and I've only seen it for the most obnoxiously egregious behavior after (usually multiple) warnings.

Issuing warnings or reminding people of the guidelines (rules) is also part of being a moderator, so the moniker is perfectly cromulent to describe dang's role

[cowpig]

I had never heard the word "cromulent" and so that led me to a Mirriam Webster article describing how The Simpsons made the word up for a joke and then from there "seeped into our lexical consciousness". Worth a read!

https://www.merriam-webster.com/wordplay/what-does-cromulent...

[throwawaysugar]

It's way too good a word to be left unused! ;-) That whole episode is hilarious tbh

[hn_throwaway_99]

My issue isn't so much with the word, but it's that so often I see tons of users who are clearly bringing preconceived notions about how the moderator role works at Reddit and thinking it works the same here. At the very least there definitely aren't moderators, plural, on HN currently by that definition.

The other reason I think "admin" is a much better word is that it much more clearly indicates that this is a special, privileged role. That vast majority of "moderation" on HN is done by normal users with upvotes, downvotes and flagging (and also, of course, by automated systems e.g. with spam filters/bot detection).

But again, my primary point is that I see users blaming "the mods" for why their post is downvoted or hidden, when usually it's that people just don't want to acknowledge that the community, at large, didn't think they were contributing productively to the discourse of the site.