Shortcomings of current models of moderation have driven policy makers, scholars, and technologists to speculate about alternative models of content moderation. While alternative models provide hope for the future of online spaces, they can fail without proper scaffolding. Community moderators are routinely confronted with similar issues and have therefore found creative ways to navigate these challenges. Learning more about the decisions these moderators make, the challenges they face, and where they are successful can provide valuable insight into how to ensure alternative moderation models are successful. In this study, I perform a collaborative ethnography with moderators of r/AskHistorians, a community that uses an alternative moderation model, highlighting the importance of accounting for power in moderation. Drawing from Black feminist theory, I call this "intersectional moderation." I focus on three controversies emblematic of r/AskHistorians' alternative model of moderation: a disagreement over a moderation decision; a collaboration to fight racism on Reddit; and a period of intense turmoil and its impact on policy. Through this evidence I show how volunteer moderators navigated multiple layers of power through care work. To ensure the successful implementation of intersectional moderation, I argue that designers should support decision-making processes and policy makers should account for the impact of the sociotechnical systems in which moderators work.

翻译：当前审核模型的缺陷促使政策制定者、学者和技术专家探索内容审核的替代性方案。尽管替代性模型为网络空间的未来带来希望，但若缺乏适当支撑框架，这些模型仍可能失效。社区审核员常面临类似的共性问题，因而发展出应对这些挑战的创造性方案。深入了解这些审核员的决策机制、面临的困境及成功案例，能为确保替代性审核模型的有效实施提供重要启示。本研究通过与采用替代性审核模型的r/AskHistorians社区审核员开展协作民族志研究，揭示了将权力维度纳入审核框架的重要性。借鉴黑人女性主义理论，我将此称为"交叉性审核"。聚焦于体现r/AskHistorians替代性审核模型典型特征的三个争议事件：关于审核决策的分歧、对抗Reddit平台种族主义的协作行动、以及动荡时期对政策的影响。通过实证证据，我展示了志愿者审核员如何通过关怀工作应对多重权力层级。为确保交叉性审核的成功实施，我认为设计者应支持决策流程，政策制定者需考量审核员所处社会技术系统的影响。