Moderate group discussions

I need you to keep the product-management group civil this week. Scan new posts and the top 20 comments every morning, remove spam or self-promotion that isn’t tied to product practice, and flag any thread where tempers flare or someone posts confidential company info. When you flag, add one-sentence context: who posted it, which company they name, and why it troubles community norms. Follow up after removal with a private note to the poster explaining the rule and next steps.

Before I post a sticky about interview techniques, make it clear why members should read it: surface the biggest benefit in the first two lines, summarize three quick takeaways, and call out any sections that might trigger heated debate (salary, hiring bias). Also point out where comments will add value versus where they’ll derail the thread.

Two senior PMs have started a heated exchange about take-home tests; one accuses the other of elitism and the thread is attracting outsiders. I’m worried this will split the group and chase away junior members. I don’t know the posters’ full histories or whether either is a serial provoker. What’s the least escalatory step to calm the thread, what wording do I use publicly, and how should I privately message the two participants to reduce repeat incidents?

Over the last six months the product group keeps getting flooded with vendor pitches and off-topic rants after high-engagement posts. Each cleanup takes hours and members complain about noise. What habitual moderation changes should I make so fewer posts go off the rails, how do I communicate new norms to the 8,000 members without alienating contributors, and what one enforcement action will stop repeat offenders?