How to write moderation rules for Skool

To moderate a Skool community, publish short rules based on observable behavior and support them with an internal procedure. Members should understand what is expected of them; staff should know which response fits and who can authorize it. Start with problems that actually occur in your community rather than an endless list of prohibitions. This approach is an operational recommendation, not a proven standard for effective moderation.

1. Turn values into observable behavior

Replace “be respectful” with examples: challenge arguments without insults, request permission before posting conversations, and disclose your business relationship when recommending a service. Distinguish disagreement, unsolicited promotion, and disclosure of personal information. Include an acceptable example beside each boundary. Publish a dated version and explain where changes can be found. Do not enforce a new rule retroactively as though it had always been in place.

2. Assign decisions according to permissions

Skool’s documentation says moderators can approve or decline members, remove reported posts, and delete comments; they cannot access Classroom or Calendar settings. Admins can access everything except billing settings. Check those permissions before assigning responsibilities. Specify who reviews a disputed removal, and avoid having someone decide an appeal about their own action. Keep your internal decision authority separate from whatever technical permissions a role happens to provide. 1

3. Use a checklist before intervening

• Identify the behavior and specific rule without assigning motives.
• Check context, earlier messages, and any exposed information.
• Choose a proportionate response and record who authorizes it.
• Explain the reason without repeating sensitive information.
• Offer a review route and identify who will respond.

4. Explain the decision and review mistakes

Example message: “We removed the comment because it included a personal attack, which conflicts with rule two. You can restate your disagreement by focusing on the idea. If we missed context, please use the review channel.” Avoid public arguments about individual sanctions, vague threats, and different treatment for popular members. Review uncertain decisions as a team and update examples when a rule repeatedly produces conflicting interpretations.