| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 1,022 |
| | Posted: | | | | In light of Kens comment (below) we may finally be moving towards some form of moderation here in the forums.
On the assumption this will happen and a few users will be serving the community, who would you vote for?
I have tried to add as many very active users off the top of my head as possible into the choices, I apologise if I have missed you out.
- We're considering stepping up moderation at the cost of some liberty, but this thread is not the place to discuss it. If you wish, start a new thread to discuss the pros and cons of moderation, how far to go, etc. | | |  |
|
| Registered: March 29, 2007 |  Posts: 410 |
| | Posted: | | | | To bad that my english is not that good  otherwise I would like to be a moderator. There some great user in your list and its hard to choose only one. |
|
| Registered: March 15, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,459 |
| | Posted: | | | | Does this mean I have to start campaigning?  Do you want to keep the voting secret(ish)? Or do you want us to discuss our choices? |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 4,684 |
| | Posted: | | | | Personally I would want one or more impartial moderators. That would pretty much exclude anyone on the list, IMHO, as well as anyone else who participates regularly in the forum.
I'm not sure Ken's comment ("discuss the pros and cons of moderation, how far to go, etc.") meant selecting moderators. That would be a rather big "etc"... | | | My freeware tools for DVD Profiler users.
Gunnar |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 |  Posts: 2,366 |
| |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 6,635 |
| | Posted: | | | | This has been discussed before, but just because someone expresses their personal opinions on this forum does not mean that they could not effectively serve as a moderator.
Moderators should have anonymous handles here, e.g., Moderator 1, Moderator 2. No one should know who they are and there would need to be a way to report moderator abuse to Ken. If it became apparent that a moderator was injecting their personal bias into a thread, they should be fired on the spot. If a moderator "outs" themselves, they should be fired. These jobs would be critical to maintaining the tone of the forums. Heavy-handedness would be something to be very sensitive to.
Although I appreciate the votes cast for me, I currently do not have the time to serve. | | | | Hal | | | | Last edited: by hal9g |
|
| Registered: June 12, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,665 |
| | Posted: | | | | All due respect to the list members but GSyren is correct. Any moderator should be impartial. We aren't allowed to have threads discussing other forum members and this falls right into that category and should be stopped.
This is not a decision for us. | | | | Bad movie? You're soaking in it! | | | | Last edited: by tweeter |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 |  Posts: 1,380 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting hal9g: Quote:
This has been discussed before, but just because someone expresses their personal opinions on this forum does not mean that that could not effectively serve as a moderator.
Moderators should have anonymous handles here, e.g., Moderator 1, Moderator 2. No one should know who they are and there would need to be a way to report moderator abuse to Ken. If it became apparent that a moderator was injecting their personal bias into a thread, they should be fired on the spot. If a moderator "outs" themselves, they should be fired. These jobs would be critical to maintaining the tone of the forums. Heavy-handedness would be something to be very sensitive to. I think that sounds good. Maby a panel for Ken that he can quickly check all changes done by moderators. |
|
| Registered: March 15, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,459 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting tweeter: Quote:
All due respect to the list members but GSyren is correct. Any moderator should be impartial. We aren't allowed to have threads discussing other forum members and this falls right into that that category and should be stopped.
This is not a decision for us. Good point, although I believe that rule is to stop us from discussing individuals, this thread could easily go that way. And if Invelos chose the moderators then we'd get the moderators we deserve, not the ones we want!  |
|
 | Dan W | | Registered: May 9, 2002 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 980 |
| | Posted: | | | | Moderating a forum is tantamount to censorship. I know, I used to moderate two forums. Since this forum is already censored (in an already biased manner by Ken) moderators are just the next step.
This forum has always had an atmosphere of combativeness (been that way since 2001 that I know of for certain). To add a battery of biased moderators (this list is replete with biased forum members) would remove any heart this forum has.
Edit:
WOW!!! I got a vote!!! I didn't expect to see that. (no it wasn't me). | | | | Dan | | | | Last edited: by Dan W |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | Wow! I appreciate all the votes for me. I do have the time to take on such a thing... but I do not have the experience. If Ken asked it of me I would do my best (hopefully under a moderator user name) But I am also of the opinion that it is better off that any moderators should be actual Invelos employees instead of people from the userbase. Not only do I think they would be less likely to have their own strong opinion about the topics... but they would also have Ken's ear much more easily then any of us would. | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 2,366 |
| | Posted: | | | | I very much like Rick and Andy but I'm afraid they're not interested as it's been a long time since their last confession.  | | | Martin Zuidervliet
DVD Profiler Nederlands |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 1,136 |
| | Posted: | | | | I would only vote for Moderator 1, 2, 3 etc
With one mod specialising in each area - rules / submissions / images / general / etc. etc. etc. | | | Signature? We don't need no stinking... hang on, this has been done... blast [oooh now in Widescreen]
Ah... well you see.... I thought I'd say something more interesting... but cannot think of anything..... oh well
And to those of you who have disabled viewing of these signature files "hello" (or not) Registered: July 27, 2004 |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 1,242 |
| | Posted: | | | | In forum's like these the moderators should be unknown, else likelyhood of abuse could ensue.
Steve |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,635 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting FunkyLA: Quote:
I would only vote for Moderator 1, 2, 3 etc
With one mod specialising in each area - rules / submissions / images / general / etc. etc. etc. We'd need a bunch of them to provide 24X7 coverage if they are required to be "specialists". | | | | Hal |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 171 |
| | Posted: | | | | Just wandered over and read Kens full post on moderation. I'm happy to hear that he is looking into this and hopefully can find a good solution.
I agree that we should not be voting for (or against) anybody here. There is little good that can come from this. What Ken proposed is:
If you wish, start a new thread to discuss the pros and cons of moderation, how far to go, etc.
To me, this means we should discuss what we like or don't like about moderation. I think it could also include what we like or don't like about moderators (in general) and how they apply the moderation. Should moderators have the power to delete posts? Ban members from posting? Give an unlimited number of red arrows?
Is this the thread for this discussion? If so, let's hear the opinions. |
|