Why so many new mods?
Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2011 2:05 am
I may have missed the explanation. I recall Shades saying the current mods could use some help. But how many do we really need?
I like what RenegadeofPhunk said in his poll thread: maybe people should focus more on reporting what they find offensive rather than the mods acting as sheriff, prosecutor, and judge?
I think our court system bears this out - in a community where free speech is the ideal, with rules to prevent total anarchy, doesn't it seem better to let the principle of free speech govern what gets identified as needing moderation? And then let the mod act as the impartial third party. If a mod feels something needs moderating, other than blatant profanity, why not have them step back and report it as if they were a normal poster? That way, no mod is editing in a gray zone based on their own opinion, but instead the person acting as judge and editor is always the third party?
It might appease some of the unspoken and spoken frustration people seem to be feeling about the moderation right now by adding a check/balance.
Of course, I reiterate that blatant profanity should be the exception. But why not do something that is based on democratic principles similar to our own system in the US, instead of deputizing half the board?
Just a thought. But I'd still like to know why we need to add so many new mods.
ETA: and they should put their name to their edits. It's only reasonable on a board governed by free speech. And it may scare some of the people who are thinking of being a mod away who should be scared away.
I like what RenegadeofPhunk said in his poll thread: maybe people should focus more on reporting what they find offensive rather than the mods acting as sheriff, prosecutor, and judge?
I think our court system bears this out - in a community where free speech is the ideal, with rules to prevent total anarchy, doesn't it seem better to let the principle of free speech govern what gets identified as needing moderation? And then let the mod act as the impartial third party. If a mod feels something needs moderating, other than blatant profanity, why not have them step back and report it as if they were a normal poster? That way, no mod is editing in a gray zone based on their own opinion, but instead the person acting as judge and editor is always the third party?
It might appease some of the unspoken and spoken frustration people seem to be feeling about the moderation right now by adding a check/balance.
Of course, I reiterate that blatant profanity should be the exception. But why not do something that is based on democratic principles similar to our own system in the US, instead of deputizing half the board?
Just a thought. But I'd still like to know why we need to add so many new mods.
ETA: and they should put their name to their edits. It's only reasonable on a board governed by free speech. And it may scare some of the people who are thinking of being a mod away who should be scared away.