DiscussMormonism.com

in HELL of us getting some extra moderators on this board? If not, you might as well erase the Board Rules.

Yours truly,

You-know-who

Jersey Girl wrote: ↑

Tue Dec 22, 2020 3:06 am

[Shades is there any chance] in HELL of us getting some extra moderators on this board? If not, you might as well erase the Board Rules.

I tend to take the view, based on his past statements and actions, that Dr Shades is well aware of this issue, and would very much like to appoint more moderators. But in order to do that, he has to find people who:

(a) Are capable of performing the tasks that fall to moderators;
(b) Will generally be trusted by other board members to act fairly and reasonably;
(c) Be willing to serve.

How many people on this board fulfil all three of those conditions? Few, if any, I'd say. And there is Shades' problem.

Maybe what the board needs is not more moderators, but less aggravators. If there was just even one single solitary right-sider who could argue/debate/discuss in good faith, there would be less need for foul weatherword gear.

Until that time comes the board may have to suit itself. That is, do as Cam suggests and argue the other side. Appoint/conscript alternating volunteers to advocate for the losing losers side. This looks very dangerous. So, in this case, you go first.

Chap wrote: ↑

Tue Dec 22, 2020 10:27 am

Jersey Girl wrote: ↑

Tue Dec 22, 2020 3:06 am

[Shades is there any chance] in HELL of us getting some extra moderators on this board? If not, you might as well erase the Board Rules.

I tend to take the view, based on his past statements and actions, that Dr Shades is well aware of this issue, and would very much like to appoint more moderators. But in order to do that, he has to find people who:

(a) Are capable of performing the tasks that fall to moderators;
(b) Will generally be trusted by other board members to act fairly and reasonably;
(c) Be willing to serve.

How many people on this board fulfil all three of those conditions? Few, if any, I'd say. And there is Shades' problem.

Well said. Thinking on this topic, this is where I land, too. The only thing I'd add to your list would be:

(d) Are the exact kind of moderators Shades approves, because they'd moderate like he would.

All who take an interest in this thread. Please note the DATE of the OP.

Chap wrote: ↑

Tue Dec 22, 2020 10:27 am

Jersey Girl wrote: ↑

Tue Dec 22, 2020 3:06 am

[Shades is there any chance] in HELL of us getting some extra moderators on this board? If not, you might as well erase the Board Rules.

I tend to take the view, based on his past statements and actions, that Dr Shades is well aware of this issue, and would very much like to appoint more moderators. But in order to do that, he has to find people who:

(a) Are capable of performing the tasks that fall to moderators;
(b) Will generally be trusted by other board members to act fairly and reasonably;
(c) Be willing to serve.

How many people on this board fulfil all three of those conditions? Few, if any, I'd say. And there is Shades' problem.

There are plenty here who know already know how to moderate the board and even more who have observed moderation techniques here long enough to demonstrate them. You have to moderate exactly as Shades would. There is in fact, a ceremony and oath involved that you will do that. I will not reveal the contents of that ceremony or oath, because they are sacred not secret.

I've always been a proponent of rotating mods in and off the team so they don't get burned out. Something tells me that EA lost interest in the board and he probably ended up not giving a damn about moderating it. Else what explains his no-notice departure? Rotation has never been tried.

Anyway, you need an admin who is willing to put out a call for mods in order to facilitate the creation of a new mod team. If candidates can separate their participation from their duties as moderator (for the overall good of the board) and most of us are capable of that, you're golden.

ETA: There is virtually NO moderator action that you can take that cannot be undone if you make a mistake. Just saying that for anyone who has considered volunteering for moderator and is worried they would take an action that couldn't be reserved.

Some Schmo wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 05, 2021 11:07 pm

Chap wrote: ↑

Tue Dec 22, 2020 10:27 am

How many people on this board fulfill all three of those conditions? Few, if any, I'd say. And there is Shades' problem.

(d) Are the exact kind of moderators Shades approves, because they'd moderate like he would.

You two are correct. Finding someone who meets all four of those criteria is like finding a needle in a haystack.

Dr. Shades wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 06, 2021 1:06 am

Some Schmo wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 05, 2021 11:07 pm

(d) Are the exact kind of moderators Shades approves, because they'd moderate like he would.

You two are correct. Finding someone who meets all four of those criteria is like finding a needle in a haystack.

I disagree. There are plenty of folks whose professional bearing, discipline, and ethics would equip them to separate private from duty-driven participation on the mod team.

We're not stupid, you know.

Jersey Girl wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 06, 2021 1:29 am

I disagree. There are plenty of folks whose professional bearing, discipline, and ethics would equip them to separate private from duty-driven participation on the mod team.

In theory, yes. But I speak from experience.

We're not stupid, you know.

Great! Then let he or she who embodies all four characteristics volunteer.