Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:
I think showing up to the forum constantly moaning about us moaning about DCP or SeN didn’t do Sledge any favors with regard to trust. Tack on soliciting Qultist for his moderator vote with an “I won’t let that crap slide.”, and there you go. Actions taken by Sledge as a mod would most likely viewed as a vendetta.
- Doc
Oh please, I was joking.
But okay you’re entitled to your opinion.
That’s why I only ask for a 90 day trial. (I’d say 30 or 60 days, but that might not be enough time to moderate anything.)
Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:
Why do you want a moderator position so bad?
- Doc
As I’ve said, I’ve moderated a lot in the past and have enjoyed the problem solving aspect of it that sometimes emerges. Also being a moderator helps me feel like I’m contributing something to the community.
I get that mods need to be volunteers, and that nominations are not acceptable.
But do/should the ordinary members of the board have any say in the selection or approval of the volunteers.
If member X has an issue with member Y becoming a mod, is there a mechanism (other than commenting on this thread) to make that known, and have it taken into consideration.
We voted on whether to have mods - should we be allowed to vote on which to have?
You can help Ukraine by talking for an hour a week!! PM me, or check www.enginprogram.org for details. Слава Україні!, 𝑺𝒍𝒂𝒗𝒂 𝑼𝒌𝒓𝒂𝒊𝒏𝒊!
Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:
Why do you want a moderator position so bad?
- Doc
As I’ve said, I’ve moderated a lot in the past and have enjoyed the problem solving aspect of it that sometimes emerges. Also being a moderator helps me feel like I’m contributing something to the community.
Sledge, to Dr. Shades, on SeN wrote:
Let me start over.
A white person who creates a site called "Black people information", or more accurately--since "Mormon" is not the preferred name--"Information about the Negro" has created a racist site and probably is a racist. That is not in dispute. I don't need to be a particular color or race to understand that. (If you don't understand this very fundamental thing, then you aren't equipped to have this discussion.)
Suppose also that this same white person hosts another site--a message board--called "discussion about the negro race," which is primarily directed at discussions how much "negroes" are wrong, believe stupid things, hate and disrespect white people, and much more. The person who has created and hosts these two sites is quite probably a bigot. That is not in dispute. I don't need to be a particular color or race to understand that. (If you don't understand this very fundamental thing, then you aren't equipped to have this discussion.)
That's the analogy. Here's the reality:
You, a non member of the Church of Jesus Christ, created and have maintained a site called "Mormon Information." You are not a member, and Mormon is not the preferred name. This makes your site a bigoted site and you, quite probably, a bigot. Enhanced by the fact that you have run and paid for a message board where other bigots and haters post primarily about Dr. Peterson, but also post about how much they hate the Church of Jesus Christ. So, two bigot sites created and maintained by a single person who is not affiliated with the church means that there is high probability that you are a bigot.
Lol. Do you need to let something out? I'm not mad. I am noting what you've said about this board. It engenders a lot of distrust, and in my opinion it disqualifies you as a legitimate moderator, your untimely 'apology' notwithstanding.
I think showing up to the forum constantly moaning about us moaning about DCP or SeN didn’t do Sledge any favors with regard to trust. Tack on soliciting Qultist for his moderator vote with an “I won’t let that crap slide.”, and there you go. Actions taken by Sledge as a mod would most likely viewed as a vendetta.
- Doc
Actions taken by mods are always taken by someone to be motivated by something that they aren’t. It’s the nature of the beast. As Jersey Girl says, moderator actions can be undone. And Shades will work with moderators who drift off course.
One thing I think we tend to do around here is judge folks by their worst moments on the board and use those s weapons to deny each other opportunities for change and growth. Shades posted the job description. Sledge said he’s willing and able. And it seems odd to me not to have a Mormon on the mod team at Mormon Discussions.
He stepped up. He says he’s got experience. It’s Shades’ call, but if I end up on the team, I’d love to have an LDS member I could consult on issues.
he/him we all just have to live through it,
holding each other’s hands.
I get that mods need to be volunteers, and that nominations are not acceptable.
But do/should the ordinary members of the board have any say in the selection or approval of the volunteers.
If member X has an issue with member Y becoming a mod, is there a mechanism (other than commenting on this thread) to make that known, and have it taken into consideration.
We voted on whether to have mods - should we be allowed to vote on which to have?
I think Shades has always selected the mods. They need to be people he has some confidence in. If you have concerns about anyone who has volunteered, either PM Shades or post them here and talk through it with the person you are concerned about.
he/him we all just have to live through it,
holding each other’s hands.
One thing I think we tend to do around here is judge folks by their worst moments on the board and use those s weapons to deny each other opportunities for change and growth. Shades posted the job description. Sledge said he’s willing and able. And it seems odd to me not to have a Mormon on the mod team at Mormon Discussions.
He stepped up. He says he’s got experience. It’s Shades’ call, but if I end up on the team, I’d love to have an LDS member I could consult on issues.
Worst moments are one thing, repeatedly defining this board, in discussions with Shades, as an anti-Mormon hate site whose members are bigots is entirely different. He is speaking specifically about this forum, and generalizing in the worst possible light the people on this forum, a forum which he now says he wants to moderate. I have no interest in having a person who expresses overarching sentiments like that in a position of trust related to the board.
But I'm curious why you would need to consult with an LDS member on issues related to moderation here, if Shades expects clones of himself?
One thing I think we tend to do around here is judge folks by their worst moments on the board and use those s weapons to deny each other opportunities for change and growth. Shades posted the job description. Sledge said he’s willing and able. And it seems odd to me not to have a Mormon on the mod team at Mormon Discussions.
He stepped up. He says he’s got experience. It’s Shades’ call, but if I end up on the team, I’d love to have an LDS member I could consult on issues.
Worst moments are one thing, repeatedly defining this board, in discussions with Shades, as an anti-Mormon hate site whose members are bigots is entirely different. He is speaking specifically about this forum, which he now says he wants to moderate. I have no interest in having a person who expresses overarching sentiments like that Ina position of trust related to the board.
But I'm curious why you would need to consult with an LDS member on issues related to moderation here, if Shades expects clones of himself?
Because being a clone of Shades requires a moderator to do his/her best to recognize her/his personal bias and to set it aside when acting as a moderator. Human brains have a tough time spotting their own biases, and my brain is no exception. What helps me spot my own bias is feedback from others, especially from people who have a different point of view than I do.
I don’t think I said I need to consult with an LDS person. But I think having an LDS person on the team would help me be a better clone of Shades.
he/him we all just have to live through it,
holding each other’s hands.
