Donate SIGN UP

Moderators

Avatar Image
anotheoldgit | 15:08 Sat 05th Mar 2016 | Editor's Blog
93 Answers
Why should Moderators who are debating in opposition, be allowed the power to remove posts, surely they should be seen to be either impartial or not given the power to remove?

Answers

1 to 20 of 93rss feed

1 2 3 4 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
O heavens
let us stop contemplating our navels
wondering why Mr X is always zapped and that awful Mr Y NEVER is

and get back to the important threads like Jerry Hall ?
If the Mods where shown to be biased, the ED would no doubt have a quiet word in their shell-like or remove their powers.
ya! wat 'e said^
Sure the ABEd gets to see what has been removed and can take an objective view of removed posts?

You are coming over as increasingly paranoid AOG!
It's because AOG is in the OUT camp, eccles.....
Despite the oft-repeated claim that the Ed reviews all removed posts, I know he/she doesn't.
Did he/she say why he/she doesn't Svejk?
well if you say that Schweik, then it must be true .....
Question Author
EcclesCake

/// Sure the ABEd gets to see what has been removed and can take an objective view of removed posts? ///

If the Ed had time to scrutinised every thread or post that is removed, he or she would have no need of Mods.
I can understand if a thread is removed and the box marked 'Spam/Advert' is the cause then a full read of the post would not be necessary.
I'd love to know where all of these 'removed' posts are occurring because
(a) it's certainly not me that's been removing them ; and
(b) I don't see vast numbers of gaps where posts have been deleted.

Apart from some 'routine tidying up' (e.g. removing a question which was posted in the wrong category, where the questioner has already re-posted it correctly anyway), I struggle to remember when I last deleted an individual post. There have been a few occasions recently where I've removed entire threads for legal reasons (i.e. because of the 'sub judice' rules) but I, for one, simply don't go around zapping anything that I happen to disagree with and I've seen no evidence of anyone else doing it either!
There has been a large quantity of answers removed in the last week, often in clusters.
AOG, I am crediting the Editorial team with a modicum of intelligence. I am quite sure they know how to filter their view of removed threads and make a judgement to their validity or otherwise.

You really are sounding paranoid!
If you don't like the way this site is moderated, then don't use it.

Simple.
I am lead to understand that the AB EDs have lives outwith this site (hard to believe though that may be) and he delegates his powers to those he can trust and also to B00.

If anyone thinks they can do a better job, I am sure the Ab Editor would welcome applications
Rubbish.

The posts and threads that were removed from news were not because the moderator disagreed with the opinons. It was because the opinions broke the Site Rules. I did not remove any of the threads, but which ever moderator did, was acting correctly.

Moderators are not appointed for their neutrality but for their fairness.
Any particular reason you changed from talking about posts to threads, eccles?
The 'clusters' that you refer to, Agchristie, probably come about simply through some 'tidying up' by a moderator.

On the few occasions that I've deleted an individual post there have often been a string of comments about that post immediately after it. Deleting the original post alone would leave loads of posts which would simply baffle people joining the thread, so it's best to remove the lot.

For example, an intoxicated member might post a string of 4-letter words. The next half a dozen posts simply say 'Reported', 'Disgusting', etc but they'll all become meaningless when the original offending post is zapped, so the whole lot need to disappear if the thread is to retain any integrity.
I notice that a SpareEd has been posting.
It may be this is a newbie Ed who is being more zealous than they need to be.
Just a thought.
" he delegates his powers to those he can trust and also to B00."

oi! Are you saying I can't be trusted? Huh? Huh?



(might have a point ;-) )

1 to 20 of 93rss feed

1 2 3 4 Next Last