ChatterBank0 min ago
Moderators
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
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.
-- answer removed --
I have always remembered Lord Carrington (I think he’s now “the late” Lord Carrington) when he was in the FO talking about the nuclear deterrent. He said they only way that it would work was if people knew you had it, knew you would use it BUT did not know under what circumstances you would use it. i think that’s the same for many deterrents :)
@ABEd
My suggestion came out all wrong. Brain fade.
How about, whenever a mod contributes to a thread, they are locked out from deleting individual posts or the whole thread. This absolves them of all cłaims of interference.
Participate or moderate. Not both. (Please).
Personally, I just want the chance to see half the stuff which is getting zapped but I'm usually too busy typing a reply and some can only be lasting *seconds*.
I think that might be why AOG suspects someone *participating* in proceedings is doing it. (?)
My suggestion came out all wrong. Brain fade.
How about, whenever a mod contributes to a thread, they are locked out from deleting individual posts or the whole thread. This absolves them of all cłaims of interference.
Participate or moderate. Not both. (Please).
Personally, I just want the chance to see half the stuff which is getting zapped but I'm usually too busy typing a reply and some can only be lasting *seconds*.
I think that might be why AOG suspects someone *participating* in proceedings is doing it. (?)
Hypognosis - //I think that might be why AOG suspects someone *participating* in proceedings is doing it. (?) //
Trying to please a minority who are vociferous in their often unfounded and baseless complaints will simply drag the entire site down.
The moderation system works perfectly well for 99% of the people who post, so on that basis, coupled with the simple fact that there will always be those who are not happy with whatever is done - the simple solution is to let it carry on.
You cannot please all the people all of the time - if I was the Ed, I would not feel particularly minded to waste my time trying!
Trying to please a minority who are vociferous in their often unfounded and baseless complaints will simply drag the entire site down.
The moderation system works perfectly well for 99% of the people who post, so on that basis, coupled with the simple fact that there will always be those who are not happy with whatever is done - the simple solution is to let it carry on.
You cannot please all the people all of the time - if I was the Ed, I would not feel particularly minded to waste my time trying!
Thanks for clarifying Hypognosis. I understand now. It's not much use though if it's a normal thread that then goes bad is it? It would lock out moderators would could help out.
And again, why would we want them to stop participating? I think my original answer to AOG covers all this, more or less.
I think we're done with this thread. I'll be closing it now.
And again, why would we want them to stop participating? I think my original answer to AOG covers all this, more or less.
I think we're done with this thread. I'll be closing it now.
