Ok, good. I don’t think he’d get any heat at all if he’d lay off the trollolol. I could be wrong 🤷
1 Like
It’s obvious that he gives and he takes, which is evidence against both decreasing animosity to the former mod and that stepping down would reduce bias or the perception thereof. Maybe if he stopped posting in About Unstuck entirely it would stop, but that is true for just about anyone.
1 Like
I wasn’t accusing you as being part of the CoC. You asked what an upside is, and that’s an upside regardless of you being part of the CoC. Not giving into the 6 months long temper tantrum from a group that has largely acted in bad faith and was voted down is clearly a positive.
Rotating mods will also do absolutely nothing to solve the problems of a loud minority of bad faith actors who feel free to burn down the place to get… something I’m honestly not sure. They seemed to have given up on getting wookie demodded and given up on their own forum.
Anyways, rotating mods is dumb. It will do nothing to solve our current problems. Our problem isn’t power hungry mods abusing posters, it’s the power hungry posters abusing mods. What will help is more people taking mod responsibilities diffusing the amount of mod hate.
1 Like
Are we RINOs or the real deal?
1 Like
Wait, do we mean this?
You just gave a perfect example of the loud bad faith minority acting loudly and in bad faith. Nobody is running off meb. I’m disagreeing with them. Calling the forum ‘toxic bootlickers with a Republican mentality and love of authoritarianism’ is just lazy trolling. Be nicer remember?
Meb has been treated with nothing but respect here. No clue what thread you’re reading. OR, maybe you’re not reading and just chiming in with toxic bs, as per usual.
1 Like
Gonna pop back in to ask everyone to cool it and stop trading insults. I am not on anyone’s side here, but I do not appreciate the posts which questioned my motives. In my view, we were having a positive conversation until those were brought into the discussion.
I am not going to be deterred on this though, as I fully plan to bring forward two rules for up or down vote from this RFC. Rule 1 should be a slam dunk to pass, and I would love to discuss if there is anything that needs to be added to my original wording. Rule 2 will likely be more contentious, but I think some version of it would be an improvement for this forum. So I would love to have the discussion here focused on how we can word it to be the best model for the forum moving forward and leave any discussion of past, current, or potential future mods out of it. The best version of this rule will create a system that is positive for the forum regardless of who is or is not a member of the moderation team.
3 Likes
Victor buddy, you were never, ever on that boat.
1 Like
I took it as infantilizing and othering. I take it by your response here that you meant it as playful banter but when you are in a position of power over other people I think you need to understand how what you mean to be kind hearted ribbing (or however you want to put it) is not taken the same way as it would be if delivered by a peer.
No… I mean she gets some unfair criticism and some fair criticism.
From this post moving forward, I would appreciate it if you temp banned anyone who attacks another poster in this thread. I am not joking, and I plan to report all posts in violation of this request. This thread is for discussing the proposed rules and not for having your personal arguments.
While I am proposing a rule to establish a mod rotation, this is one small example of my implicit trust in anyone who serves in this position to handle business during their term.
6 Likes
I’d like to hear some arguments against rotating mods? All I can come up with is that it is kind of a pain to have the elections and/or find new mods every couple of months.
4 Likes
Appreciate it, just felt things going off the rails and wanted to get us back on topic.
3 Likes
I don’t believe there are any strong arguments against. It does require a shift in thinking to view taking on mod duties as temporary community service. I think under this system it is a 100% selfless duty with a defined time period. I am open to hearing arguments against, if they exist, that do not involve discussion of any particular person fulfilling the role.
My current rough proposal is 6 month terms, forced two month break after a 6 month term, and with each election any volunteer who meets a 2/3 threshold can be added to the mod team without a cap on number of mods.
I think a six month break would be better. Why does any one person need to be mod 3/4 of the time? 1/2 time at most seems better to me.
1 Like
It’s a fair point and my interests are honestly in finding what might be the best length to reach an overall consensus*. I wonder if meeting in the middle at 4 months would achieve this? Im interested in more people’s thoughts on length of break.
*Clarifying this, but my goal is to pass this rule. So i want to find what wording will gain the largest level of support from the forum as a whole. This means finding the line where no one gets exactly what they want, but everyone is kinda happy.
1 Like
Forced rotation of mods has always seemed silly to me. The more mods the better, but forcing out a good mod who wants to keep modding based on some arbitrary term limit seems counterproductive and has no upside I can see. Framing it as “for their own good” is patronizing and offensive.
5 Likes
I think the view is
-
The current mods have majority support (or did last time it was checked)
-
Why do we need to change mods if they are supported by the majority?
Then theres a bunch of implicit assumptions about the root cause of the all the disagreements.
– these seem valid points.
On the other side, it seems to be about forum dynamics and that have a circuit breaker every 6 months will keep everyone getting a long better. Which also seems valid.
3 Likes