Curious if anyone was motivated to volunteer to be a mod because I threatened to RFC Keeed if they didn’t.
cassette nominated me in the About Moderation thread a few weeks ago and I ignored it because I’m kind of busy with IRL stuff and don’t want to commit to helping out around here when I’m not sure if I’ll be able to. So I’m still interested and can be added to this thread but can’t guarantee I’ll be available at all times.
6 Likes
I think the beauty of the mod system is that each mod is incremental. So the fact that a potential new mod (like you) might not be available sometimes doesn’t at all negatively affect the collective mod group’s ability to do stuff. If you’re able to do any moderating at all (assuming it’s good, which I believe it would be), you would be a positive addition.
3 Likes
Yep, I wholeheartedly endorse this.
I saw that @hokie also offered to mod in another thread. Seems like they would be a good addition.
Re: Bruce’s question above, I don’t have enough run-ins with Keed to have a strong opinion. Quite frankly I don’t really want to be a moderator. But I’d rather try and be a good one than potentially watch this place fall apart helplessly from the sidelines. I definitely would not be someone who’s consistently available, but I would at least try to encourage empathy rather than vitriol whenever possible.
2 Likes
I did, thanks for the heads up. I think your thoughts below sum up my position pretty well. I appreciate this community and would be willing to take a turn supporting it.
This is not the place for this discussion, but I do want to note that I always liked microbet’s idea of rotating mods to give it a true community feel, like each person taking their turn / doing their duty. I’d be more comfortable taking a mod role with a defined term, perhaps six months, so that there is a clear opportunity for the community to provide input (and, to be honest, for me to have a target date for retirement if it turns out to be absolutely miserable 
).
I’ll accept consideration for now. I’ve posted my honest thoughts in several recent threads, so folks are welcome to view those posts and ask if they have further questions. I’ve never been a mod before so I don’t really have a style but my initial plan would be to be pretty hands-off.
2 Likes
Our standard mod term is 6 months, and there’s no obligation or expectation to seek re-election if you have any reluctance at all.
1 Like
Plus even if you get tired of it before the six months are up you can pretty much goof off for the remainder of the term. Things are pretty relaxed here when it comes to moderation. Let’s get you voted in.
5 Likes
No to Rigby unless he / she is a direct swap (US: trade) for the walking carpet.
Nononocantsleep - Yip
otatop - Yip
Given the number of candidates, I see no need to push through on my threat of an RFC for Keeed unless he publicly expresses a desire to be a mod when hi current ban expires.
I’m in favor of all.
+2
+3
1 Like
Still counting 'em up there Jman?
What would you say a “horizontal modding” system is? I mean, they claimed to hate the RFC/voting system that we have now, which seems fairly horizontal to me. If it were truly vertical, there would be no votes. we’d have rules, mods that enforce those rules, and no voting or endless discussions about 3-day bans. It would just happen.
I read that PM thread where they mercilessly mocked the RFC system we have.
How would it truly be different? How would they make mod decisions in this sub forum that would be different than what we have now?
I vote for more mods, yes please. That way I don’t have to worry about this shit anymore, because if it were up to me, hell yes I’d get rid of the stupid RFC and voting on every damned thing system and pin a set of rules, a set of standard consequences for breaking said rules, and I’d nuke the entire “about moderation” style threads from orbit.
No bitching, no whining, if you break the rules, you do the time. Break them again, you do more time. And so on.
I’m a yes for everyone.
3 Likes
Also I’ll be a mod, fuck it why not right?
11 Likes
No on Rugby
Yes on both Otatop & nonstopcan’tsleep
1 Like
I don’t want to speak for them as I was not part of the organization of their idea so please read this as my understanding only. I could be very wrong.
I would make a few points that I think they would make,
-
the rfc system is overly bureaucratic resulting in making it very hard to initiate change. A few would argue it is designed to make change very difficult. I am one of the most regular posters here and I don’t really understand it!
-
by horizontal I think they want a model where individual mods don’t moderate behaviour with bans, rather the community moderates behaviour with social pressure, ignoring ect. Should something like a ban be required it is via vote. Mods only execute community will, not their own.
-
any mods that exist must rotate. Not can. Must. This prevents entrenched power base and the accumulation of bias between posters and those with the power to remove them. Mods are basically those with access to the back end, not decision makers.
I don’t see any of these as bad on the face of it. 1 and 3 I generally support. 2 seems a bit of “I wish people weren’t people” but I see no reason it can’t be tried.
The thing they absolutely don’t want is unchained where anything goes. None of the people organizing are racist, sexist, bigoted etc. None of them want a less kind forum. They think this will make a more kind forum.
I think their defining characteristic is they tend to be further on the authoritarian scale than some of us and they bristle at a community model with individuals who are imbued with the sole power to remove people. They see this very idea as anathema to the whole idea of community.
9 Likes
???
That is what’s currently happening and is like, the entire point
3 Likes
This right here is a good post
5 Likes