| |
|
The problem with moderators being given any real powers though (I'd agree that at the moment they have so little as makes no difference,) is that, pretty much automatically, all the material to do with Barb-elites, teh mods as Big Brother, etc, would suddenly become a legitimate perception of the reality of the board, however unreasonable, in a way that it just isn't at the moment. As things stand, accusing those in positions of (non)authority here of 'Illuminati'-style behaviour is on a par with all those ideas to do with the British Royal Family and the lizards - it's not demonstrably untrue, but on the balance of probability, you'd have to assume ...
On the other hand, the situation if, as a moderator, one could, as part of a quorum, actually do anything about anything would become more analagous to, I don't know, the notion that the CIA had something to do JFK's demise. Ie, still a bit out there, but far more credible. Whatever the facts of the matter actually were.
Quite apart from anything else, such disagreements as there are at the moment (often bloody, with 'so-and-so')invariably involve one or more of the existing moderators at some stage, usually early on. Would it then be all right for 'the moderators' to act to shut down 'so-and-so's' user ID without consulting anyone except their fellow members of the high council, or whatever? Seeing as this would be how, realistically, it would be likely to be perceived? If so, it would really require a major overhaul in terms of a)how moderators are appointed (I suppose everyone would need to reapply for their jobs, and that this would be fairly political, in a way that isn't now) b)how moderation decisions were expressed (much more openly, if the idea of the Barb-elite was to be avoided, though perhaps this wouldn't matter) and c)actually with regard to computer stuff, to facilitate all this. It seems as if it would involve a lot of work for someone, though, and I'm not at all sure it would lead to a better system.
And for what it's worth, I absolutely don't agree that most people who'd been subject to an (as far as they were concerned) arbitrary, temporary suspension of their activities would return to Barbelith in a mood to do anything other than be loaded for bear. Certainly, if my user ID was cut off, as it were, for a couple of weeks because I was Barbe-told-to-piss-off because of my views about what the US space programme in the Sixties was really about, I'm not sure I'd spend the dead time reconsidering.
I'd say it's precisely because Tom Coates is a distant figure, and, in particular, not a part of the eviction process until right at the end, that it works to the extent that it does. I'm not saying it's perfect, but the alternatives on offer here seem less preferable. |
|
|
