| |
|
Perhaps I'm poorly-disposed today, but I don't really want to have to electioneer for the post because having my respective merits & demerits debated publicly would almost certainly crush this presently fragile ego. The simplest solution, and one I think more preferable is (and I think that there's a growing need for a clearout and reinstantiation of moderators in most if not all forums) a cumulative election whereby everyone who wishes to do so can chuck two names, or say four for convo, in for any forum they want to vote on and the top ten or twenty (again, in the case of the busier Conversation) make the grade. There are a number of posters still on mod status who post irregularly if ever, and also a number of posters whom imo it's [overstatement]frankly outrageous[/overstatement] that they're not mods, and this method is more, well... positive and open. Yays, not nays. And folks don't have to say why they themselves're worthy, which is not something I personally enjoy in any case and not - I think - something for one to judge about oneself, communitywise. I'd like to do this over a month, but logistics are at a planning stage, and I'm sure someone will quash this foetal idea of mine before long. In this case - I would have proposed Miss Wonderstarr but ze doesn't seem to post in Comics anymore.
Fair enough. However, if you do become moderator in Comics, could you undertake not to embark on campaigns of birthdaygate-style deletion (a), and to disagree with other moderator's requests with a little more respect than "for cry-eye, dad" (b)? I'd find that, as somebody who used to moderate Comics and still participates in discussion about comics, reassuring.
...
As such, I don't think moderator positions should necessarily be awarded based purely on long involvement
The short answer to both is 'yes'; the long answer is (a) well, without checking, I'm fairly sure I did expand upon my thinking quite shortly afterward - immediately in thread terms. Also I consider Boboss a chum, hence the extra cheek. I'm moderately distressed he's reduced to swearing about my behaviour and absolutely apologise for my part in reducing him to this. With regard to the issue discussed therein, if we want across the board ontopica in Comics - well, I've not seen it; I've seen one man (Boboss) attempt to hold back the tide in 3-4 threads maybe, so the current climate led to a disagreement on the issue/its enforcement, etc. It's entirely likely the forum has been disintegrating over a long period of time, with periods of recuperation, and I know people whose contribution I used to enjoy greatly and who still post elsewhere on the board are not posting much, if at all, in that forum. This is probably a problem.
Anyway, if we do want that, and I'm all for more tidy rather than less, then lets do it all over. Mod or otherwise, I'll happily assist if that's to be a directive.
Long (b) having seen how that worked out: no, I certainly wouldn't propose a delete for all but the most obvious things - doubles, reqs - without lengthy discussion in the moderator requests thread even if ultimately I can predict with reasonable confidence that next time someone wants to, say, poo on a thread, we'll probably just fight there and nothing will happen to the thread.
Incidentally, am I to assume that if anyone else proposes themselves here that they will be subject to similar interrogation? I absolutely do agree that long involvement itself is a poor benchmark for whether any poster be modded, though. See top: I believe it should come down to a community decision (or at least one based upon those who are invested enough to make themselves heard,) but as it stands I think it's basically about attracting Tom's attention at the right time (correct me if I err.) |
|
|
