| |
|
I don't know why you're pluralising, Haus; the only other (mildly) controversial moderator decision I've ever done was fairly shortly after becoming one was to agree a thread lock, proposed by a mod, who also mods Comics, and in that case, as in every other where necessary, made myself accountable for my (and their, on that occasion, and - iirc - a third party's?) decision.
I missed that one, Duncs - I was thinking of the time you refused the deletion of a post by somebody who had been clearly identified as not wanted or welcome on Barbelith, and the deletion of whose posts wherever possible was policy, because you didn't think the content of that particular post merited deletion. My understanding of how that played out was that once Tom had restated the position, you acknowledged that you were unaware of the policy.
The problems with your approach to deletion I already outline, here, and again I thought that we had explained and understood together reasonably satisfactorily the limits of this approach. I'm a bit confused by your hip-hop example, as it seems to be saying that you feel that it would be appropriate to delete posts which are contentless attenton-seeking (which personally I don't have a huge problem with, as long as fair warning is given), but respond to a request for threadrot to cease in another discussion, in Comics, with "for cry-aye, Dad", and then, when challenged, a regretful admission of your role in the moderator trying to keep order being "reduced" to swearing.
So, I missed the thread lock request you cite above, and would be happy to take a look at that as well. At present, my only ambivalence about you moderating fora outside the Conversation is what you have taken from previous decisions, and whether you would replicate them. In a sense, this is unfair, because it means that I am looking at you in terms of your form as a moderator, whereas other people here get a basically clean slate on that, because they have not been moderators. There is precedent for moderator applications being rejected on personality, but I have no trouble at all with you on a personal level - I just want to be reassured that you are not going to aim, as a moderator, not to make decisions which would endanger the quality of the forum, is all. If that is likely, then I think one could without, I hope, causing offence, suggest that you would be better expressing your interest in and dedication to the Comic Books forum by contributing high-quality posts and threads to it.
Ultimately, however, this is just my personal ambivalence. I'm no longer a moderator in comics, just a concerned citizen. I would hope that if and when you become a moderator in Comics you do reflect on what I've said, though.
Oh, IMHBECO - In my humble but evidently/eminently/empirically correct opinion. My little joke. |
|
|
