Voting on moderator's actions

5starpool

Sounds like a good idea to me, but only if it can be used as leverage in our bargaining with the admins for our annual pay rises as the mod union has been lax on that of late. Since I quit my regualr job and concentrated on the banning/modding bonuses we get, I am up to my old salary level now from here alone.

Jesus Wept

In years to come, all moderating will be done by a high tech super-computer, programed using long complex algorithms.





We'll also be driving cars like this.

.

gandalf

O'Morris wrote: »

You're getting really worked up over this aren't you? I bet you absolutely hate the idea of having any checks on your power as a moderator. You people have a nice cozy little arrangement here that you just can't bear the thought of anyone coming along and passing judgment on your every decision. Of course I'm sure it doesn't matter to you, you're mature enough and responsible enough that you would never need to fear making an unpopular decision.

Errr if you read my earlier submissions to this thread (or maybe its too much for you to do as there are SO many pages!) you'll notice that we don't have POWERS (too many Marvel comics old boy!) we clean up the messes left behind when people spam, shill, can't discuss just preach etc.

Power is of no interest to me on this site. If it was I wouldn't have stood down as Cmod of Society. What is of interest is the community spirit and keeping it running smoothly. If it means a minority get their feathers ruffled then so be it.

I meant moderation on the front-end old boy! Moderation on the front-end!

Unlike you, I'm a front-end man.

Well you obviously do not have an idea about what I meant then. I was talking about the technical aspect of implementing your idea from a systems point of view.

It's obviously not very popular with the moderators but I was expecting that anyway.

Well its not a valid idea for many reasons, the main one the waste of the developers time when they have far more important issues to deal with.

I disagree, I don't think it should be the business of the moderators to determine whether a thread has run it's course or not. And if there's a rule that a thread should be closed when it has run it's course or has "gone around in circles enough times", then shouldn't we expect that rule to be applied consistently across the board? Shouldn't we expect other long-running threads to be closed as well? A quick look around the site and I can see several threads there are far more guilty of going around in circles than my thread was. Why aren't they closed? The only thing I can think of would be bias.

Ah yes you see here is where you really don't have a clue how the site in general is run.

Different forums within the site have different levels of moderation. After Hours for example is a place where people post up whimsical threads so the moderation level is low. Politics on the other hand is dealt with differently and in a far more serious manner, hence threads being locked because they were "going in circles".

Basically I think you are now nit picking.

If a moderator has a good reason to close a thread then they should have nothing to fear from the voting system that I have proposed. Only moderators who behave capriciously or in a blatantly biased manner need to worry.

It has been explained by others that this will not work and the reasons why.

I can see why your thread was locked in Politics/EU because you really don't listen to what other people say and keep harping on as if your opinion is the only valid one.

Mr. Incognito

The central flaw in your argument is that you are living under the delusion that Boards is a democracy.

It is not.

You are living under the iron fist of a tyrant. Deal with it.

Sparks

SetantaL wrote: »

You are living under the iron fist of a tyrant. Deal with it.

Not to nitpick, but technically it's "under the boot" of a tyrant. You see, you can rule with and iron fist, but the people you're ruling are then "under the boot". It's a whole eastern european thing, very old terminology. Now, where were we? Ah, yes.

BE SILENT, WRETCHED PIG-DOG! OR I WILL HAVE ZE VILLAGE BURNT AND ZE SHEEP PILLAGED!

:pac:

Mr. Incognito

Whay are the Eastern European tyrants speaking with a poor German accent?

or giving pills to sheep for that matter.

as for semantics? well, lets not go there moiseuir typo.

Sparks

SetantaL wrote: »

Whay are the Eastern European tyrants speaking with a poor German accent?

Because Eastern Europe has its tyrants imported, don't'cha know.

or giving pills to sheep for that matter.

Because sheep don't like suppositories. It's meant to be a threat, you see? Comply with my wishes, or Dolly here has an uncomfortable afternoon. Most villagers are fond of their sheep and wouldn't like to see them distressed, so it works most of the time.

as for semantics? well, lets not go there moiseuir typo.

I'm sure you're wondering why I've culled you alltogether...

Mr. Incognito

This has decended into farce.

Sexy beastality............and inported tyrants

I know just the man

Sparks

I think "descended" is a term that's far too generous to the original post, in all fairness...

Cabaal

Vote 1- to this, not gona happen and there's too many muppets who would vote in the negative regardless of the decision

TwoShedsJackson

O'Morris wrote: »

Blah blah blah set my people free blah blah

This isn't a democracy, hippie. What are you, some sort of communist?

kevteljeur

TwoShedsJackson wrote: »

This isn't a democracy, hippie. What are you, some sort of communist?

Hippies aren't tolerated under communism, old boy! Not tolerated at all!