Suggestion Bannings...

[The Chairman]

OK gang... give me some input.

What should (if anything) warrant a temp ban (5 day suspension)?

What should (if anything) warrant a perm ban?

 

[Walter]

"If I could change anything it would be to eliminate moderating activates under a regular user ID and eliminate participation in a regular discussion as a moderator. This would reduce the perception of biased moderating. Give each moderator a separate moderator ID."

IMHO, this would result in members seeing the process as being even more secretive than they do now. Who is a mod? Who is spying on me? Who can I trust in PM's? Did you ever notice NetDoc and Sockpuppet are never on at the same time? You think some people are untrusting and paranoid now? This would make it worse.

 

[DFC5343]

How bout putting some of the heavy complainers as guest moderators. Let them go for a week and see how it works. They will talk to the population. Maybe that can "ease your pain".

 

[cornfed]

How bout putting some of the heavy complainers as guest moderators. Let them go for a week and see how it works. They will talk to the population. Maybe that can "ease your pain".

Can you imagine the damage control all the real mods would have to do after the week was up! Seriously though, it's an interesting idea.

 

[Walter]

Seriously, if you had privacy issues, would you consider "guest mods"?

 

[MikeS]

IMHO, this would result in members seeing the process as being even more secretive than they do now. Who is a mod? Who is spying on me? Who can I trust in PM's?

Why is that a bad thing? If you stay within the TOS you shouldn't have a problem.

Mike

 

[Genesis]

The problem is discretionary application of the TOS.

The TOS, for example, bars name-calling. Yet right now over in the DIR forum there are SEVERAL DIR "partisans" who have repeatedly violated that - yet no sanction has issued.

I suspect were I to do the same, the censure would be immediate.

If a policy is not evenly applied then it is not a policy - it is an excuse.

 

[cornfed]

The problem is discretionary application of the TOS.

The TOS, for example, bars name-calling. Yet right now over in the DIR forum there are SEVERAL DIR "partisans" who have repeatedly violated that - yet no sanction has issued.

I suspect were I to do the same, the censure would be immediate.

If a policy is not evenly applied then it is not a policy - it is an excuse.

Fine, if they make me a "guest moderator" I promise the first thing I'll do is go play wack-a-mole with all the DIR "partisans"!

My second action will be to impose a word limit on you!

 

[MikeS]

The problem is discretionary application of the TOS.

The TOS, for example, bars name-calling. Yet right now over in the DIR forum there are SEVERAL DIR "partisans" who have repeatedly violated that - yet no sanction has issued.

I suspect were I to do the same, the censure would be immediate.

If a policy is not evenly applied then it is not a policy - it is an excuse.

What difference does it make? Perhaps if you looked at the board as an exchange of information, a way for divers to help each other out, rather than some type of debate or contest you’re you can win, you wouldn’t be so concerned.

If it upsets you, why are you staying in a DIR thread? Get over it and move on. To me it looks like you baiting them into violating the TOS so then you can say you won.

Mike

 

[Walter]

It's a bad thing because this board runs best when trust is involved. Why would anyone frequent this board if they felt they couldn't trust the board management? When people feel they can't trust the management of a board, they leave. Soon you have a few posts each week. I've seen it happen before.

 

[scubasean]

Fine, if they make me a "guest moderator" I promise the first thing I'll do is go play wack-a-mole with all the DIR "partisans"!

My second action will be to impose a word limit on you!

LOL....I'm sure you are first on the list of potential guest mods.