make me moderator

Post Reply New Topic

as we all know things have gotten out of hand as of late on this forum.threads have been locked and posters have been banned.by the time the moderators get around to this political forum things are already out of hand.this forum needs a even keeled in the middle moderator who understnds the personalities of people on the forum,who can straighten things out before things get out of hand.contact administration and tell them you want me to moderate this politcal forum only.you can email me,PM me or call me.my corporate website has my busines phone#.my name is benjamin love and im a true sololmon who would split the proverbial baby

I don't know if you are serious or playing around. Either way, the only people who ever get picked for moderators on this site are conscripts. Anyone who asks to be a moderator is never chosen and you have effectively just barred yourself from such a position. It is a general principle of Alex the site owner - anyone who actively wants to become a moderator likely just wants the power and will consequently wield it for personal reasons rather than the good of the site. Not saying you would do so, but that is how Alex's selection process works.

Anyway, the mods have been taking a much more active role in this forum lately; we are sick of all the infighting that goes on here. We have made repeated warnings which were ignored resulting in the banning of several members. If the trouble continues more will be banned. Our patience is at an end.

One point I will repeat so everyone is clear. If we see fighting / personal attacks going on we will suspend or ban ALL the members involved. We aren't going to get into any he/she started it first discussions.

i am serious and i am fair and i have no interest in power.i am completly kind and fair in all conversations.read my posts,i have been speaking out against infighting for 9 months.

vermontsavant - I think you would be quite fair, but I understand restricting moderator positions to people who don't want them.

I wish we picked presidents the same way.

It is very good of you to offer. I think you'll enjoy the forums more not being a moderator - I think they have to work very hard without a lot of appreciation.

Because somebody wants a position of power, it only means they wish to use it for bad intentions? That doesn't make sense.

It isn't my rule, it is Alex's. He's had this site a very long time during which a lot of moderators have come and gone. I'm guessing it is an empirical rule he has learned the hard way.

Not accepting that there will be exceptions in everything when you think literally is a sure fire way to shoot yourself in the foot. But given that vermontsavant is probably the only person on this site who has been unfailingly friendly towards myself AND ci I wouldn't blame him for thinking that he would be a good candidate.

I find that most people who want power, even if that desire starts out being for good reasons, eventually become attracted to power for power's sake. There are some who resist that temptation, but not nearly enough.

While such a rule might keep some of those lusting after power from becoming moderators, it also will keep some good citizens and some generous, supportive people from becoming moderators.

Alex has his own approach to selecting moderators, of course. It seems to be working well, even if it risks not putting some good people to effective use.

i never ever wanted to be a moderator at all.it was when all the negitive stuff happened last weekend that i thought i would be good for that.not to weild power but straigten lines on communication before long time members get banned.thats when i thought of the political subforum junior moderator idea.to keep vigerious debate without letting long time members loose memberships by letting there passions get the best of them.i want to save members not ban them

I do not see any problem anyway. I think the mods handled this really well, except for waiting a bit too long to ban ci...but almost anyone would have done that, me included, because under it all there is something engaging and sincerely intentioned trying to get out, and that makes it really hard to feel it is the right time to draw the line under (or even *through*) him.

Tallyman and Moog have both shown themselves to be pleasant, fair and still under serious delusions of mere mortality...even down to engaging in threads out of real interest (not for form's sake) from time to time.

If it's not broke, don't fix it.

That is not an argument to exclude vermontsavant. That's only an argument to keep Tallyman and Moog as moderators.

I don't think anyone's arguing to exclude vermontsavant

There's really nothing wrong with members intervening under their own steam, if you believe you can make something positive happen, then by all means.

If anyone could have gotten through to ci before things got too far beyond gone, that would have been good.

For HEAVEN'S SAKE Gedrene it just means "leave things exactly as they are because they are working".

There is a PM awaiting your attention... we'd like a chat.

Which begs the question of how air traffic controllers, worldwide, would handle all the pigs...

Nah, Ci needs some growing, developing and IRL 3 dimensional intervention time to get the head on straight...and I hope he does it one day too.