[ Poll ] Noone for Moderator position

Post Reply New Topic

Forums are not a democracy. Particiopating on a forum is not a right, its a privilege, same goes for being a moderator on one and therefore moderators should be appointed by the site owner only who thinks they deserve it, not by a popularity contest.

(And no, i do not want to be a moderator).

I don't understand what the poll is asking.

Its basically a "none of the above" and a call for the end of the



threads... it's basically "big brother" (the TV show) going on.

I think those threads are just having a little fun and are not to be taken seriously.

Possibly, but they do sound serious.

My thread is definitely a joke. Like I could seriously be a mod

Its not about being A mod, it's about being A GOOD mod.

I could point to other forums i've visited over the years and show examples of bad moderation. Its not that they are uncapable of moderation, its just that they did a lousy job because they were appointed by the "masses", i.e. people who liked them.

What i am saying here is that a popularity contest is a bad idea for quality control/assurance.

With my own particular level of popularity in mind, I had *very* briefly thought about doing something similar ... but I definitely agree with you and say this kind of thread can only at the very least cause confusion.

I think Rossc's thread here was serious. But Blue Bean's was a joke.

Yes the site owner ought to make the choice and it is not a popularity contest.
Now let's take your brainwave a little further and entertain the concept that with a forum of as many people as is on WP that Alex, as informed as and involved as he is with this site may actually not know everyone on here.
I know, heavy stuff but bear with me, if he has a thread bringing someone to his sight that he may have not ordinarily have entertained and as he again may not know such a person, ge some insight into this "potential candidate" then this is not a popularity contest nor denouncing his right to make a decision.
Again your original post makes no sense in light of this and as such ought to be rethought.

Perhaps we can put this into concrete terms.
Alex is a employer of a construction firm. Ought he walk around the streets of the city he is based in and size up big strong looking bloke and say "Hey big fella you look like you would be pretty good at hauling bricks could you be in my crew? or would he be better off placing an add and getting people to apply for such a job. Were he to, would it make sense that he had some insight from what they did and who they were and get references?
See that my friend would actually be a smarter way to go about things, huh?
What you are suggesting would not be. You see the difference?

Serious about propelling discussion, yes. About wanting to be a moderator, no.

IMHO.

Considerations related to *paid* positions begin with both parties knowing the proffered relationship will be about work-for-money from one side and money-for-work from the other. But here on WP where worker-moderators receive no compensation in return, servants' hearts are required ... and people who have them are not likely to speak up and apply.

Even in real life for any volunteer position people express an interest. The turn up or hand in a resume or make themselves available for the volunteer work through an agency and again with suitable references.

So how in your line of reasoning holding up in light of this?

Oh DW A Mum I am serious and I DO think I would make a difference here. Recently dropped a few forums I was active in and looking to consolidate my attention and make a difference somewhere. Been a member here for a while and think it is about time I put something in. Besides I have the smarts, maturity, experience and have been a mod before and know what it entails.

I think it's a bit of an unwritten rule that requesting moderator on the internet in most places is a bad idea. It makes you look power-hungry.

Now holding that into perspective. This place has been through its share of bad mods recently and we all know that right? We aren't pretending that did not happen?
How were they selected? Why if this other method was selected did it not work?
Isn't it at least entertaining that perhaps the reason it did not work is that the people selected were selected in a poor way? The method of establishing whether they may be suited inherently flawed? If this is so, then why?
I have mentioned it many times but it comes down to Alex being constrained by his actual knowledge of people. When he makes a "guess" without the benefit of actual knowledge of who or what that person is he has a small window of knowledge to base this on. Worse still the people who have been selected on this uneducated guess have not actually put their hands up or shown an interest in the position and therefore after the honeymoon period of rewarding Alex as a thanks for having such faith in them are likely to be demotivated at the position they did not actually want or ask for in the first place.
Now what is stopping a change and break in the unwritten rule? The FEAR that such people with experience and enthusiasm to take the role and who genuinely want it are power-hungry.
So fear of what may be is actually running decision making? Apathy is a decent trade-off? Guess work is somehow a higher consideration?
How much sense do you think any of this actually makes when teh light of rationality and reasonableness is shone at it?

I spend a lot of time chasing down people who I think will be good at certain volunteer jobs, in real life. It runs about 50/50; those who raise their hand and say, "I'll do it," v. those we ask to take on specific jobs with specific skills involved.

The moderator job is different from, say, a booth volunteer. Or being the PTA treasurer. Or taking minutes for a non-profit board. Or running a silent auction. None of those later jobs involve making judgment calls that affect the lives of other people. They just involve doing. Moderation decisions, however, can have a profound impact on someones life - or, at least, that is what banned members and those facing bans tell us. And what members feeling harassed by other members and wondering why those seeming trolls are not banned yet. Serious business. You don't just take the raised hand and say "great, thanks, go for it." I don't think the raised hand should be an automatic dis-qualifier, personally, but I see the point behind the theory.

So, you say you are serious. As explained in the other thread, that surprises me, given how I've seen you play certain outsider roles so well.