Why not implement a polling system for each issue that arises? Example:

I get sick of hearing about "DEEZ NUTZ" or some similar crap from a troll. I tell cthree about it. cthree opens a thread with the the "official" statement of the issue for a poll. Twenty-four hours later, we tally the results and move on.

Just a thought.

 

I think this thread should be locked...


j/k...

 

No committee PLEASE! I'll take a dictatorship over a committee anyday. At work we have committees and it's always a big joke. Nothing ever gets done if it goes to the commitee.

Moderators are fine by me.

 

My point exactly
If rules actually work, OJ wouldn't be playing golf.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by KenS2K:
No committee PLEASE! I'll take a dictatorship over a committee anyday. At work we have committees and it's always a big joke. Nothing ever gets done if it goes to the commitee.

Moderators are fine by me.
[/quote]

 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>If rules actually work, OJ wouldn't be playing golf.[/quote]
What do you mean by that? The glove didn't fit

 

Ok, I see what you mean! I already can't keep up. I want to spend time working on the site so I'll graciously begin accepting applications for four moderators over in the S2000Online forum.

 

I already read virtually every post and reply, however I hesitate to become the object of ridicule and bashing just for locking a thread that never should have been posted in the first place. As graduate from UTA with a Bachelor in Journalism, I tend to be a staunch advocate for freedom of speech. However as long as there are forums where total freedom exists there will be a need for some level of management. Whoever the moderators, there will have to be some predetermined policies. I agree committees are a great way to get nothing accomplished. Post your rules and regs. Accept some input if you like, but once there is a bottom line then stick to it. If people don't like them they can post their vulgarities elsewhere. Let's keep this forum S2K. If you still want my help, let me know.

 

It doesn't appear that I am welcome here, to look at some of the posts, but I want to offer my opinion if anyone cares to hear it.

First off, Siper nor I have ever moderated based on our own opinions, but more so as a result of requests by other members. I have a standing policy that unless a thread attacks someone unnecessarily or is obscene, I let it stay until I get at least 2 complaints/deletion requests from other members. Even then, if I feel that the requests are unfounded, I won't act. I NEVER have locked or deleted a thread because it made JUST ME angry. I take offense to anything to the contrary said of me, as my job was to uphold the integrity of the board and the H-A net user agreement and I feel that that's exactly what I did.

Secondly, as for this dynasty crap, I was moderating a full 6 months before my brother was brought on as a moderator, having been brought on under a vote of the members. There have been, to my knowledge, only a very few complaints about the way in which I moderate and many more compliments, and no one has ever asked that I be removed as a moderator. I had no say in the appointment of Vapor as a moderator (there was no vote for this appointment), and when he was appointed by Fazle, I did make note of the conflict by relation and was told by Fazle to get over it.

I think there are a few very important reasons for having moderators:

1. as the board grows, one or two people addressing problems will be tiresome and an incredible amount of work.

2. those one or two people can't be online ALL the time, therefore, if a problem arises that needs immediate attention (i.e.: obscene photos posted, and I don't mean lecar's topless shots), more people with the ability to change things increases the likelihood that the problem is taken care of quickly. Most of you never saw it because the moderators and admin were on top of it so quickly, but a few months ago we had a troll on the boards who was lifting member photos, mutilating the images, adding obscenity, and reposting them. This is not the kind of stuff you want lingering on your board while you're out to a movie on a Saturday night!

3. sometimes just having someone who is active on the board with the ability to address problems is all it takes to make people behave a little more respectably than they might unchecked.

I was never a "webNazi". I prided myself in being fair at all costs, and if you didn't see much criticism of me on H-A, it's because it was never there to begin with. I am able to take it when someone disagrees with me, and I have no problem letting criticism of me become a debated point should it arise.

For those of you who complimented me for the way I handled things on H-A, I thank you. To the ones who didn't see my attempts at judicious use of my privileges, I wish you the best in finding a forum that better suits your expectations.

Thanks.

 

Sondra, for the record, I think that you and Siper did a pretty good job as moderators. Your post here reflects your maturity and level-headedness (not to mention the fact that you can actually spell and use correct grammar!)

I contacted you once about something I found questionable and your reply was prompt and reasonable. Recently you also had occasion to contact me in response to someone's complaint about me and you were very professional about it (even though the complainant is a butt-head!)

 

The reason I think people are opposed to the concept of a "steering committee" is because you have never been a part of one that was organized with a clear mission. As I stated in my earlier post, a committee of this type is not there to micromanage problems or issues. In fact those that get pulled into this, always fail as some of you have expressed. I believe the concept of a steering committee as it can be applied to this forum are simply a group of participating members who help guide the overall evolution of this forum. This can take the form of discussion and planning for specific upgrades that members call for, for example. If there is no group set out to work with the overall infrastructure and community, than we will spend much of our time discussing problems and wishes and very little actually getting them done. It is easy to talk but much less easy to take responsibility and be held accountable.

I should add that a steering committee is not a fixed group of people. People enter into and out of this committee as situations and interests dictate. However, once you accept being in this committee, you should be held accountable to abide by its charter on behalf of its members. This is not a dictatorship.

Lastly, I think the concept of "moderators" and of a "steering committee" are different animals. They are both there for two completely different purposes and perhaps if we made note of that distinction, some people might view its value differently.