Quote:
Originally Posted by OrbitzXT I'm also in favor of less permanent bans, more use of diplomacy and explaining to temporary banned members why they were banned. All too often they're temp banned, then will do something rash because of a lack of explanation and end up permanently banned. Aside from the underage users, I think we should make the reason for a ban public as well. This whole latest incident would have never occured if a small notice was made in the help desk, a locked topic with the banned person's ID and a small statement of reason for the banning.
I agree with Kotch that members need to have trust in the mods, and if they feel were doing something inappropriate or wrong that they can report us to someone. I don't think this person should be Rob_E though, he's a busy guy and can't be dealing with a bunch of complaints. Some may be valid but I suspect generally speaking that most would be hate against the individual. We can't have Rob_E sifting through 20 PMs about why Hickboy is an ass =).
What I would recommend since we do need to be held accountable is having the Co-admins responsible for the mods. If someone has a valid complaint, bring it to mindseye or Pecker, the Co-Admins. If they feel it warrants some looking into, they'll discuss it and bring it up with Rob, where the three will decide the fate and outcome.
Lastly I wanted to comment on Gold Members voting on future mods. I think this is a bad idea. As you said Kotch, there's the popularity contest aspect to it, but thats just a very small reason. Its always been my belief that the paying members here are no different than the rest of us. I mean no disrespect by that, your contribution is extremely appreciated. But there were a number of Gold Members who during my time as mod have demanded I explain myself, my actions, wanting to know outcomes of a banning, etc. They even went as far as saying "I am a paying member, I demand to know" etc. These people are no more welcomed to information than the rest of the public membership.
Everyone contributes to this great site in their own way, some members make great posts, bringing great intellectual content here. Others post wonderful galleries of themselves attracting others to join the site, a few of us do our best here as moderators and Co-Admins which we don't get paid for, were volunteers who were originally members and loved the site enough to want to help out. Its not a power trip, we don't want to be mods to ban people we don't like. Regardless, everyone is contributing in their own way, whether it be money or content, everyone is the same. We are LPSG. |
I Don't know if the 'Co-admins' presently are regarded with any greater confidence, or that that the position is actually different from a moderator, those titles just appeared a while back with no explanation that I noticed. (and some people asked) Concerns have been ignored.
What you say in the first paragraph seems to be a bit contradicted by what you say in the fourth one.
You are not clear as to whether you think no members or all members should be able to vote on moderators.
I think members being part of the selection, and maybe even removal process, of moderators is an excellent suggestion.
Any member should be entitled to a reasonable answer to a reasonable question. (The present situation is largely due to an explanation being requested for the banning of BD, and some of the Co- Admin/moderators, in effect, saying to the members, (pardon the Zoran) 'fuck off'.)
I want to stay with positive proposals in this thread, in this post I don't see a way of suggesting remedies to mistakes without mentioning them.