Simultaneous Moderator Approval Survey - January 2013

[Antonio the Sixth]

Yeah, it's ridiculous to disapprove of Dave since this place wouldn't even exist without him.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Yeah, it's ridiculous to disapprove of Dave since this place wouldn't even exist without him.

unless you believe your membership here has had a negative influence on your life.  similarly, one can have a negative opinion of God if he prefers he had never been born at all.

A poster can leave, and a living human can commit suicide. Dave and God both left us an opt-out option.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Good to see that all active moderators except Inks have positive approval ratings. I hope that will bust the myth that people who disagree with Inks only do so because they're anti-Mod.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Inks, you can slice it however you want, but the fact remains that there is an overwhelming number of serious posters (starting with Al) who have serious issues with your moderating style. Good arguments have been put forward, but you have systematically ignored them and instead you chose to only respond to the most frivolous accusations. In short, you deliberately focus on the trolls and ignore those who have legitimate issues against you. Now, you can keep this game on as long as you want. It's pretty clear you can hold on to your job forever, thanks to Dave's inactivity. Of course it's easier to convince yourself that it's always everyone else's fault. But if you had an ounce of common sense, you'd realize that it is not normal for a mod to constantly anger a majority of the forum's most valuable contributors and a good share of the moderators themselves.

[Antonio the Sixth]

If you saw Al on the Mod Corner, I doubt you'd consider him a credible person to criticize me.

And how have I not taken you guys seriously?  I'm not modding the boards anymore... you got what you guys wanted.

So what? If it's just a "cooling off" period, so that after one month you come back and start again moderating in the same style, what's the point?

It's not like we even really want you out. What we would really like is you to reconsider your moderating style, and actually take into account our objections to it. If you were actually able to have a critical judgment on your own actions and understand that having 3/5 of the forum community and half of the mods criticizing you is not normal, we'd have no problem with you keeping your job. A mod should not be so controversial, they should enjoy a certain degree of confidence from the forum community.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Wouldn't a "cooling off" period mean that I'd come back different?  Your post doesn't even make sense.

It's up to you, obviously. But since you haven't even acknowledged that you did anything wrong so far, why should we be hopeful that you change anything?

And like I said... I get slammed because I'm transparent about what I do.  If Al posted publicly his list of people he thinks should be banned, you'd be more concerned about him than me.

I don't give a crap what a moderator thinks. What matter is the way he acts. Al's board is probably the most quiet, friendly and qualitative of all.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Wouldn't a "cooling off" period mean that I'd come back different?  Your post doesn't even make sense.

It's up to you, obviously. But since you haven't even acknowledged that you did anything wrong so far, why should we be hopeful that you change anything?

I have no clue... you're the one who said it.  I can't explain why you said what you said.  But yes, if I come back to modding FC/OT I probably won't infract too much of anything.  That being said, at this point, I have no plans on coming back any time soon.

What I said (based on what you yourself announced) is that you planned to come back after one month. Without any indication that you planned to change anything. What I said is that this was in no way satisfactory to the problem. If you have changed your mind and now have given up on the job altogether, that's great news.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I never said I planned on coming back in one month...

And didn't you just say that you weren't desiring my resignation, but just a change?  So why is it great news that I'm not going to be modding the boards?

Are you unable to read?

If you saw Al on the Mod Corner, I doubt you'd consider him a credible person to criticize me.

And how have I not taken you guys seriously?  I'm not modding the boards anymore... you got what you guys wanted.

So what? If it's just a "cooling off" period, so that after one month you come back and start again moderating in the same style, what's the point?

It's not like we even really want you out. What we would really like is you to reconsider your moderating style, and actually take into account our objections to it. If you were actually able to have a critical judgment on your own actions and understand that having 3/5 of the forum community and half of the mods criticizing you is not normal, we'd have no problem with you keeping your job. A mod should not be so controversial, they should enjoy a certain degree of confidence from the forum community.

Highlighted for your convenience.

[Antonio the Sixth]

1. I never said I planned on coming back in one month.
2. "But yes, if I come back to modding FC/OT I probably won't infract too much of anything."

Yes I did acknowledge your posting this, and commented positively on it. That's a good development. But correct me if I'm wrong, this is the first time you clearly announce your resignation-or-activity-limitation, right? I don't remember reading that anywhere else.

[Antonio the Sixth]

It makes more sense to have "neutral" in the middle between "approve" and "disapprove"... Good job though.

[Antonio the Sixth]

It's not really neutral... it's didn't vote.

Not voting indicates neutrality of opinion.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I would have thought my proposal to ban Hillary2012 would have led to higher disapprovals, but apparently not ...

Nobody liked Hillary2012.

[Antonio the Sixth]

His idea for a moderation based on editing posts rather than deleting them was great. Anyone remember that awesome blue text?

[Antonio the Sixth]

I'm sorry, Sbane, but I will never buy into the "old-timers" should get preferential treatment argument.

Yeah, I also strongly dislike this logic.

Good posters should get preferential treatment.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I'm sorry, Sbane, but I will never buy into the "old-timers" should get preferential treatment argument.

Yeah, I also strongly dislike this logic.

Good posters should get preferential treatment.

Well, I agree with this. But you must also realize that long time posters might do a light trolling from time to time, and when they get infracted for it, everyone gets pissed about it. I am not saying that new posters should be infracted just for being new, but they should get less leeaway. At least that is what people seem to want.....

There are relatively recent posters who have quickly proved their worth (see Nathan, or Homely), while some old timers sometimes just literally get themselves banned (Jmfcst). I think it is perfectly legitimate for the mods to allow some mild form of trolling, as long as it's not disruptive of the forum's atmosphere, but I don't think seniority should be a criterion per se.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I'm sorry, Sbane, but I will never buy into the "old-timers" should get preferential treatment argument.

Yeah, I also strongly dislike this logic.

Good posters should get preferential treatment.

I disagree with that as well.  If someone is a good poster, a few infraction points here and there won't matter in the long run.  If someone is racking up massive amounts of infraction points, they probably aren't a "good poster".

Al's example proves that a very mild and harmless form of trolling can get one of our best posters in serious trouble. Enough said.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I have my Board pretty pussy whipped (), but my approach is to take the temperature of my Board. Unless I see something outrageous, if the temperature is "normal" I just don't do much. If it developed a fever, then the issue is how to turn the dial down. I expect "good posters" to help me do that if need be, and if they don't, I suspect I would be pretty even handed in whatever sanctions I settle upon, which might not be death points, but some sort of chastisement, or whatever. The issue is how to maximize the utility of the Board for the community as a whole, while not allowing something that would annoy DAVE if he saw it.

Hopefully, most are comfortable with that.

This is exactly what a moderator should do.