Simultaneous Moderator Approval Survey - January 2013

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

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?

[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.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

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."

[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.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

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

Yes you did......whether you deleted the post or not, you said it.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

No, Gramps, I said I would be gone AT LEAST one month. At that point, I was going to reevaluate what I would do. I never said I'd be returning on March 1st.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

And I'm not resigning either. I'm on an indefinite leave. At this point, I have no intention to return, but I don't know what will end up happening down the road.

[fezzyfestoon]

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

And for those who don't believe me, here's a screenshot of my post on the mod board.  I can't disprove that I never posted something, but it wouldn't really make sense for me to tell the mod board one thing and the community something different:

[Mr. Morden]

What has Bacon King done to be so loved?

[Antonio the Sixth]

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

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

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

[Antonio the Sixth]

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

Not voting indicates neutrality of opinion.

[fezzyfestoon]

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

Not voting indicates neutrality of opinion.

Yeah, that's pretty much the definition of neutral. The lack of a stance. 88 people voted and didn't take a stance on those Moderators.

And you're right about the disapproval Antonio, but I already deleted the spreadsheet so that ship has sailed.

[Tender Branson]

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

[Antonio the Sixth]

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

Nobody liked Hillary2012.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

What has Bacon King done to be so loved?

Not give out death points.

[Antonio the Sixth]

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

[Sbane]

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

Yes, that by itself should make everyone approve of his moderation.

Inks, I think you just need to chill out and exercise better judgment in your infracting. The reason why this system was created in the first place was because we had a problem with trolls and people like Hammie raising hell. You need to focus on those people and leave long time posters alone, within reasonable constraints (hard to judge, admittedly, but the other moderators seem to have figured it out). I don't know if that is a "fair" application of the TOS or not, but that is the way the forum community wants it and I think you should respect our wishes.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

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

[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.

[Sbane]

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.....

[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.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

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".

[Sbane]

Well, Inks, the posters want good posters or well established and well liked posters to get more leeway.