I simply wouldn't become a mod, as I don't see it as my place to enforce rules I don't generally agree with, or to enforce them with the iron grasp needed.
If I was mod, I would be doing the exact same thing I do on gamespot now, I'd just be doing some modding and thread-locking along the way too, and have a colorful font for my username! :D
but I would be fair, and not be nitpicky. I would post in topics like I do now.
I would be a ninja mod who would lurk the boards and quietly snap the necks of whatever trolls that dared to enter. The way all modding should be done. 8)
Equitably. I am perfectly capable of putting aside my biases when placed in a position of authority, thinking logically about the spirit of a set of rules, and would never moderate out of spite or power 'intoxication.'
Equitably. I am perfectly capable of putting aside my biases when placed in a position of authority, thinking logically about the spirit of a set of rules, and would never moderate out of spite or power 'intoxication.'
pianist
Well that's just boring. It's much more fun to ban people for no reason whatsoever. And then stumble into a room drunk off of power yelling "I LOVE YOU GUYSH SHO MUCH".
Equitably. I am perfectly capable of putting aside my biases when placed in a position of authority, thinking logically about the spirit of a set of rules, and would never moderate out of spite or power 'intoxication.'
GabuEx
Well that's just boring. It's much more fun to ban people for no reason whatsoever. And then stumble into a room drunk off of power yelling "I LOVE YOU GUYSH SHO MUCH".
I would still talk to people, make threads, i also would send pm´s before locking or banning someone, to give em a chance to edit their /thread/post and i will also give them motives as way i banned them or stuff. I think i ll do very good mod work :D
Equitably. I am perfectly capable of putting aside my biases when placed in a position of authority, thinking logically about the spirit of a set of rules, and would never moderate out of spite or power 'intoxication.'
Equitably. I am perfectly capable of putting aside my biases when placed in a position of authority, thinking logically about the spirit of a set of rules, and would never moderate out of spite or power 'intoxication.'
btaylor2404
Well said, as always.We only have his word for it....:o
Except for those who annoy me... then I banhammer...Hmm.....I have employees that annoy me and one thing all my employees will say about me is that I'm fair.
Here's a question for would be mods. Considering the leeway in the ToU for interpreting posts do you think you could remain unbiased with those posts that are only interpretation?
I simply wouldn't become a mod, as I don't see it as my place to enforce rules I don't generally agree with, or to enforce them with the iron grasp needed.D3nnyCrane
Same here. The ToU would have to get completely revised for me to accept a position as internet cop.
Here's a question for would be mods. Considering the leeway in the ToU for interpreting posts do you think you could remain unbiased with those posts that are only interpretation?
LJS9502_basic
Since I'm the perfect candidate, I'll answer it. Yes I do. I'd read the discussion and judge whether or not the user intended to offend someone and not if his post COULD offend someone. If I don't have the time to read the discussion, I wouldn't take action since that would be irresponsible.
Here's a question for would be mods. Considering the leeway in the ToU for interpreting posts do you think you could remain unbiased with those posts that are only interpretation?
jointed
Since I'm the perfect candidate, I'll answer it. Yes I do. I'd read the discussion and judge whether or not the user intended to offend someone and not if his post COULD offend someone. If I don't have the time to read the discussion, I wouldn't take action since that would be irresponsible. Intent is still opinion. I think if it's not clear that it was flame then you err on the side of caution...ie don't mod. But that's just me because I don't like being told what my intent was.:P
Here's a question for would be mods. Considering the leeway in the ToU for interpreting posts do you think you could remain unbiased with those posts that are only interpretation?
LJS9502_basic
Since I'm the perfect candidate, I'll answer it. Yes I do. I'd read the discussion and judge whether or not the user intended to offend someone and not if his post COULD offend someone. If I don't have the time to read the discussion, I wouldn't take action since that would be irresponsible. Intent is still opinion. I think if it's not clear that it was flame then you err on the side of caution...ie don't mod. But that's just me because I don't like being told what my intent was.:P Yeah, that's true. On a side note, I also think the mods should take an extra look at what punishments they give people, and how coherent they actually are with the post they're modding.
[QUOTE="jointed"] Since I'm the perfect candidate, I'll answer it. Yes I do. I'd read the discussion and judge whether or not the user intended to offend someone and not if his post COULD offend someone. If I don't have the time to read the discussion, I wouldn't take action since that would be irresponsible. jointed
Intent is still opinion. I think if it's not clear that it was flame then you err on the side of caution...ie don't mod. But that's just me because I don't like being told what my intent was.:P Yeah, that's true. On a side note, I also think the mods should take an extra look at what punishments they give people, and how coherent they actually are with the post they're modding. Common sense and the pianist on my OT?
[QUOTE="jointed"] Since I'm the perfect candidate, I'll answer it. Yes I do. I'd read the discussion and judge whether or not the user intended to offend someone and not if his post COULD offend someone. If I don't have the time to read the discussion, I wouldn't take action since that would be irresponsible. jointed
Intent is still opinion. I think if it's not clear that it was flame then you err on the side of caution...ie don't mod. But that's just me because I don't like being told what my intent was.:P Yeah, that's true. On a side note, I also think the mods should take an extra look at what punishments they give people, and how coherent they actually are with the post they're modding.Time elapsed between moderations should be taken into account. Otherwise, a user who stays within the ToU almost all the time gets just as severe a moderation as one who doesn't. Plus, I don't think it's fair to penalize a user harsher because their account is older. If it's been months inbetween moderations then obviously they aren't trying to abuse the ToU and have learned how to read it.
[QUOTE="jointed"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Intent is still opinion. I think if it's not clear that it was flame then you err on the side of caution...ie don't mod. But that's just me because I don't like being told what my intent was.:P
LJS9502_basic
Yeah, that's true. On a side note, I also think the mods should take an extra look at what punishments they give people, and how coherent they actually are with the post they're modding.Time elapsed between moderations should be taken into account. Otherwise, a user who stays within the ToU almost all the time gets just as severe a moderation as one who doesn't. Plus, I don't think it's fair to penalize a user harsher because their account is older. If it's been months inbetween moderations then obviously they aren't trying to abuse the ToU and have learned how to read it. Time elapsed is heavily considered. At least as far and as much as I've learned so far. The only part about a harsher penalty for a user on the site longer is, shouldn't you & I (for example) know the rules by now, and what is and isn't allowed? I'd bet both of our moderation histories show that, as for mine, almost all my moderations came the first few months I started posting in the forums.
I think i'ld be sacked instantly for not modding anything for being offensive, i don't really get offended by posts and i find out right flaming purely hilarious
Time elapsed is heavily considered. At least as far and as much as I've learned so far. The only part about a harsher penalty for a user on the site longer is, shouldn't you & I (for example) know the rules by now, and what is and isn't allowed? I'd bet both of our moderation histories show that, as for mine, almost all my moderations came the first few months I started posting in the forums.btaylor2404
Not when a moderator is determining intent. You can't account for what someone else is going to think. Hence, I'm totally against ANY AND ALL moderations that are up to interpretation.
As for time elapsed I find it doesn't matter though it makes a nice answer in ATM.
[QUOTE="btaylor2404"] Time elapsed is heavily considered. At least as far and as much as I've learned so far. The only part about a harsher penalty for a user on the site longer is, shouldn't you & I (for example) know the rules by now, and what is and isn't allowed? I'd bet both of our moderation histories show that, as for mine, almost all my moderations came the first few months I started posting in the forums.LJS9502_basic
Not when a moderator is determining intent. You can't account for what someone else is going to think. Hence, I'm totally against ANY AND ALL moderations that are up to interpretation.
As for time elapsed I find it doesn't matter though it makes a nice answer in ATM.
Well I can only speak for myself, and the "training" I've had. I do understand the interpertation part, but that's a very high percentage of modded messages, IMO.
Well I can only speak for myself, and the "training" I've had. I do understand the interpertation part, but that's a very high percentage of modded messages, IMO.btaylor2404
I'm not picking on any one mod. But I read ATM and from my own experience there are some problems with the current way. Anyway, I see you noticed my sig change which I'll keep for a bit. High honor for the Pens to be included in my Cure sig.:P
Equitably. I am perfectly capable of putting aside my biases when placed in a position of authority, thinking logically about the spirit of a set of rules, and would never moderate out of spite or power 'intoxication.'
LJS9502_basic
Well said, as always.We only have his word for it....:o
Indeed. In reality, I say that just to be political, and would rule with an iron fist. :P
Log in to comment