Who wants to be a moderator here?

If I ran QRZ.com, there'd be little need for moderation.
At the first ad hominem attack the perp would be gone.
Instead a moderator, the solution is a headsman.

 

I know someone who is impartial, decisive and will get rid of trouble makers instantly:










Gort!



Sorry, I couldn't resist.

 

We would be in Big Trouble.

 

Klaatu barada nikto.

(c'mon, somebody had to do it)

 

Who?

In my reply, I would have it that any moderator action would require at least two mods to agree.

Btw, I have done online moderation myself. The key is clear guidelines an consistency. IMHO.

 

Yes, we would.....



------

Seriously though........

IMHO, what's needed is a bunch of moderators, not just one. But therein lies the rub: Anyone who wants to do the job is too involved to actually do it. Sort to the reverse of "I would never join a club that would have me as a member".

 

So if someone makes spelling errors or posts inaccurate factual information, corrective action will be taken to deal with the violation?

Incidentally, this is an entirely legitimate question based on your earlier responses in this thread.

My question is how would you handle this situation exactly and outline your rationale explaining why.

 

I would be the first to be banned. Nit pickers eat boogers, I think.

Self moderation can work too, If a person tries.

I just failed.

 

The future moderator in this forum must really be on the ball. This forum isn't free and doing the wrong thing may cost subscribers.

Some may rethink their subscription if a moderator were to point out something so trivial as typos.

Something to think about.

 

I think Fred should do it first.

I never gave anyone a job I would not do myself.

He is always on vacation. Me too.

 

Sure. This doesn't mean every typo gets fixed, it just means that if something is clearly inaccurate, in an objective sense, it gets fixed.

Where a typo might get fixed would be if someone wrote a tube or transistor number wrong, and an unsuspecting person could actually put the wrong tube or transistor in and cause damage. Or, say, posted a formula that was just plain wrong.

First, the mistake would have to not be corrected by other posters or the person who posted it.

Second, it would take two or more moderators agreeing that there was a factual mistake.

Third, the post with the mistake would either be edited or removed, depending on the mistake.

Fourth, the poster would be informed of the action and why it was done.

ONCE MORE: This would ONLY be done if the mistake or typo is CLEARLY and OBJECTIVELY wrong.

 

Looking at some of the responses, I'd say very few have ever been a moderator or have an idea what it is about. I was a global moderator on a very busy, well known (UK) forum that was fairly contentious. You have to be fairly passionate about the subject to devote the time and not hold too high an opinion of yourself. Self control is good, for when the twats target you and they will, just to try and provoke you into doing something, so they can then complain that you are over zealous.

It is almost the same as police and politicians, any one that holds their hand up, should automatically be excluded.

 

Moderators should not go around editing posts made by used unless the posts violated site TOS.

Even if a poster says the grass is pink ..... a Moderator has no business editing it.

How difficult of a concept is that to grasp????

 

I agree .... the people to who are bad candidates to be a moderator are the ones who ask to be a moderator.

 

That was a clear and detailed explanation. Thanks for taking the time to clarify your position on the matter.