Do you want to see moderators on LPF?

Crazy Jay · Nov 5, 2009

how about setting a certain number of mods needed to lets say ban someone. So a group of mods can only make changes rather than any single one mod. They have to be in agreement.

c0ldshadow · Nov 5, 2009

i have 2 ppl in mind that would be mods if we had them back. might have 3

key characteristics: proven/respected, moderated before (plus), laser knowledge (a plus), well spoken/good writer, PEACEFUL, can be assertive when needed.

automatic not possible: owns a business selling lasers which could be conflict of interest. (LPF mods gotta be unbiased about companies). known to cause arguments; stir the pot

lasersbee · Nov 5, 2009

Laser_Ben said:
I voted no on this one. Why? Simple, I have seen what happens when too many people have too much power. They abuse it, plain and simple.

When I ran SpectraForum, I left most of the day to day stuff to several Moderators. This worked for a while, it got rid of spam, and moved posts as they thought necessary. It did a good job of keeping the forum in order, however, after a while, I noticed that it became an issue where they had to try and find posts to deal with, and whenever something got moved, it was hard to find next time. There is rarely a problem with people doing stuff that deserved banning, or problems which required immediate results.

Now, I see this forum which is largely self moderated. When someone steps out of line, they get called on it, a public poll is taken, and then action is taken by one person to resolve the issue. Do you really want a couple people running around deciding who to ban and what posts to remove? I don't think that would be in anyone's best interest.

A good example of how I think a forum should be run is Photonlexicon, it is entirely self moderated with the Admin stepping in rarely to deal with very serious problems. There is no need for moderators.

If you say you think there should be a moderator here, tell me, who do you think it should be? If your first thought is that you should be a moderator, there is a problem.

You make it sound like all the members here are morons with an agenda
and can't wait to be a Moderator... In case you're looking at me... I personally
don't have the time... so that gets me off your abusive moderator list...

I highly doubt that any moderator chosen would be a noob with no clue
as to what is going on...

Did you enjoy the Darkarmyofone Ban Fiasco...:undecided:
That one chewed up two days of my time... when that could have been handled
a little faster if Mods were here to advice the admin directly...

I'm not saying you're wrong I just don't agree that all Mods are abusive..
Even if we had mods here it is still the Admins job to control the reins of the Mods.:beer:

And hey... if Mods don't workout... we can always open a Poll and Ban the Mods...

[EDIT]
@ c0ld... that makes sense... I agree

Jerry

c0ldshadow · Nov 5, 2009

if we had mods back i wouldnt let them ban... prob just lock threads, move them, and SOFT delete threads/posts
[edit] i might let them ban ppl, but if something went wrong even once would revoke this]
banning would likely be decision of community in polls

digital_blue · Nov 5, 2009

Maybe moderation should be done on a the basis of literary competence. After all, 99% of members who've been banned had the writing ability of a fifth grader.:crackup:

In all seriousness though, my vote would land somewhere in the middle; I definitely feel we need moderators but I also think the "trash pit" idea I proposed would help... Just my 2 cents...

Hemlock_Mike · Nov 5, 2009

DB -----

"Maybe moderation should be done on a the basis of literary competence. After all, 99% of members who've been banned have had the writing ability of a fifth grader."

I love that comment you made !!!

or should I say "i luv thet coment u made" ??

HMike

Crazy Jay · Nov 5, 2009

c0ldshadow said:
if we had mods back i wouldnt let them ban... prob just lock threads, move them, and SOFT delete threads/posts
[edit] i might let them ban ppl, but if something went wrong even once would revoke this]
banning would likely be decision of community in polls

The polls work Mr. Avery. With so much support on the last one I was surprised your first reaction was to do nothing but I'm glad you changed your mind. It took a lot to put together all of that info.

nikokapo · Nov 5, 2009

c0ldshadow said:
if we had mods back i wouldnt let them ban... prob just lock threads, move them, and SOFT delete threads/posts
[edit] i might let them ban ppl, but if something went wrong even once would revoke this]
banning would likely be decision of community in polls

c0ld, I agree with your terms, but instead of allowing the mod to permaban/IPban, you could just allow him to perform a 3-day ban on the member. If a permaban is needed, the mod will just contact you.

HumanSymphony · Nov 5, 2009

Dave for mod!

pullbangdead · Nov 5, 2009

c0ldshadow said:
if we had mods back i wouldnt let them ban... prob just lock threads, move them, and SOFT delete threads/posts
[edit] i might let them ban ppl, but if something went wrong even once would revoke this]
banning would likely be decision of community in polls

I would also like to suggest the ability for mods to edit the thread tags for specific threads. There's been a little abuse there with the "member-who-shall-not-be-named-but-it-rhymes-with-fark-farmy" threads of late.

RA_pierce · Nov 5, 2009

nikokapo said:
c0ld, I agree with your terms, but instead of allowing the mod to permaban/IPban, you could just allow him to perform a 3-day ban on the member. If a permaban is needed, the mod will just contact you.

Agreed. Terms are good. Mods should have the ability to suspend, rather than ban.

Mods could be a good idea. I don't think the previous mod issue will be a problem again.
Although I did think timelord was pretty funny at times

larrball · Nov 5, 2009

lasersbee said:
Well that's a good sign Jay...

(Opps... another 1 liner)

Jerry

Doin't worry jerry i got you covered... :wave:

Crazy Jay · Nov 5, 2009

uh... me?

Mohrenberg · Nov 5, 2009

Apparantly a past moderator made some comments about a laser company. This laser company held Avery and the forum responsible for the comments and threatened to sue. So after avery spent thousands in legal fees he decided not to have moderators any more.

So...should he decide to allow moderators again, he will need his lawyer to draft out a contract that each moderator will sign. This will protect the forum from legal ramifications from a moderators comments or actions.

It's understandable that these precautions must be taken. A moderator in a sense IS the forum, they are the judge and the jury, and speak for the forum and therefore to third parties, the forum is responsible for a moderators actions....

any ways, if he decides for moderator (which i support) i think we should start a fund raiser to help pay for the legal fees of this new contract.

Hallucynogenyc said:
I still can't understand all the legal issue. Why do we need to make contracts? Are mods supposed to earn money?

Just adding a line on the legal terms of the forum saying something like:

Yours,
Albert

larrball · Nov 5, 2009

jerry was talking to jayrob.. crazy jay.

Lonewolf · Nov 5, 2009

I have a very low post count, because I read everything I can (drama included). I still don't know enough to put my .02, and I can't get into the....LOL...OMG....posts (old age maybe?).

When I first came here, I knew next to nothing about lasers, now I'm getting ready to build one. I hope to someday be able to contribute to the forum, not for rep points, or status...but to give a little back for what has been given to me.

Cheers,
Ray

Do you want to see moderators on LPF?

Would you like to see moderators?

Yes

Not

Crazy Jay

0

c0ldshadow

LPF Founder / Admin

lasersbee

0

c0ldshadow

LPF Founder / Admin

digital_blue

0

Hemlock_Mike

0

Crazy Jay

0

nikokapo

1

HumanSymphony

1

pullbangdead

0

RA_pierce

0

larrball

0

Attachments

Crazy Jay

0

Mohrenberg

0

larrball

0

Lonewolf

0

Online statistics

Forum statistics

Share this page