Quoting johnd:

Quote:

Just wanted to clarify this. I mean that a moderator cannot participate in a thread under any user ID at all.  In other words, they cannot express an opinion here outside of the moderator function. As I said, I know this sounds hard, but it is the only way to ensure fairness.

Once again, I must disagree.  As I said, I did this for a living...meaning I got paid by companies like Invelos to moderate their forums.  None of those companies required their moderators to stop participating in the forums.  They had a moderator name and a user name.  They moderated with one and participated with the other.  Fairness was ensured by removing the moderator if they couldn't keep the two separated.

Quoting Rifter:

Quote:
Absolutely NOT!  Anonymity translates to no accountability.  Such a moderator could do an extraordinary amount of damage before Ken could intervene and shut him down.

Knowing who the moderator is will not prevent them from causing damage.  If they want to cause damage, they will.  On the other hand, anonymity removes current animosity.

The name Skip brings with it some baggage.  The name hal9g brings with it some baggage.  Heck, even the name Unicus69 has some baggage.  Knowing who the moderator is determines how they are treated.  A moderator should be judged on how they moderate.  No more, no less.  Knowing who they are prevents that from happening.

JMHO

Quoting TomGaines:

Quote:
I do not like the idea of an incognito mod either. And thinking about it, I never encountered a forum which used one. Also there can be mistrust then. Rumors about who could it be and such. And when the mod slips up (e.g. logged in with the incorrect account when warning someone) the whole cover is blown.

Really?  Never?  I have encountered quite a few like that. 

Quoting Kevin:

Quote:
Quoting Unicus69:

Quote:


The name Skip brings with it some baggage.  The name hal9g brings with it some baggage.  Heck, even the name Unicus69 has some baggage.

I don't think anyone on here is universally liked. It all boils down to who Ken believes will do the best job, and even then there will be people who will disagree with his choices.

I just want people who are going to be fair and impartial, leave their own personal lies and dislikes out of it, and work for the benefit and betterment of the site and program for all.

I agree with you.  My point was if we know who the person is there is a built in history.  Let me give you an example.

Let's say Hal became a moderator and had to take action against Rifter.  There is a well documented animosity between Rifter and Hal.  If Rifter knew that Hal was the mod that took action, there is the potential for escalation based on previous bad blood.  Rifter could claim that Hal was being unfair simply because he didn't like him.  If it is an unknown person behind the mod title, then that potential is greatly reduced.

Disclaimer:  Please note that this is just an example.  It is not meant as an attack against Hal or Rifter.  No flames please. 

Quoting Rifter:

Quote:


Absolutely NOT!  Anonymity translates to no accountability.  Such a moderator could do an extraordinary amount of damage before Ken could intervene and shut him down.

Accountability lies with the  forum owner, Ken, not with individual moderators. As I have mentioned before, he is the one that wears any legal consequences.

However, this does raise the issue of how moderation can be seen to occur. One of the links that I provided earlier is a good model. If a thread, post, whatever is changed or deleted, then it must be apparent in the forum that this has occurred (unlike at the moment, where posts just vanish without a trace). Plus there must be a mechanism where the author of the affected post can debate the changing/deleting of the item outside of posting in the forum. Plus a grievance process if a particular moderator continually steps over the line.

Moderator privileges (note I use the word "privileges", not "rights") must be subject to peer and user review.

Quoting Ken Cole:

Quote:
The tentative plan is to roll some site enhancements to support this within 2 weeks.  For those who have volunteered and/or nominated, I will let you know what we decide around then as well.  We have several great choices from the submissions already.

To whoever gets the job

Be fair

And good luck

Will be intresting to see what/how it happens

Quoting Unicus69:

Quote:
Quoting Kevin:

Quote:
Quoting Unicus69:

Quote:


The name Skip brings with it some baggage.  The name hal9g brings with it some baggage.  Heck, even the name Unicus69 has some baggage.

I don't think anyone on here is universally liked. It all boils down to who Ken believes will do the best job, and even then there will be people who will disagree with his choices.

I just want people who are going to be fair and impartial, leave their own personal lies and dislikes out of it, and work for the benefit and betterment of the site and program for all.

I agree with you.  My point was if we know who the person is there is a built in history.  Let me give you an example.

Let's say Hal became a moderator and had to take action against Rifter.  There is a well documented animosity between Rifter and Hal.  If Rifter knew that Hal was the mod that took action, there is the potential for escalation based on previous bad blood.  Rifter could claim that Hal was being unfair simply because he didn't like him.  If it is an unknown person behind the mod title, then that potential is greatly reduced.

Disclaimer:  Please note that this is just an example.  It is not meant as an attack against Hal or Rifter.  No flames please. 

Just as a point of reference, Unicus, since you did use me as an example.  I've been in this game long enough to know how to separate my feelings about someone from whether or not they are contributing a proper profile for example, and whether or not they are being fair in a moderated situation.  That is something else you should've noticed about me if you've really been paying attention.  I'm not a newbie by any means.  That's the last word on that from me.

Quoting Rifter:

Quote:
the old Fidonet days when everything traveled by packets.

Ahhh those were the days