One last thing before I head off to beddie bye.......

[TheCalvinator24]

LB has edited far more posts than anyone else. Most of what I've done has been to delete accidental duplicates.

I'm not gonna pitch a fit about it, but I like my accidental duplicates (with a very rare occurrence rate, I hasten to add). Cuts down on my on-purpose duplicates.

Maybe that's just me and and my post-padding proclivities.

Deleting someone else's post that is not spam or otherwise generally recognized as inappropriate content is out of line. So is "cleaning up the tags" unless the poster asks for the help or the screwed up tags are messing up the formatting of other posts. (I used to frequent a board where if someone forgot to close a tag, every post below it would wind up bolded or italicized.)

I can't think of any legitimate reason to delete a post unless it is obviously outside our commonly accepted standards (explicit porn and spam being the only examples I can think of).

[Sisyphean Fan]

Novel concept: how about we just leave everything the way it is, now knowing what the moderators are capable of doing, and knowing the other moderators are capable of seeing what they are doing? If they find evidence of abuse of power, boot them. But otherwise, adding more moderation makes things worse and not better.

The 'they' is where I go south. I do not want the Bobs to judge unnecessary use (I do not think anyone has nor have I accused anyone of abuse) of power. They are guilty of that in my eyes. All the other ones, fine with me.

I do like giving sprots the job, mostly cuz I know her and know she has the same boundaries and such as me. It will also make her feel good, which I like as well. She will also 'be on the look out', while I am not so sure any of the current ones will be. Although, maybe lb will be, given whatever he has discovered today.

This is really getting to be ridiculous. If somebody needs to be 'on the look out' for anybody else, then what is even the point?

Is there any reason, other than smoothing ruffled feathers, that there is any need for any moderators at all? Aren't the three administrators perfectly capable of handling anything that needs to be handled?

And, if somebody feels that there should be somebody to police the administrators, then (as I said yesterday) it's their choice as to whether they want to stick around someplace where they can't trust the administrators of that board. I have left other boards where I didn't agree with the moderation or administration. If I felt it had gotten out of hand here, then the same remedy would be available. And that goes for anybody, not just me.

[peacock2121]

You say that like ridiculous is a bad thing.

[Sisyphean Fan]

You say that like ridiculous is a bad thing.

Ridiculosity has its place, but it seems like this is just snowballing into bad feelings and paranoia. Which doesn't seem so bad after all, as more and more is brought to light. I guess it's like laws and sausage, you don't want to really know what people are monkeying with since, if you hadn't noticed before, it really hadn't affected you.

More than that, nobody trusting anybody and everybody pissed and examining everything everybody else does is more than destructive, it could irrevocably change any good feelings or fondness that people have for this board. And much less has destroyed communities or relationships in other places.

[MarleysGh0st]

Is there any reason, other than smoothing ruffled feathers, that there is any need for any moderators at all? Aren't the three administrators perfectly capable of handling anything that needs to be handled?

I don't recall what powers distinguish a moderator from an administrator, but one reason for us to have the six we have (besides the historical reason that has already been noted) is that nobody is online 24/7. If we have an intrusion by spammers or whatever, it's good to have someone who can respond to it quickly.

And I agree with you that the debate is getting ridiculous. Those us us who voted in support of moderation (a majority, according to the completely unreliable and unofficial poll) have no problem with things as they are now. My nomination of Sprots as an MIA was a gesture to the other faction, in the spirit of bipartisanship.

Maybe if Dave ratifies the nomination, we can all move along to the next great debate of the Bored.

[Jeemie]

Is there any reason, other than smoothing ruffled feathers, that there is any need for any moderators at all? Aren't the three administrators perfectly capable of handling anything that needs to be handled?

I don't recall what powers distinguish a moderator from an administrator, but one reason for us to have the six we have (besides the historical reason that has already been noted) is that nobody is online 24/7. If we have an intrusion by spammers or whatever, it's good to have someone who can respond to it quickly.

And I agree with you that the debate is getting ridiculous. Those us us who voted in support of moderation (a majority, according to the completely unreliable and unofficial poll) have no problem with things as they are now. My nomination of Sprots as an MIA was a gesture to the other faction, in the spirit of bipartisanship.

Maybe if Dave ratifies the nomination, we can all move along to the next great debate of the Bored.

This is why bipartisanship sucks!!

Screw the losers!!! We won, dammit!!!!

[peacock2121]

Is there any reason, other than smoothing ruffled feathers, that there is any need for any moderators at all? Aren't the three administrators perfectly capable of handling anything that needs to be handled?

I don't recall what powers distinguish a moderator from an administrator, but one reason for us to have the six we have (besides the historical reason that has already been noted) is that nobody is online 24/7. If we have an intrusion by spammers or whatever, it's good to have someone who can respond to it quickly.

And I agree with you that the debate is getting ridiculous. Those us us who voted in support of moderation (a majority, according to the completely unreliable and unofficial poll) have no problem with things as they are now. My nomination of Sprots as an MIA was a gesture to the other faction, in the spirit of bipartisanship.

Maybe if Dave ratifies the nomination, we can all move along to the next great debate of the Bored.

This is why bipartisanship sucks!!

Screw the losers!!! We won, dammit!!!!

Even you channeling Obama is funny - I really am no longer pissed off.