We have two roles - that of a member and that of a moderator. They are separate. If you can't see the difference, brad, that's your problem.Originally Posted by arsenal
Anybody here will find themselves in the same boat if they become moderators.
In an ideal world a moderator would be someone completely divorced from the board; someone who knows nothing about us whatsoever and has no idea of the 'history" between members.. But as I wrote in another thread :
So that being the case, is it worthwhile paying an outsider to do the job? Can such a person be found? Is Moses willing to pay?The situation we have faced recently is very unusual - three members all deciding to misbehave at the same time, necessitating moderation. Normally, most members manage to self-moderate and there had been very little call for moderation over the years.
If the answer to those questions is "yes" then let's go for it. That would make me very happy indeed!
We have to be realistic. We are using the resources we have - our members - to attempt the task. I'm sure all of us have "history" with others on the board. But surely the rules, which are posted here for all to see, prevent moderation from becoming an exercise in vindictiveness if they are followed to the letter by anyone who moderates. When the rule is open to interpretation, the board owner decides. That should prevent any bias being shown.
When sanctions are applied to a member, he must be able to ask for the reason. In other words, show me the rule on which the decision was based.
Unless we end up heading towards the Bitchboard of old, an outsider is not essential, IMHO.
