Who do you want as a moderator?

Discussion in 'POLLS AND ELECTIONS' started by Electric_Man, Jun 24, 2005.

  1. Electric_Man Templar

    Well this will eventually lead to an election poll, but first we need candidates. For someone to be up for nomination they should have 2 seperate people nominate them, then they have the choice to be put up for nomination or to pull out. Obviously we need more than one moderator so suggestions for the number we should have would be welcome. I think 3 would be the absolute minimum (plus Mal as administrator), but I've no idea on what the maximum should be

    So I'd like to start by nominating (in alphabetical order):

    Ba Witda
    Buzzfloyd
    Tonyblack
  2. Rincewind Number One Doorman

    I'll second those. And though EM is a spaz, I'll add his name to the list. I'll also say CY cuase he seems to have a good head on him.
  3. Toaf New Member

    Like the good crowd-follower that i am, I agree. Buzz, Ba, Tony and CY seem like good ideas.
  4. Rincewind Number One Doorman

    HA! Face EM! Toaf hates you. :)
  5. Chimaera New Member

    I'd be happy with any and all of those people as moderators. :)
  6. Maljonic Administrator

    I'd like to nominate Buzzfloyd and Tony and Garner and Ba and Marcia and Cynical Youth and Electric Man and Rincewind, assuming a moderator is something along the lines as I wrote here: http://www.terrypratchettbooks.com/cgi-bin//ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=2;t=004603;p=4#000046 and also assuming that Tony and Ba join, which they haven't yet. We can also allow people to become moderators after this voting of course, this is just the initial start-up moderator gang.

    As well as the message board moderators, you can also have people in charge of modules, which is probably for another thread; but I was hoping Tony or Electric Man might want to be in charge of the FAQs section which isn't visible at the moment. This is different from the Forum FAQ above, which is simply an operators manual for the message board. :)
  7. Rincewind Number One Doorman

    Marica and Garner are good. I'll also say Doors. He on holiday though and doesn't know this place exists though. But seening what Garner and Doors did as beasically Mods on the main board, it's pretty stupid not to have them here. I
  8. Marcia Executive Onion

    I'll second Buzzfloyd, Tony, Rincewind and Doors. And I nominate Mynona

    I'd also like to nominate Sacharrissa, but she probably won't have time for it.
  9. Cynical_Youth New Member

    Thanks guys! I agree with all the nominations so far.

    Edit to add: Although I don't think I've been around long enough to be as widely respected as the other nominated posters.
  10. Marcia Executive Onion

    I think it might be a good idea to have moderators from different time zones, so we could have sort of a 24-hour watch.
  11. Pepster New Member

    Thats not a bad idea.
  12. Delphine New Member

    I'd nominate Buzzfloyd and Tony straight away.

    Other than those two, there are quite a few people who have the necessary qualities. I'd agree with all who have been nominated so far. And Marcia, if she hasn't already been nominated, I can't remember.
  13. Buzzfloyd Spelling Bee

    I'd second most of those nominated. They probably won't thank me for it, but I think Garner and Doors should *not* be moderators - they are both too hot-tempered and inclined to do impetuous things that they won't apologise for or change. Sorry, Garner and Doors, but that's what I think.

    I think it's also important that the moderator group not be seen as cliquey. Does anyone think the group we have there is in anyway biased? I think it's ok, but I'd like to check if anyone thinks it needs balancing out.
  14. Electric_Man Templar

    I'd have to agree with Grace, short fuses don't make good mods. I don't think it's [i:376d2778e3]too[/i:376d2778e3] cliquey, there's always a certain amount of clique, because naturally the people nominated have fitted into the same board already

    I'll second Marcia and Rinsewind if they needs seconding, and thank the right honourable Rincewind for nominating me

    edit: where on earth did an extra closing italics bracket come from?
  15. Maljonic Administrator

    I don't think it's too cliquey either or, if it is, there's not much we can do about it - we have to nominate people we know well enough. Plus there'll be others in the future we haven't even met yet. :)
  16. Mynona Member

    I've earlier refreained from posting in this thread because it's rather a delicate topic. Despite all that Doors and Garner has done for us over at .net I don't think that they will suit what we have in mind here. Apologies to to Doors and Garner but you are, as Grace said, rather short tempered.

    And I do think that it's a good idea to have a
    around the clock' watch. But not only timezones are important but also when a certain member can be online.
  17. Pixel New Member

  18. Maljonic Administrator

    I don't see why they should have a seperate poll, I've already voted for Garner so, with your vote too, that means he's going to be part of the final vote anyway. The only reason I didn't vote for Doors earlier was because he wasn't here, in fact he still hasn't joined yet so I don't know if he's going to take part or not anyway. Assuming he does though he gets my vote too.

    This thread is for collecting candidate names; we can start simple yes and no polls for each individual that has two nominations on here, but wait for a while to give everyone a chance to join in, in case there are any late comers. I imagine most people would rather not mention in public who they want to vote for because they don't want to upset anyone; so on the individual polls people can just vote yes or no and not say anything if they like.

    Remeber though, this is just to sort out an initial moderator structure; people can still be voted out again if they go loopy in the future - and other people that don't get mentioned here can be made into moderators later. :)
  19. Cat New Member

    I nominate Ba Witda, Electric Man, Tony, Rincewind and Buzzfloyd. I'm not sure how may mods we'll need, but I think these people could do a good job. As a matter of fact, I can think of many others who would be good at it too, but then the list would get to long. :)

    I think it's good to have a 24-hour watch, I haven't seen any aussies on the list though. Maybe miss Teak would like to do the honours?

    I'd have to agree with Mynona, Buzzfloyd and E-man. I think Doors and Garner are both to short-tempered to perform the moderater-job the way we are (tentatively) intending it to be. No offense guys.
  20. Cynical_Youth New Member

    A 24-hour watch could be useful for getting rid of spam and other junk quickly. For the big decisions it doesn't really matter, I think.
  21. Roman_K New Member

    Moderators, moderators, hmmm...

    My own opinion?

    Ba Witda
    Buzzfloyd
    Electric_Man
    Mynona
  22. Marcia Executive Onion

    [quote:4f2619f59c="Cynical_Youth"]A 24-hour watch could be useful for getting rid of spam and other junk quickly. For the big decisions it doesn't really matter, I think.[/quote:4f2619f59c]

    I think it could help things work more efficiently. For example, if a troll comes on when one of the moderators is on the board, that mod could start the process of sending out emails/PMs/posts asking what should be done about it. Others would be able to see this and respond as soon as they checked their emails or checked the board.

    edit: I think it would be fine to have Doors and/or Garner as moderators, as long as there were other moderators whose voices could balance theirs.
  23. Electric_Man Templar

    Mal, is it possible to have a moderators only forum? Maybe they could discuss things there, and then when they've finished deliberating could open any threads to the board (or just make a statement). It would save having to PM several different people.
  24. Maljonic Administrator

    Yes it is possible to have a moderators only forum, assuming people don't mind having one. :)
  25. Mynona Member

    I also think that that would be a good idea. And easier on the moderators if nothing else.
  26. Silmaril New Member

    I can't see any problem with any of the nominations, except that I do agree with Buzzfloyd et al that maybe Garner and Doors would not be best suited to it. On the other hand, as this is pretty much meant to be boardania as the Gods want it, it does seem a bit strange to exclude two of the tripod.

    Perhaps we need to decide what exactly we're aiming for here?
  27. Cynical_Youth New Member

    [quote:cddec4856e="Marcia"][quote:cddec4856e="Cynical_Youth"]A 24-hour watch could be useful for getting rid of spam and other junk quickly. For the big decisions it doesn't really matter, I think.[/quote:cddec4856e]

    I think it could help things work more efficiently. For example, if a troll comes on when one of the moderators is on the board, that mod could start the process of sending out emails/PMs/posts asking what should be done about it. Others would be able to see this and respond as soon as they checked their emails or checked the board.
    [/quote:cddec4856e]

    True, but you would still have to wait for the other moderators to see it. Also, if we want to let the board vote, like in the Coventry thread, that extra speed is not that much of an advantage. I guess it would be useful, but I'm not sure if it should be the basis for choosing an extra moderator.

    Edit to make the quote thing work prop'ly
  28. Maljonic Administrator

    I don't think you need speed to deal with trolls, most of them develop over time so we can all decide what to do with them. In fact I don't think any of the moderating requires that much speed; blatent spam can just be deleted, it doesn't mean you've removed the person entirely, just their annoying posts/s. A deathstar type post with nothing in it is what I mean by blatent spam. :)
  29. Cat New Member

    [quote:f1c1087622="Silmaril"]I can't see any problem with any of the nominations, except that I do agree with Buzzfloyd et al that maybe Garner and Doors would not be best suited to it. On the other hand, as this is pretty much meant to be boardania as the Gods want it, it does seem a bit strange to exclude two of the tripod.

    Perhaps we need to decide what exactly we're aiming for here?[/quote:f1c1087622]

    I don't think we want Boardania the way the Gods want it. I don't, anyway. This is not ment as a complaint, let me explain:
    Boardania has developed through the contributions of lots of people. Doors, Garner and Ba proclaimed themselves gods as a natural result of the way things developed and they are amongst the persons who had a big influence on the board. I don't always agree with their viewpoints or how they voice their opinions, but in general I like the community the way it is, so they must have done something right. :) Still, the way the Board is today, is not only their doing. There are quite a few other people who have helped shape it. In fact, every Boardanian has influence, be it great of small.

    My nominations aren't based on the 'position' people have on the Board/in Boardania. It is based on the contributions they made, and more importantly, the way those contributions are made. And that is why I only nominated Ba of these three people.
  30. Tempus New Member

    Garner, Doors or Ba as moderators? Why don't you just castrate them while you're at it? Moderators are generally supposed to be fair, just, and the calm voices of reason amongst squabbling posters - I'd hate to see any of their finely crafted diatribes be lost to posterity in their efforts to remain impartial.
  31. Buzzfloyd Spelling Bee

    [quote:55a94098fd="Pixel"]Sorry, I have to disagree with you here - you cannot exclude two of the major founders of the whole Boardanian culture from moderator status just because they have hair-trigger reactions - when all they can do is comment (or rant) they can say what they like, but I trust both of them to behave responsibly when they have the power to act - just having that power makes one stop and think.[/quote:55a94098fd]
    Over the years, I have seen Garner often take impatient action (or, given that we can't actually take action on the boards, post impatiently) that he subsequently regretted. I have also seen how stubborn Doors can be - disagreeing with him usually makes him dig in deeper, and he [i:55a94098fd]won't[/i:55a94098fd] change his mind. This is common behaviour from these two posters. And I don't believe they would change if they were conferred moderator powers. Garner has often said he would make a terrible moderator, and I believe him! As Tempus says, the qualities that make them interesting and worthwhile members of the community are not necessarily the same qualities that make for a good mod.

    I think Marcia and Mynona would both be excellent moderators, and I would like to add their names to the list. Mal, does your name need adding? You'd have been one of the first people who sprang to mind for me, if you weren't already running the place.

    I don't like the idea of a mods only forum. I believe community decisions should be transparent and, as the name suggests, made by the whole community, because everyone should have the right to know what's going on and speak up if they don't like it. A mod can just as easily post to the whole board as to one group of members to say, "I deleted some spam". I can see no reason [i:55a94098fd]for[/i:55a94098fd] having a mods only board unless the mods are making decisions that other members don't like.

    Moderating should be very hands-off. Our community comes from a moderatorless background, and I think the chief role of mods should be to enable us to carry on in the way we were without hindrance, by getting rid of junk that clutters up the (sometimes rowdy) discussions. Janitors don't need their own forum to discuss whether or not to sweep the floor, but if they want to carry out building works in the dining hall, they should probably ask the other inhabitants of the place first!
  32. Maljonic Administrator

    I agree with everything you've said; also, if Garner says he'll make a terrible moderator, then he probably will.

    We could have moderator forums and use them to ask the moderators to do stuff, and for the moderators to let everyone else know what they have done.

    And my name does need adding to the list if you want me to be a moderator. :)
  33. Cat New Member

    You need two people nominating you to make it on the election list, don't you Mal?

    I'm not sure anyone else mentioned your name. I forgot, anyway. :oops: And you did such a great job building this site.
    So here goes: I nominate Maljonic. :)
  34. Tonyblack Guest

    [quote:1323634a06="Cat"]You need two people nominating you to make it on the election list, don't you Mal?

    I'm not sure anyone else mentioned your name. I forgot, anyway. :oops: And you did such a great job building this site.
    So here goes: I nominate Maljonic. :)[/quote:1323634a06]

    I second that and nonminate Cat and Marcia.
  35. Maljonic Administrator

    Thank you, I'll also nominate Cat if I haven't already. We seem to have a fair few now, perhaps we should gather all the names together? :)
  36. Rincewind Number One Doorman

    [quote:b0070d3652="Buzzfloyd"]

    I don't like the idea of a mods only forum. I believe community decisions should be transparent and, as the name suggests, made by the whole community, because everyone should have the right to know what's going on and speak up if they don't like it. A mod can just as easily post to the whole board as to one group of members to say, "I deleted some spam". I can see no reason [i:b0070d3652]for[/i:b0070d3652] having a mods only board unless the mods are making decisions that other members don't like.

    [/quote:b0070d3652]

    Maybe we should have a dunno 'Mod forum' thats open to everyone. Maybe a 'feedback' forum. A place were we can dicuss the 'runnings' of the board without it spilling into the regular board. So all the 'suggestion box threads' and 'coverntry threads' that in the other board just get mixed up could be in one place?
  37. Cynical_Youth New Member

    I think a "feedback" forum would be a good idea. It could have a sticky thread where all the moderating decisions are announced/discussed and a "complaints box".

    Edit to add: This could be combined with the FAQ section.

    I agree with Buzzfloyd on this, moderators should be members with more responsibilities rather than members with more power.

    I think the nomination stage is pretty much completed now.

    The list:
    Ba Witda
    Buzzfloyd
    Tonyblack
    Electric_Man
    Cynical_Youth
    Garner
    Marcia
    Rincewind
    Doors
    Mynona
    Saccharissa
    Maljonic
    Cat
  38. Rincewind Number One Doorman

    Now I guess those moninated have accept or decline before the voting.

    I'd be happy to be a moderater.
  39. Cat New Member

    I also accept the nomination. Thank you, Mal and Tony for nominating me.

    There is one other matter: how many moderators do we want?
    I have no idea, I have never moderated a board. I willing to learn though. :)
    The only other board I regularly visit, has three. I think 5 would be better, so that we can keep things running smoothly when some of the mods aren't available.
  40. Buzzfloyd Spelling Bee

    I'm happy to accept the nomination. And I think the appropriate number of mods depends on the size of the community. Five sounds fine, I think.
  41. Garner Great God and Founding Father

    Okay, this is just now coming to my attention. I'm a bit surprised at how quickly this place has filled up with activity, given the reception the concept originally received.

    I'd like to say, as politely as possible, that I'll not be participating in this community at this time. I'm a bit outraged at a lot of what I've read in here, but I can put that aside, as it's really just me and my issues to deal with.

    I'd like to thank pixel for his vote of confidence. I do agree with him that I could rise to the challenge. Still, I also would like to thank Grace for pointing out that I've often said myself that I'm not the best choice for a moderator. I agree with both of them.

    That said, I will not be party to any moderated "boardania" where I'm not one of those moderators.

    I think the extent of the nominations has been almost absurd, though I don't disagree with many of the choices. I'm sure this new community will find some level that works for it, as these things always do balance out in the end, one way or another.

    I've brought this thread to Doors' attention, but do not know if he'll be replying any time soon, or even at all.

    I think that's about all I had to say on the matter. Best of luck,

    Clay
  42. Orrdos God

    I have to say that I agree with garner for the most part on this.

    The notion of having a moderated community without myself or garner as mods is vaguely insane.

    For all intents and purposes we ARE mods already, just without any real power. All hot air really.

    What exactly are you expecting mods to do? Generally, they ban spammers and tidy forums up a bit.

    I'm sure my hairline trigger can stretch to that without too much hassle.

    In the event of a large argument, it's not like either of us could just ban someone we're arguing with. Words are our weapon, and the flame is our sport.

    I'm quite confident that I'd be exactly the same posting wise as I ever was prior to that, but with an ability to ban the deathstars of the world and to perform some admin work on the forums.

    Then of course comes the question of what if I'm not a mod. Would it come to the point where me or garner would be censured?

    I dunno. Even if I wasn't a mod, I'd probably still exert a lot of influence.

    I'll be frank. I don't like the idea of a moderated board where the 2 most influential people on it are not given mod functions.

    As I say, mods dont actually do much, it's not much more that a title. But it's the principal of the thing.

    Unless you're all thinking of using mods to, well, moderate arguments and the like.

    Which is an idea I would oppose, as it goes down the censuring path.

    In that situation, level headed people are a good choice. And indeed, on most other boards.

    But on this board? In this community? No.

    I'd hate to see the day where someone posts "Garner is banned for a week for insulting language"

    But, if the community wills it, then I suppose I'll just have to go along with whatever people decide.

    Of course, it's probably a moot point, considering we still have those other boards....
  43. Buzzfloyd Spelling Bee

    This is bollocks.

    My point was that I think the people who should be mods are the ones who will never be tempted to use their mod powers to censor (censuring can be done by anyone) or to try and prevent arguments.

    If you both say that you think you would be OK as mods, then fine. Be mods. But the implication you're both making is that, if you weren't, others in the position of mod would threaten you and your style of posting. I'm saying that it would not be the place of mods to do that, although they would potentially have that power - and that's why we must be certain we have even-tempered mods who would be less likely to abuse their potential powers.

    That means that mods don't censor swearwords, don't call people out for fighting, don't delete offensive posts, or [i:d94be574b5]anything[/i:d94be574b5] like that. They don't ban members that people don't like unless the decision is close to universal. They don't delete a post because one member PMed or IMed them saying they didn't like it. They have the power to do all those things - but they must refrain. That is the reason why a mod must be subjective and rational. Otherwise they should only be granted limited powers.

    The people who could potentially stop others from having a voice should neither be those who are quick to anger nor those who will not accept conflict - either way is a lack of objectivity and a potential problem.

    I'm sorry if either or both of you are offended. I'm trying to say what I think is best for you and me and the community here.
  44. Orrdos God

    I cant say I'm happy with the implication that I'd go about deleting things, banning people and censoring posts.

    I'm one of the most ardent opponents of post deletion you can find. It's never something I'd agree with except in the most extreme of circumstances.

    I can't imagine outright banning anyone off my own back either.

    I can't say that me of all people is going to call folk out for fighting either. Again, not my style.

    And if you honestly think that I'd do any of those things, then I'm dissapointed.

    As I tried to make clear in my previous post, I regard a mod as basically an administrator. Nothing more, nothing less. Keeps the place tidy and kicks the odd obvious troll.

    As I also said, unless your specifically looking for mods to act as referees, theres not a single reason why me or garner can't take up the role.
  45. Rincewind Number One Doorman

    I agree. Like I said earlier it's slightly stupid to not have the too people who where basicly our 'mods' on the other board not to have them here. Seening as the mods or Sweepers job is just to remove trash and ban deathstar type people, while every other decision will be a group one, i don't think they abuse the power- seening as mods don't hve that much power anyway.

    I can see graces point though, you guys are implusive, and do get angery, I wonder if you had the power to just ban dragonmother would you do it? Espiecally after you've had a few doors? I'm not saying that you would, If you can say that it those times when your really pissed of and have a 'fuck her shes a mental cow' mood you'd still have restrait, then thats good enough for me. In fact, you've got my vote either way, really. If drunken bans ever would happen, which i doubt, in the light of day they can be undone.
  46. Maljonic Administrator

    Personally I don't have a problem with Doors or Garner being a moderator, unfortunately Garner has declined; I think it fair though to give Doors the benefit of the doubt considering how much he puts into the boards, I don't think he would go mad and delete a load of posts myself, no matter how angry a post made him feel. I mean you can't get your point across in anyone else's eyes if you've deleted the stuff you are arguing about; even though Dragonmother did go a bit loopy and cause a lot of angst I don't think it would make the boards any better if you could wipe her from history, I'm pretty sure Doors wouldn't want to do that either.

    We also have to remember that it is the members as a whole that will be running the boards here, directing what the 'Sweepers' can and can't do; if any one of them goes off the rails we can vote to have their status removed. The database with all the posts on it will be backed up regularly so we can put things right again if anyone has a mentalist attack and tries to delete everything in the forum they are moderating.

    Anyway, the above has nothing to do with Doors and he's going to get my vote which, incedentally, we may as well start doing soon. :)
  47. Rincewind Number One Doorman

    Oh, there is no way that Doors would detele post that piss him off. No way.
  48. Saccharissa Stitcher

    Cat just messaged me aboutt his thread.

    I'm afraid I have to decliine the nomination for board moderator. Not only is my schedule very haphazard, I am useless when it comes to technical matters and I'm afraid I'll make a jumble of things.

    I am very much flattered by the nomination though. Thank you for your trust in me :)
  49. Buzzfloyd Spelling Bee

    [quote:3f4fa3641a="Rincewind"]I can see graces point though, you guys are implusive, and do get angery, I wonder if you had the power to just ban dragonmother would you do it? Espiecally after you've had a few doors? I'm not saying that you would, If you can say that it those times when your really pissed of and have a 'fuck her shes a mental cow' mood you'd still have restrait, then thats good enough for me. [/quote:3f4fa3641a]
    Exactly my point. I am judging by your words and actions in the past.

    However, if Garner and Doors both say they would be able to mod effectively, then fine. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. But please don't get angry with me for questioning - I think I was being fair, and no one else would have dared to speak up.
  50. Maljonic Administrator

    I would have done if I agreed with you. :)
  51. MissTeak New Member

    Everyone on the list seems like they'd be fine as Sweepers (yeah, I like that name). One thing I'm wondering though - what happens if a mod goes all nasty and starts banning people left and right? I'm not saying this is likely to happen to anyone that's been nominated, it's just something I'm wondering about. Do the other mods have the ability to demod the crazy mod? That sounds odd. Sheesh, and now it rhymes. :roll: Anyway. What do you people think?

    Edit: I posted before reading page 4, and thereby missed Mal's post at the top. :oops: Sorry.
  52. Maljonic Administrator

    Moderators can't ban people; I should have made that clearer earlier I think. They can look at ip addresses which gives them details of where the poster is from, what other names/users have posted from the same address (ip address, not house address of course). They can delete posts; delete threads; move threads; lock threads and split threads up into two seperate topics, though I've never seen the last one done before.

    You can send the ip address of spammers to the authorities and have them prosecuted, which is nice. This means people who use up the site's bandwidth to constantly post unwanted ads and such. :)
  53. Marcia Executive Onion

    [quote:1899298492="Maljonic"]They can delete posts; delete threads; move threads; lock threads and split threads up into two seperate topics, though I've never seen the last one done before.
    [/quote:1899298492]

    I have seen threads split up on other message boards.
  54. Electric_Man Templar

    [quote:0fc1df0e1f="Maljonic"]Moderators can't ban people; I should have made that clearer earlier I think. They can look at ip addresses which gives them details of where the poster is from, what other names/users have posted from the same address (ip address, not house address of course). They can delete posts; delete threads; move threads; lock threads and split threads up into two seperate topics, though I've never seen the last one done before.

    You can send the ip address of spammers to the authorities and have them prosecuted, which is nice. This means people who use up the site's bandwidth to constantly post unwanted ads and such. :)[/quote:0fc1df0e1f]

    What powers do you have as administrator that the mods don't have, and vice-versa?
  55. McLaren New Member

    [quote:eb2d6138e1="Maljonic"]Moderators can't ban people; [/quote:eb2d6138e1]

    So nobody has the ability to ban people?
  56. Maljonic Administrator

    Moderators can't ban people, the admin account can be used to ban someone in a very extreme case but I don't think that should be necessary very often, if ever. I don't even believe that we should be deleting posts that often. I think it's probably better to keep the amin account solely for maintaining the site's workings; but have a site-wide vote on whether to ban someone or not, like the coventry thing.

    There's also another option to banning that I haven't quite figured out the working of yet called karma, but I'm not sure if we'd ever want to use that either. Basically disruptive posters can be given bad Karma, everyone starts with good Karma - the different states are as follows:

    [quote:db39aae0af][list:db39aae0af]Default value. Users marked with Good Karma can post their comments without any restrictions.

    Users marked with Regular Karma should be under observation. Consider this value a flag to have a eye on it.

    Users marked with Bad Karma can post comments but the administrator should approve/moderate them from the admin panel.

    Users marked with Devil Karma are very bad. This users are not allowed to post comments. All his content is just ignored and nothing will be published. [/list:u:db39aae0af][/quote:db39aae0af]

    This is all stuff for the future though and I'm not even sure how to implement that, or whether or not we'd even want to. It might be better to keep things simple?

    We're only talking about moderators for now I think, who have all the powers listed above, which I think is quite a lot. :)
  57. Rincewind Number One Doorman

    I know it's too late now,(or at least for the time being) But I'd like to say i think Hsing would make a great moderator! I said i big 'D'oh' when i realised we forgot her!
  58. Maljonic Administrator

    To be honest I'm not even sure where this moderator thing is going anymore; not sure how long the poll is supposed to go on for and daren't say anything on the subject anymore on the other message boards for fear of being accussed of rushing things.

    I don't even know if all the people we've voted for are even interested in this still, and whether or not we ought to do something about Garner being a moderator despite his refusing the nomination. :)
  59. Tephlon Active Member

    As we're now really moving I'll second that.

    Garner, please reconsider?

    I haven't heard Garners opinion about the 18th of August move. (I've been on holiday for 2 weeks, so I might just have missed the relevant discussion.) I do hope he joins his friends here.
  60. QuothTheRaven New Member

    All of the sweeper election threads are in the dungeon demensions. I assume that this means they are invalidated. So, now what? The move is rapidly approaching.

Share This Page