-->
@Tyrone
Thank you for seeing my point. Common sense prevails as always.
Poll on Moderation
Posts
Total:
188
Ill vote 'neither' on the basis that its not so much the user who is being the moderator that is the problem as much as the policy being enforced in the first place..... To me Its not clear if the main issue is the overly strict enforcement/application of what the moderation policy is, or if the moderation policy itself is too large and expansive...... Having been told by a mod not to use a certain word because its 'ableist hate speech', it could very well be either or even both.
== Vote Count ==
PRO-BSH
4
ANTI-BSH
2
NEITHER
1
What would Bsh 1 have to say about this?
-->
@Alec
The thread will get removed if it doesn't go the way he likes
How would he remove an entire thread? Besides, Tyrone said, "The site owner says he is responsive to popular opinion".
I tried to give him the benefit of the doubt when it was first announced, but virtually every action of his proves my initial instinct correct.
Vote anti.
-->
@Alec
Excellent trolling, really that was smart as fuck.
-->
@Alec
The site owner may have said that, but Tyrone posted a thread with a video of his face in it, and BSH1 literally deleted a thread because he didn't like Tyrone's face. The messed up part is Tyrone's face is black, so he basically punished Tyrone for being black.
Vote anti.
So, you want to turn the mod position into a quasi-Presidency? Everytime you disagree with the mod philosophy you overthrow them with a new one? Eh. I'm not voting - at least not now.
-->
@1harderthanyouthink
Why not vote 'disagree' then? You support the status quo, yes?
"turn the mod position into a quasi-Presidency?"
Oh God that would turn drama on the site up to a fucking 12 real quick
Oh God that would turn drama on the site up to a fucking 12 real quick
-->
@Imabench
I already read the bullshit meter as being pretty high. That's just what I'm reading this as turning into.
-->
@Imabench
I counted your vote as is, but just FYI, the moderator basically controls moderation policy. Bsh1 wrote much of the current policy himself. So this poll is essentially over whether or not you'd like to see more lax moderation generally.
@Wylted and drafterman
He took my voting privileges because I didn't know how to vote within the terms of the site. If he doesn't get back at something I told him by the end of the weekend, I'm voting Anti. Right now, I'm neutral, but that's not necessarily permanent.
P.S. This seems like a good way for me to get a badge. Also, what does it mean to troll?
-->
@1harderthanyouthink
So, you want to turn the mod position into a quasi-Presidency? Everytime you disagree with the mod philosophy you overthrow them with a new one? Eh. I'm not voting - at least not now.
One of the core functions of the Presidency (in theory) was to serve as a check on moderation via popular vote. So yes.
== Vote Count ==
PRO-BSH
4
ANTI-BSH
4
NEITHER
2
-->
@RationalMadman
I don't really like the way the mod position was established and introduced. I think there'd be less shit if the site was left in a laissez-faire state for longer, and moderation rules were stipulated before appointing a single mod. That would have allowed for community input without creating a dramatic cause of dissent that results in instability.
-->
@Alec
That's actually a good attack on bsh1 that is genuinely a new flaw in his moderation not brought up before and something I would agree is bad moderating lacking communication to the punished.
-->
@Alec
To @ two people at once put a comma between the names. Maximum 5 per post.
-->
@RationalMadman
I kinda want to go back to the discussion of a moderator log. I think it would greatly increase transparency of the mod team.
-->
@1harderthanyouthink
I don't really like the way the mod position was established and introduced. I think there'd be less shit if the site was left in a laissez-faire state for longer, and moderation rules were stipulated before appointing a single mod. That would have allowed for community input without creating a dramatic cause of dissent that results in instability.
100% agreed. Arbitrarily going with Bsh1's vision of moderation was a terrible idea.
I think the poll is inaccurate. I think the poll results are:
Bsh 1 should be overthrown: 2 (Tyrone, Rational Madmen)
Neutral: 2 (Imabench and Alec)
Bsh 1 should not be overthrown : 3 (Yeusha Bought, Argent_Tongue, Mopac)
P.S. How would we overthrow BSH1 if we wanted too?
-->
@1harderthanyouthink
this. I also think the site would benefit from a more rough and tumble culture like ddo had. Max enforced moderation standards that were about as strict as the ones here for only a few months before walking them back
-->
@1harderthanyouthink
I was sort of hoping that there would be some sort of site-referendum for what the moderation policy on the site would be where individual rules could be put up for a vote, but at the same time it can still be altered at will by the site owner while on top of that I only poke my head in here once every few days"I think there'd be less shit if the site was left in a laissez-faire state for longer, and moderation rules were stipulated before appointing a single mod. That would have allowed for community input without creating a dramatic cause of dissent that results in instability."
-->
@David
Please tell mike you can handle this position on your own, without the assistance of BSH1. The majority of us would be happy with you as a mod. You are transparent, try to make decisions that would make the community happy, are fair and also you are not prone to occasionally becoming emotionally frail, being over zealous and being pig headed. I'm not asking you to say anything negative about BSH1, but just let mike know you can handle the job alone
Let off of Bsh, how about. He's made a good faith effort to satisfy the needs of this Site.
-->
@Swagnarok
This is a pro-bsh1 vote yes?