Can I ask all my fellow team members (TFFE) to vacate this thread.. I do so value your kinship but I chose my path regardless of the team..

You mean I have to quit TFFE in order to participate?

I suppose it would be easier to join BOINC Synergy. Then I wouldn't have to put up with as much nonsense.

---

Account frozen...

Can I ask all my fellow team members (TFFE) to vacate this thread.. I do so value your kinship but I chose my path regardless of the team..

You mean I have to quit TFFE in order to participate?
I suppose it would be easier to join BOINC Synergy. Then I wouldn't have to put up with as much nonsense.

Also not germane to the discussion.

---

Capitalize on this good fortune, one word can bring you round ... changes.

I personally look at it like this; twenty plus people were made moderators. Through the process of elimination, the mods best suited for the job are still here.

Natural selection has not been at work here.
By our speaking up, we are asking for a reasonable method of selection.

What do you think would be a reasonable method of selection? If you got to choose your mods, would that make it easier to accept their actions?

Ms Heinze . . . good of ya to coME out of thE woodwork . . . 'ow's Your Life trEatin' you?

---

BOINC Wiki . . .

Science Status Page . . .

Ms Heinze . . . good of ya to coME out of thE woodwork . . . 'ow's Your Life trEatin' you?

I can't complain. I'm not much of a Cafe denizen, I'll look here when there's an email about it and the other mods get to discussing it. This was one of those threads, and I thought this was an interesting discussion. Since I don't come here, I leave Cafe moderation to those mods who hang around here.

the mods best suited for the job are still here.

I have to disagree with you CR. While there might be a a few people here on the forums that are well suited for the job, there are also some of the WORST suited for the job still here. In this case a positive and a negative equals a negative.

---

For a person to moderate effectively, they have to be a regular member. Someone that knows everyone and knows what's going on around here.

I don't agree with that at all. Appointment of a moderator should be on the basis that they spend *some* **voluntary** time here depending on what they are able to contribute. They don't need to know everybody, in the same way that a policeman does not need to know everyone on his patch to enforce law and order.

Appointment of a moderator should also be based on the ability to do the job, to enforce the rules here, not on the basis of going easy on friends and hard on someone they don't like or doesn't belong to their team. In fact any moderator making moderation decisions based on their personal preferences, or based on which side they got out of bed that morning, is patently not suitable to moderate. Any such person should be withdrawn by the administrators since theirs is the responsibility of bad moderation and its unchecked continuation.

Most importantly, moderators should also have a signature.

Someones fishing:-)

---

It is SEXY to DONATE!
Skype = demiurg2

What do you think would be a reasonable method of selection? If you got to choose your mods, would that make it easier to accept their actions?

Possibly. But it's not likely we could all agree on a method of selection. You could have an open election with people standing and votes cast. But so few a percentage of crunchers post to make it truly representative. I still think personal reccommendation from existing mods is the best way to go forward.

Maybe democratic would be the way to go. The people who want the jobs would stand, and then the masses can make their decisions. Since it's about the boards, then only the participants of the boards matter anyway.

....

Most importantly, moderators should also have a signature.

You can't get a cooler sig than this:

Please make a donation to this project. Thank you.

PayPal now available!

As Demiurg says in his sig, it's sexy to donate! :-D

Now you destroyed it again for me Fussy, I was just about to post with a tiny sad voice asking if not mine was cool to, and then I saw that you had already mentioned me... *It's so hard to be whineing around you*

Hehe!
Carl

---

It is SEXY to DONATE!
Skype = demiurg2

50th post!

---

Capitalize on this good fortune, one word can bring you round ... changes.

He called her Fussy.

---

Capitalize on this good fortune, one word can bring you round ... changes.

I personally look at it like this; twenty plus people were made moderators. Through the process of elimination, the mods best suited for the job are still here.

Natural selection has not been at work here.
By our speaking up, we are asking for a reasonable method of selection.

What do you think would be a reasonable method of selection? If you got to choose your mods, would that make it easier to accept their actions?

Not very complicated. Someone that takes part in the forum and isn't a control freak.

---

He called her Fussy.

Good eye!

---

Account frozen...

He called her Fussy.

Oh... *poot* Well, I am both a swede and senile. I think I have actually edited Fuzzys name twenty times out of spelling it wrong. But this time it got past me. Another strange spelling I do is about music. I am a composer by profession and have a ph.d. in music theory. I write in papers about music and so on and soforth. And I still 50 percent of the time write msuic.

Ah well...

Sorry Fuzzy!

---

It is SEXY to DONATE!
Skype = demiurg2

I leave Cafe moderation to those mods who hang around here.

Which must surely beg the question, why do you still be a mod if you have no real interest?

Chris, you might not know Pam, because she's not a Cafe regular, but she is very active on the NC board. And I think Pam is doing a great job there.

Thanks, Fuzzy. Yeah, I would say that's it, I'm at NC all the time and Questions and Answers some. But that would be a valid point, if one is a mod, should they patrol all the forums, or is it ok to just go to the ones they like and mod the problems they see?

Thanks, Fuzzy. Yeah, I would say that's it, I'm at NC all the time and Questions and Answers some. But that would be a valid point, if one is a mod, should they patrol all the forums, or is it ok to just go to the ones they like and mod the problems they see?

I don't think that any one person could be a beat cop on all the forums. Unless of course you have no life. (Or getting )

---

Account frozen...

I have no way to mod this thread but I can present my questions again:

Can a moderator both hold power yet chat as if they had neither power, persuasion or responsibility?

Could a simple member chat and hold the power to stop or alter a thread?

Can a moderator moderate if they are involved in a thread, argument or position?

Can we as members step outside ourselves and assume the role of moderator whenever we wanted?

Can a moderator actually be an average member or will they always be partisan?

Perhaps not written in my best english but I meant these questions to point out a deep disapointment I felt.

Non of us should be partisan..

I love being amongst my team mates (TFFE) but they are also just my favoured starting point to explore being a member of the wider community.

I want to be a member in the Cafe forum but I DO NOT WANT to be subjected to either errant moderators who think they are members - nor members who think they are moderators..

We all have badges to wear.. lets wear them without needing to tarnish other people's..

It is not safe when our forums don't have the will to make a structure work..

It is not safe when those who are charged to give this community a place to be start trying to be in our place..

I hope you mod's accept my questions and as a member I know I will never break a rule I could not see a big hole in.

If no one minds I will ask for this thread to die away - as people see fit..

Actually there is a way to at least know a bit about the moderators.
Just take a look at this thread. Has it been moderated? There has been one post that even I think should have been moderated and I have pretty high standards (some would say sloppy) on what I used to moderate.
Why is this important? Well, if a thread discussing the work of moderators and individual members concern about how moderators execute their work (not duty, a mod can go home and eat ice-cream) is moderated that is not good. Becuase this thread is actually the enactment of the freedom of speach. Something that does not exist over Predictor for instance.
As far as I know the thread has not been moderated, I might be wrong though. And this still after some pretty hard preasure on the moderators, valid or not.

If it has not been moderated, than we probably should be lucky with our moderators, even though they make mistakes. Remember that they are human.

If it has been moderated there might be concerns because then the freedom of speach and the god given right of complaining might have been impeded. I do not know though, there might have been a really bad post that needed to be removed to.

Second issue. Cultural distinctiveness.
I for instance is a swede. For me naughties aren't a big deal. I would instead stamp on people loosing coherence in a discussion if I where moderating. But then I am from a country where the new big family entertainment program is named Yippie Kaa-Yay... You can all imagine the word it ends with. And some nudity is okay in tv. On a swedish site you would pretty much never get moded for stating a body part or bodily activity. But start a row and you are out on your middlebackwardsbodilypart.

American moderators are moderating other things than europeans, something I've seen in here for instance. Name any body part, or that you want to eat a part of a cow and you get moderated by an american, start a row, nothing...

Just a couple of cents.

On the whole I think the mods in here are pretty good. Still human, and making errors now and then. And in my eyes way to prudent. But this is an american site so... Who am I to speak:-)

Carl

---

It is SEXY to DONATE!
Skype = demiurg2

I have no way to mod this thread but I can present my questions again:

Can a moderator both hold power yet chat as if they had neither power, persuasion or responsibility?

Could a simple member chat and hold the power to stop or alter a thread?

Can a moderator moderate if they are involved in a thread, argument or position?

Can we as members step outside ourselves and assume the role of moderator whenever we wanted?

Can a moderator actually be an average member or will they always be partisan?

Perhaps not written in my best english but I meant these questions to point out a deep disapointment I felt.

Non of us should be partisan..

I love being amongst my team mates (TFFE) but they are also just my favoured starting point to explore being a member of the wider community.

I want to be a member in the Cafe forum but I DO NOT WANT to be subjected to either errant moderators who think they are members - nor members who think they are moderators..

We all have badges to wear.. lets wear them without needing to tarnish other people's..

It is not safe when our forums don't have the will to make a structure work..

It is not safe when those who are charged to give this community a place to be start trying to be in our place..

I hope you mod's accept my questions and as a member I know I will never break a rule I could not see a big hole in.

If no one minds I will ask for this thread to die away - as people see fit..

Just one small thing about us regular members. Are we not erreing if we do not tell a friend to cool it when he has a bad day and starts ranting against someone?

Another penny falling from the bald tree
Carl

---

It is SEXY to DONATE!
Skype = demiurg2

/Edit

To clarify: I have never of course been a moderator here.
I have though been a moderator on two other foraii before and have been paid to supervise moderators on swedens largest children site.

Carl

---

It is SEXY to DONATE!
Skype = demiurg2