Total Commander

Well, the question says it all, I guess.

Roman

I picked option no. 3 but I would have not problem in seeing as moderators any of the following members additionally:

- Clo
- Sheepdog
- djk
- fabiochelly
- SanskritFritz

This arises a new question - what if moderators "don't fit" - ie have opposing opinions on the same topic (eg moderator A thinks a post is rude and should be removed / poster be warned, however, moderator B thinks the post is a great sarcastic joke and shouldn't be touched, poster praised)...?

Roman

Hacker wrote:eg moderator A thinks a post is rude and should be removed / poster be warned, however, moderator B thinks the post is a great sarcastic joke and shouldn't be touched, poster praised)...?

I guess this would be obvious for the moderator. And if he knows that another moderator could see a posting a different way, he should discuss it with the other(s).

In addition I think a moderator could send an email to the writer even before he has to warn him.

sheepdog

2Hacker
Hi Roman !
• Jokes must be clearly indicated, not only by a smiley whether it could be ambiguous…
- To write disguised insults with a " " at each line isn't a joke, it's easy to distinguish.
- In ticklish cases, the moderators could find an agreement together out the board, i.e. via e-mail or messenger, since PMs are disabled still…

  K R
Claude
Clo

I picked option no.3, but I would have not problem in seeing as moderators any of the following members additionally:

- fabiochelly
- SanskritFritz
- djk
- Black Dog
- Clo
- Sheepdog

Hacker wrote:This arises a new question - what if moderators "don't fit" - ie have opposing opinions on the same topic (eg moderator A thinks a post is rude and should be removed / poster be warned, however, moderator B thinks the post is a great sarcastic joke and shouldn't be touched, poster praised)...?

Moderation by multiple members is not a new idea. It's actually not just an idea but there are tons of living examples. A little research can show some light.

A recent (to me) example I've seen is here: http://forums.divx.com/

At the bottom you'll see a private section where moderators make their discussions on a separate section of the forum which is not accessible to regular members. Now, I don't know the contents of that area but someone can easily assume it can be used to make decisions over inappropriate posts, etc.

norfie wrote:I would have not problem in seeing as moderators
Black Dog
norfie

So you have voted against moderators, I guess. Because Black Dog wouldn't be a moderator but a stimulator.

Or prhaps I had wrote better:

Dont' feed the trolls

sheepdog

I picked option no. 3 but I would have not problem in seeing as moderators any of the following members additionally:

- Clo
- Sheepdog
- djk
- fabiochelly
- SanskritFritz


I also agree for a private section where moderators make their discussions on a separate section of the forum which is not accessible to regular members.

In addition I also think moderators could send an email to the writer even before he has to warn him.

Well, I've hesitated for a long time how to vote.

I've been always proud (and happy) of the fact that this forum didn't need moderators. Mostly because people
really tried to keep to forum rules. I've already seen many other forums and this one is one of the "cleanest".

Of course it happend several times even here that some people weren't too nice or put eg. some links to illegal software. But it wasn't too often.

I hope that if we have a moderator he won't become a GOD here. I've seen some forums where moderators put comments to almost every second post - it was not acceptable

IMO it would be good if there were several moderators - it would make their work easier - I'm not afraid that they will be quarreling but the separate forum for moderators could be helpful.


Finally I've voted for the third option cause both Lefteous and Hacker are good candidates for moderators but of course there are also a few other people who could do it, too.

djk wrote:I hope that if we have a moderator he won't become a GOD here. I've seen some forums where moderators put comments to almost every second post - it was not acceptable

I'm confident that if moderators consist of the list I have outlined above there won't be any such problems.

2pdavit
You are right

Have'nt voted yet. I'm fine with the candidates, but are there additional volunteers to be added to the list?
I don't want to miss the chance to give them a vote, too.

Hacker?


Regards, deus-ex.