Who would make for good moderators in the D&D forum?

+1

 

I know people have been suggesting the need for a moderator or moderators, but I worry that we will grow to dislike it if the site it too actively moderated. I hope that the idea is only to have him/her/them act when someone really crosses the line -- and that crossing the line is not just advocating for a minority position, even if unpopular. (My 2 cents, if worth that.)

I also think that really wanting to be moderator is probably a bad trait for a moderator. Kind of makes it tough.

That being said, my favorite candidates identified so far in no particular order are:

1) Os T: He seems very tolerant, had the very good sense to advise me to keep out of the recent mess (fail on my part) and most importantly wouldn't abuse the position.
2) B-Bob: I know that he has very strong beliefs so I get the Russian bot concern raised in a post, but he seems like an incredibly decent man. And, I believe he would take the job very seriously and would set aside his own personal feelings on a subject when determining whether to act.
3) Jay-Google: He also has strong beliefs, but I have read pages of him sparring with Bobby and others without ever getting personal, upset or offensive. I think he would be fair to all viewpoints. (I know this seems very tit for tat, but this is the same thing I have expressed in prior posts.)
4) Juan Valdez: I am not as familiar with his posting as the others, but what I do remember seemed very level headed.
5) Durvasa: Same as with JV. I haven't read a ton of his/her stuff, but have been impressed by what I have seen.
6) AroundTheWorld: don't know him but have been impressed by him the last few days.
7) Theimpossibles1: Same.

To the extent anyone cares, I don't intend to leave out other qualified posters. These just jump out at me.

Problem is I would rather have them as active posters than as a moderator who I hope (not my site) won't be tasked with doing very much. I also doubt they would want the job, but if they do, great.

 

The next time I vote for a Democrat for a federal office will be the first time.

 

I saw that one and knew he was off .

 

@Clutch: what sort of guidelines are you expecting the moderators of this forum to enforce? There is probably a wide range of opinion on how to moderate an forum like this. If you are looking for multiple mods, I guess they should be more or less on the same page in this regard.

 

I guess it's good that I get accused by both sides of being on the opposite side

 

Thank you for the consideration, but outside of Unsorted (@KingCheetah has that covered contra @Clutch), the Stros Forum (@codell ditto) and certain parts of the Hangout (@various_people) I possess neither the time, temperament nor qualifications for the position, so I respectfully withdraw my name from consideration.

 

I had not seen Justtxyank's post when I was writing mine. He is another good candidate. My comment re: wanting it not necessarily being good doesn't apply and was not directed at him. (And he may not want it, but is willing to serve for good of the community.)

 

Well, my ears were burning, so I'll chime in. Thanks for the few votes of confidence and thanks too to those expressing misgivings. Short version: I think the idea of D&D mods is a good one, and thanks to @Clutch for considering it. I'm personally not interested in doing this, and as I've said, I plan to take some time away. Several months, if possible. Need more real world time and focus. And the drama has been disappointing for many of us... probably all of us.

(By the way, @RocketsLegend and @Deji McGever, I really and truly did think RL was a foreign infiltrator based on join date, chosen avatars, and simple pattern-matching to posting content and behavior. Examples are easy to look up. But RL, my dude, if I was completely wrong, I sincerely apologize for labeling you a foreign presence. I won't apologize for calling out some of that earlier divisive posting behavior though.)

On point, perhaps that example of my internet judgment is just one, of many reasons, I wouldn't be a good mod. @rocketsjudoka would be good. Also, finding two people, a sane person who leans left and a sane person who leans right, might be a good combo.

I'll see y'all after a while, assuming an old, old man keeps hisself upright . (@moestavern19 shoutout for looking after the blood pressure.)

 

Here's my idea.

Mods don't need to read everything, ban posters or edit posts.

Posters would be "paging MOD's" if things are getting too heated or start to get out of control.

Mods would put poster(s) on timeout away from D&D for 2, 4 or how many hours so things can cool down, but not the rest of the forum. I would think this would be enough attention for anyone to settle down. Lock the thread for a few hours would do the trick also, since the problems are usually contained in a single thread.
A notice of timeout is displayed for the post or poster, so other posters will know what is over the line as a reference.

 

I like your post. One thing that jumps out is the folks that you point out have been labeled trolls are some of the more conservative members of the community (or at least some of the more vocal conservatives). I would hate a site where posters are punished or censored for being considered "too far" on either side. I know you were suggesting the opposite. Just chiming in.

 

Good call.

 

I've accused both of being fake accounts or a Russian troll at this point. I have at least circumstantial proof for both of them. I honestly believe they are. The side they take on politics has nothing to do with it. I don't think anyone should be booted for being too far on either side. I nominated @StupidMoniker who posted that he is further to the right on 2nd amendment than Scalia He doesn't believe there should be any limit on it. If people want hand grenades, bazookas, nukes, whatever, he's fine with that.

I respected that from him because that is his constitutional view. It isn't mine. I disagree with it, and at least on that issue, I think that's pretty extreme. I would still respect him being a moderator.

However, posting conspiracy theories and stuff that has been debunked isn't being extreme politically, it's just mud, dirt, and propaganda.

 

I don't mind that. I also like the idea of putting tattletales who go running to the mods repeatedly for trivial offenses in a timeout as well so people don't abuse the power.

 

I was going to suggest JV and Buck. Buck bowed out.

I would think more than 2 (3 with Clutch) would get overly complicated and could devolve into further complications.

Or close this forum to all members except those being punished. And close all other forums to those who are being punished. Private forum. Argue away. Unmoderated island of misfit toys. Only benefit for the site is continued ad revenue through their clicks.

 

My post wasn't directed at you or anybody at all. My statement was only directed at the fact that all of those listed are conservatives. I get your point and have always appreciated your posts. The tough part for a moderator will be drawing the line between a poster intentionally (knowingly) spreading false conspiracy theories and a poster stating something they (whether right or wrong) believe to be true.

 

Honestly I suggest we take a step back from adding moderators in this forum. The biggest problem in this forum is not the toxicity (easy to avoid using the ignore function) that also exists in the GARM, frankly. The biggest problem is posters who rampage through the forum and post or create threads so often that they're difficult to ignore when others respond to them. The main culprit is of course Bobby. He has no business here, not because of his political views or his insults but rather that he is an incredible nuisance. He hasn't just degraded the D&D, he's also done that to the Texans forum. The D&D has had its share of people who come through and stir the pot but nobody, ever, has single handedly damaged the experience more than Bobby. Not to diminish what he said which was horrible but even if Bobby stopped his posting style he would continue to be a significant problem.

Respectfully, I would hope that instead of adding mods that the site would simply move on and let Bobby spend his time elsewhere.

 

Agreed. I'm generally in favor of the moderator have a long leash and giving the benefit of the doubt. I think deleting threads that are conspiracy theories would serve better than to ban a person who was unaware they were spreading that crap.

 

I've always thought @FranchiseBlade was extremely rational in how he argued his points, but I fear he might be too active on this sub-forum to be approved by the party across the aisle.

In addition to him, I think @JuanValdez and @Space Ghost would both be home-run appointments.

 

Dammit I think y’all killed B-Bob