A thank you & a request

[RisiaSkye]

While I've been "manning the ship" solo in the forum, many of you have been of tremendous help, particularly in using the "report post" feature and helping me to keep on top of rule violations. As I don't have nearly enough time to read all of the threads every day, I cannot tell you what a life-saver this has been. I will not embarass anyone by listing all those who've done so, but know that I do appreciate your efforts. Thank you, all of you, for taking responsibility for the forum's contents, and for treating it with such respect.

Now, on to the other side of this. I am, more than ever, painfully aware of the fact that I'm the only Mod, and that I can't always be here. While there's no way to make sure a Mod is always handy--and to even ask it would be ridiculous--it seems to me that at least one more Moderator might be in order. However, some have suggested that less is more when it comes to moderation, and that the forum is currently benefitting (and will continue to do so) from its currently-minimal administrative intervention. So, let's hear from the community--please respond to the following:

1. Do you think the forum needs one or more new Moderators? (Why or why not, please.)

2. If you answered YES to #1, please nominate no more than two people who you think should be considered for the job. Please refrain from nominating yourself.

3. If you see your name listed as a nominee in the thread, please indicate whether or not you are willing to be considered and *potentially* given Moderator duties.

Thank you for participating.

Best to everyone,
RisiaSkye
BDSM Forum Moderator

 

[MissTaken]

Great idea, RS.

I think a second mod would be in order so as to alleviate some of the responsibility and stress of it on your own. Things have been wonderfully quiet and respectful lately, we can hope that will continue, but in the even that changes, having one mod in the crossfire could be particularly difficult.

I do think if a second mod comes on board, they need to be someone you feel can work with you. Your leadership has been invaluable and I believe, that we can continue to benefit from that. Also, no public mod bickering....

As for who?

I will be back with ideas. I hvae a couple, but want to be sure that I haven't overlooked anyone.

 

[WriterDom]

I think it would be better, Rs, if you picked one and they remain anonymous rather than having a Mod election.

Edited to add "all someone needs is the password to the Bdsm Forum Mods account to help with housekeeping."

 

[MissTaken]

To some degree, I agree with WD.

Frankly, I also think that going to the forum for, at the very least, some open discussion concerning what they would respect in a mod could alleviate some of the stressors from yestermonth returning in a week or so.

I also think that the next mod should be someone who isn't identified as part of the "founding fathers", again to avoid difficulties that seem to be resolving.

Perhaps, some of the discussion and nominations should be done privately via pm to RS. Thereby, avoiding a popularity sort of list thread with lots of hugs and thanks yous.

?

 

[~Dream~]

I agree with them both Risia

You do carry far more than your fair share of the load,however my Master is much better at explaining why 3 mods would be better than 2 and I agree that voting should take place over pm's so as not to hurt anyone's feelings and such..
~Dream~

 

[lovetoread]

I think you should pm someone privately,ask them if they want to be a mod,either create a new name or whatever the boards name's one is,and ask them to be quiet about it if they agree to be one.

When you become a "mod" you no longer are just a poster anymore. Why stigmatize someone that way?

Oh but I would find one that is on during a different time than you are,therefore the housekeeping can be spread out better during the day.

But this is my opinion.

 

[Lancecastor]

Less is more.

 

[Cirrus]

Unless you're swamped, I think one Mod is fine. If you think there should be another one (or two), I agree with the anonimity idea. We don't need a repeat of what happened before.

 

[Pure]

Hi RS,

If you're feeling burdened, there should probably be a second mod, possibly with a different kink than yours, but with a compatible philosophy. Further it should be someone like you, who does NOT have a history of any kind of flaming or publically losing temper.

I think a moderator should NOT be a major participant; minor/occasional at most. Their name or screenname should be known. Those who sound off several times a day on many threads become personalities--for better or worse-- with packs of pals and several detractors. One wants, I think, LESS personality and LESS-than-constant-presence. I don't think anyone who wishes to be heard on many topics should consider the job; rather someone with less 'color'. The temptation of--perhaps unintentionally-- using the moderator position to give 'clout' to one's views and to 'show up' those who disagree can be just too great.

 

[Cirrus]

Actually, I changed my mind. What Pure said.

You make a lot of good points, Pure. I don't think Moderator, and Friend are always compatible positions.

 

[KillerMuffin]

I think that Pure makes a lot of sense.

My take on this things is that overmoderation is worse than undermoderation.

However, the forum is set on this course of action, I think that before the general public votes on moderatorshipness we should consider that it must be done silently. VIA PM ONLY. Otherwise you're going to run into the vast and terrible excitement known as "the popularity contest." You'll also find that some people might start campaigning for it. Once you've assembled likely candidates, then silently offer them the position. They may turn it down at any time. People should be encouraged to post that they do not want the job to save time.

I disagree that three mods are needed. This is not a guided discussion forum and the moderators are not here as a tribunal. Since they are here to essentially clean rule violations and mediate, the sub/Switch/Dom business is pretty much unnecessary. There is no legislation or judgment being passed so there is no necessary representation required.

This forum is not overrun by spam, death threats, or other nasty stuff. Just a nice long run of posting copyrighted material and some infighting. Why hire a fifty man police force if they only thing they'd be doing is writing tickets in the mall parking lot?

I also think that whomever you decide on for the mod position should be someone with a thick skin and a high tolerance for drama-induced stress because this is a contentious group of people.

 

[Wizard]

I belive 3 mods were picked because one is Dom , one a switch, and one a sub. each bring a diffrent view to the table.............

I think we need two here on our forum.......

 

[Sandia]

I nominate Lancecastor.

Heh.

Sorry. Couldn't help myself. (Would be funny, though, wouldn't it?)

Uhm, seriously, please put me down in the "less is more" category. I'd vote that moderation should be limited to enforcing the rules, with a view of enforcing them as little as possible.

If you need help with that, you should have it. I'd vote against anonymous moderation, though - I think it'd add an unnecessary air of mystery to the process.

 

[A Desert Rose]

Uhm, seriously, please put me down in the "less is more" category. I'd vote that moderation should be limited to enforcing the rules, with a view of enforcing them as little as possible.

If you need help with that, you should have it. I'd vote against anonymous moderation, though - I think it'd add an unnecessary air of mystery to the process.

Here is my vote too.

 

[Guest]

In my opinion, anonymous moderation is a good idea because it allows moderators the pleasure of participating in conversations without the ball and chain of their reputation following them everywhere.

In my opinion, connonymous (hey, if it's not a word, it should be!) moderators are a good idea because that way, moderators would take personal responsibility for their posts and their actions; plus, people would be able to address them personally.

What if we had silent votes (PM Risia, for example) for a new moderator (which we do need if Risia is feeling overworked), who would then adopt a second lit. persona in order to keep the moderating separate from the board participation?

That's my vote!

 

[NemoAlia]

Whoops -- that was me!

 

[Goddess Helena]

I think another mod would help RisiaSkye.
I think deciding who and how many should be done through PM's. I agree that it could become a popularity contest and I doubt that is what this board needs right now. But I'm still new, what do I know.


Helena

 

[NemoAlia]

Helena -- you are a perfect example of the adage my grandmother taught me when I was but a wee little lass:

The number of posts you have on an internet forum does not equal your wisdom.

It's a pleasure having you around!

 

[Goddess Helena]

Thank you, NemoAlia. You are very kind.


Helena

 

[artful]

An Opinion

How people CONTINUE to view (3) Moderators over (1) Moderator, as being MORE Moderated, or OVER Moderated, just blows my mind. If ANYTHING,...it would tend to REDUCE Moderation.

I am very much SUPPORTIVE of (3) Moderators. I see NO reason, for Risia to take ALL the responsibility, for keeping OUR Forum on track.

Unlike some OTHER Forums, we have SEEN from our history, we DO need guidance, to "STAY" on track. Flaming posts, flaming threads, off TOPIC threads, and LEGAL issues ALL need to be addressed by responsible Moderators, without a BIAS to any who post.

With (3) Moderators,...*IF*,...there is a "borderline" situation, (post, thread, or content) that has been reported by a board MEMBER,...it would be a simple matter for the (3) Moderators to make a 2 out of 3 vote, (What should we do, if anything?).

SOME will say this is UNWORKABLE,...mainly because they think it would take too much time. I submit that the TIME issue, will work for the BETTERMENT of us all, (better LATE than NEVER).

I am totally AGAINST anonymity. I think WE as board members NEED to know who is guiding this Forum, and I would hope that we ALL have an input as to it's direction.

Myself,...I see NO value in having ROLE playing threads posted in our Forum. I value FREE SPEECH as much as ANYONE,...but I also believe in the RIGHT for *US*,...as a SPECIFICALLY directed Forum to EMPOWER our Moderators to guide it.

Also,...I would expect Risia to CHOOSE who she will, to fill the other two Moderator positions.
I think we all should submit TWO names to her for consideration, (via PM), and even if she CHOOSES two peoples names, who have NOT been submitted to her, to fill those positions, it's quite all right with me.

Personally,...I would NOT accept the position of Moderator if nominated. Why? Because I am VERY opinionated,...pretty much a man who can only see His way,...not the OTHER members way, (my bad).

(JMHO),...but it's mine,...and I own it.

 

[Sandia]

Helena -- you are a perfect example of the adage my grandmother taught me when I was but a wee little lass:

The number of posts you have on an internet forum does not equal your wisdom.

It's a pleasure having you around!

Your grannie was a wise woman, Nemo.

 

[Desdemona]

Risia, if you need help with moderation, then by all means we need another mod or two. I don't really care who does it though. It looks like a damn thankless job with no perks and terrible pay.

 

[P. B. Walker]

I feel if Risia needs help then she should get it. I also think it's her decision if she needs help. I like the idea of an anonymous moderation helper. This other person would take care of the day-to-day duties and go to Risia for major decisions.

I only think one more is needed, unless Risia and the new mod decide they are swapped too. But I think we should add one at a time and see what happens.

As for who to pick... i think the decision should be up to Risia, but I feel she should take input (anonoymous of course) from the community. The decision will still be up to her, but at least she has an idea of what the community thinks.

Just my two cents.

PBW

 

[artful]

A Selfish Bump

How people CONTINUE to view (3) Moderators over (1) Moderator, as being MORE Moderated, or OVER Moderated, just blows my mind. If ANYTHING,...it would tend to REDUCE Moderation.

I am very much SUPPORTIVE of (3) Moderators. I see NO reason, for Risia to take ALL the responsibility, for keeping OUR Forum on track.

Unlike some OTHER Forums, we have SEEN from our history, we DO need guidance, to "STAY" on track. Flaming posts, flaming threads, off TOPIC threads, and LEGAL issues ALL need to be addressed by responsible Moderators, without a BIAS to any who post.

With (3) Moderators,...*IF*,...there is a "borderline" situation, (post, thread, or content) that has been reported by a board MEMBER,...it would be a simple matter for the (3) Moderators to make a 2 out of 3 vote, (What should we do, if anything?).

SOME will say this is UNWORKABLE,...mainly because they think it would take too much time. I submit that the TIME issue, will work for the BETTERMENT of us all, (better LATE than NEVER).

I am totally AGAINST anonymity. I think WE as board members NEED to know who is guiding this Forum, and I would hope that we ALL have an input as to it's direction.

Myself,...I see NO value in having ROLE playing threads posted in our Forum. I value FREE SPEECH as much as ANYONE,...but I also believe in the RIGHT for *US*,...as a SPECIFICALLY directed Forum to EMPOWER our Moderators to guide it.

Also,...I would expect Risia to CHOOSE who she will, to fill the other two Moderator positions.
I think we all should submit TWO names to her for consideration, (via PM), and even if she CHOOSES two peoples names, who have NOT been submitted to her, to fill those positions, it's quite all right with me.

Personally,...I would NOT accept the position of Moderator if nominated. Why? Because I am VERY opinionated,...pretty much a man who can only see His way,...not the OTHER members way, (my bad).

(JMHO),...but it's mine,...and I own it.

 

[BlondGirl]

The following are just my thoughts on the topic--easy to ignore if needed.


Exactly what is the mod's job? To enforce the rules, right? Most of these rules can be naturally enforced by those who make up the "community" here.

An example: If someone tries to start a flame war--how we each respond (or better--how we DON'T respond), dictates how a flame war is fought. If the Mod only has the posts of one to remove or deal with, I would expect it to be much easier than a dog fight amongst the rest of the group.

2nd example:
Mr Jerk begins posting his personals all over this board. If we don't repond outside of perhaps a simple comment that it is against the TOS here and then forward links to that to the mod--is t really that difficult?

I think that the mod, getting involved in discussions-AS A MOD--is an example of a power trip. Moderating posts should be kept to rule enforcement without any expression of opinion. That is difficult for the average bear though.
Of course, the moderator is expected to be a part of the forum and to participate. But throwing in the "I have the powers of a god" and you must obey the rules while posting about one's opinions within the same post is...um...shitty. Yeah--that is the only word I can think to sum it up. It alienates others from expressing their opinions.

People who post rarely can learn very quickly that their posts are not welcome when the Moderator says within the same "breath": I believe things should be this way and then in the same paragraph brings up the forum rules or tells the person that if they don't like the OPINION then they need to leave...well....This is a big part of why I rarely come here. The power trips.

The mod should ONLY act as mod publicly when enforcing rules. One's sexual inclinations should have no bearing whatsoever on the ability to spot a personal ad here and remove it. And one's personal opinions should certainly not be a part of enforcing the rules--expecially publicly.