I guess one of my main questions is if mods. and administrators are held accountable for their actions? I am aware that most of this may take place behind closed doors but to the rest of us not privy to that information it's tough to know.
This is going to be a difficult situation for any site. It's always hard to ask people to stick themselves out there to serve as peer police, and to redouble their focus on their own language and behavior. In the end, every single one of us is going to come across poorly, over-react, and/or not represent our position and the site well at some point. Like everyone else, we have bad days, bad moments, and it gets reflected in our words and actions. It's harder for those who are saddled with their titles under their names for every single post.
I'll freely admit, that I took the cheesy/easy way out. I removed 'Administrator' under my name, because I wanted to maintain the illusion (just to myself, I suppose) that I could participate in a conversation, even a heated one, without people feeling like it was "them vs. the admin", which I never want it to be. Wearing "admin", I felt like I had to sterilize myself for the most part, which was less fun. Appreciate that the distinction is only in my head really, but that it was there enough that I felt restricted by it. But it's the cheesy/easy way out, because we can't really have everyone do that. People need to know who the mods, admins and senior mods are. So those folks are saddled with the perpetual balancing act. When are you a poster, and when are you a mod? Different hats, only really perceptible to you. There has been a *ton* of conversation amongst the mods and admins, particularly following Tibor's banning, in regards to the boundaries between 'user' X and 'moderator' X. Everyone already understands and appreciates the need for that, but that doesn't make it any easier (on anyone) in the heat of the moment. I have, absolutely, done and said things that I regretted later because of the 'position' I hold on the site. It's unavoidable, and those of us with stronger personalities suffer the most for it.
Here's really all I can offer. If people come to myself, osugrad21, and/or 3yardsandacloud with concerns about mods, senior mods, and admins, we do
always take as objective a look at the complaint as possible, and almost always talk about it with the bulk of the moderatorship, and the person in question. I am always interested in how to do things better.
I am a critical person, but I there's nothing and noone I'm more critical of than myself. I don't expect everyone to be the same way, but I do make it clear to everyone who takes on a greater role with the site that we have to police ourselves as well.
Not sure how to say this as simple and clearly as possible, but there is not a single mod, senior mod, or admin on this site that doesn't have my trust and appreciation. That may seem fantastic (in the 'hard to believe' sense) to some, but it's true. Doesn't mean I always agree with them, doesn't mean I think they're always in line with my personal vision of how the site should be represented, does mean that I know I can express concerns to them, and they'll give those concerns due consideration. I also know that every single one of them values this site and community, and wants whats best for it.
We try to be fair. When we fall short, we examine why, and talk about how to prevent the same from happening.
What I'd ask of every user on this site, is consider those you have the biggest differences with, and allow that your perception of them may well be harsher than the reality. Personality differences are a part of 'life' on a forum like this, but sometimes we get so used to conflict with specific people, that we do it out of habit rather than having a real issue with them at that moment.
Of our mods, like of our users, we represent a wide range of approaches, tact, perspectives, voices, use of the language and vision of what BP should be. There's no accident there.
I intend to increase the mod ranks shortly. I'm still a bit unclear by how many. Could be 5, could be 10, could be 20. I don't really know. I don't have a 'cap' for how many mods we should have, because mods (like admins) are users who try to represent the site as best as possible. The more we have, the more like advocates for the user base they are, and the less like authoritative 'police'. That's what I'm shooting for there. Not looking for 'control', but rather for representation.
There are also changes coming to the warning system, both in terms of how the mods use it, but also in terms of how it impacts people who are warned. All in an effort to be as fair, and as 'open' a book as possible when it comes to the more difficult decisions.
In the end, we all do the best we can. I can't ask any more of them, than to hear me (and others) when we come to them with concerns, and I try to be as receptive as possible when they (and others) have to approach me for the same.
) So I figured I'd offer up how things look from my "noob" PoV
