the mysterious world of stock forums, page-14

Interesting article but hardly any revellations.
Thanks Sandy for your post in feed back.

The issue of moderation has had me thinking recently ( for some strange reason).

I have gone through the gambit of emotions from being angry at the naivity of some moderators/moderation, to thinking more sisnister conspiracy scenarios.

A time of reflection and discussion with HC admin has lead me to believe that moderators are simply human with all the faults and abilities as the rest of us and by getting emotive I don't help the cause.

Do they have agendas?

Of course they do...why else would they be on a stock forum.

Do they keep those agendas in check at all times?

Possibly not, but they were posters before mods.

Do they take things personal at times?

Probably

Do they get it wrong at times?

Well I can think of one recent occasion...but I won't go into that :)

However the main question is...Are we better off for having moderation or not?

The answer is an obvious yes.

As long as their decisions can be questioned and there is an impartial arbitrator then we can also be allowed to disagree without threat.

For those that are interested the nic currambine was used only whilst dicussions were being held with HC admin and HC admin were aware of this when the nic was created. There was never any intention to 'multinic' and there never was a 'multinic' occasion.

I am sure that the approach of Dub to moderation has earned both himself and HC an enormous amount of respect. I am sure that the less than handful of 'others' are also trying to do their best in an unpaid service, however Dub by being approachable as well as communicative certainly helps.

FWIW eh?

LOL

debono