Moderator(s) needed here....

Originally Posted by Drizzt80

I added my name to the list for both of your reasons . . . I honestly hope I lose the "popularity contest", but IF noone else wants to be a mod, WHO will take on the charge to help get the site back to some semblence of normal?! It's obvious Rich can't necessarily do it all by himself, and is looking for help.

I'm very much in line with your view of this, Brent. I have a paying thankless job; the possibility of acquiring a non-paying thankless job isn't such a rosy prospect. But I haven't asked for my name to be withdrawn for the reasons you cite.

Originally Posted by Joejr14

Honestly, I'd like to see the mods on this website already be contributing members who have been here for quite a while.

Some of you may ask why?

Because contributing members feel enough for this website to kick $25 (or in some cases $75) a year to him. They have a vested interest in this website and the direction it takes. I'd also like it to be someone who has been here for a while---because they know what it was like a year ago when everything was fabulous and are less likely to decide one day that corns just aren't for them.

I definitely agree with this. I don't think you have to contribute monetarily or be here for a long time to be a great asset to this community, but these ARE at least a couple of indicators of a member's committment to this site.

Originally Posted by Fenderplayer108

Joe; Why don't you be a mod?

I think you would make a good one for many reasons. You have been here for a long while, pretty much everyone on this forum knows you. You vest a interest in this forum, and I think thats what the mod spot needs.

Ha. I'd love to and I think I'd do a good job, but I'm viewed as 'controversial' because I don't sugar coat things and fluff it all up. That 'chat thread' didn't do much good either. And in a 'popularity contest' I don't think that would exactly secure me many votes.

Like I said, there are some good names up there that at least are in line with that I think we should have. So I won't have any problems voting for those people.

Well, anyone who has never been a moderator will be in for a surprise, I think. Most people voting to have moderators will be under the impression that everyone will be subjected to moderation EXCEPT for themselves. Seen it time and time again. On some of my other sites, people would complain that moderators were needed. So when I did so, and the moderators determined that those people asking for moderation were PART of the problem, well that pretty much shocked them. THEY wanted ONLY the other guy to be moderated. But they themselves wanted free reign to do and say whatever they pleased.

Doesn't work that way. Matter of fact, it better had NOT work that way. A moderator needs to be impartial. If your best friend is acting like a jerk, you have to call a "spade" a "spade". If you can't do that, then you should not be a moderator. It also puts quite a burden on the moderator to lead by example. You cannot be credible as a moderator unless you act the part WE need for everyone else to act as. So yes, if that is a part of your persona that you do not wish to give up, again, this is not for you.

When I have had to wear that hat, I try hard to treat everyone the same. Doesn't matter if you are my biggest customer, a steady advertiser on one or more of my sites, or just someone who blundered their way in here, not having a clue about common courtesy. I try to treat you ALL the same based on what you DO, not who you ARE. So if you cannot do that, then no, this job is not for you.

Speaking of which, I will also put a "none of the above" vote when I make up that poll. The purpose of that will be to give everyone the opportunity to plainly state that one of two things: (1) They don't want anyone on that list to be a moderator, or (2) They don't want ANYONE at all to be a moderator here, and wish things to remain as they are now. If that option in the voting gets the majority of the votes, then I will consider that as a clear signal to just drop this whole idea.

I am putting this into your hands here. You all can make or break this site. I certainly have no intention of sitting here 24/7 playing the "daddy".

And yes, I am FULLY cognizant that moderators can make or break a site as well. Which is why I am putting THAT decision in your hands as well. Choose wisely, please.

Oh, one other detail. "Moderation" does not give anyone the force of their "powers" here to enforce their opinion on another person. In other words, if someone disagrees with your genetics understanding, husbandry practices, or the way you incubate eggs, that contrary opinion is not a concept subject to moderation. Moderation is to keep the discussions civil, regardless of the topic matter and your part in the opinions on such matters.

Originally Posted by Joejr14

Ha. I'd love to and I think I'd do a good job, but I'm viewed as 'controversial' because I don't sugar coat things and fluff it all up. That 'chat thread' didn't do much good either. And in a 'popularity contest' I don't think that would exactly secure me many votes.

Like I said, there are some good names up there that at least are in line with that I think we should have. So I won't have any problems voting for those people.

Wow, I really didn't think you had any interest in it. I guess I shouldn't have assumed. I also thought that you didn't have time for it at this point. Had I not made these assumptions, I would have nominated you. In fact, I'm going to go nominate you right now. I hope that people are objective, and that the voting doesn't turn out to be a popularity contest. If the "voters" look back on your contributions here, Joe, I think they'll see that you're as qualified as anyone, and more qualified than many. And there's no question regarding how much you care about this site.

Originally Posted by Rich Z

Speaking of which, I will also put a "none of the above" vote when I make up that poll. The purpose of that will be to give everyone the opportunity to plainly state that one of two things: (1) They don't want anyone on that list to be a moderator, or (2) They don't want ANYONE at all to be a moderator here, and wish things to remain as they are now. If that option in the voting gets the majority of the votes, then I will consider that as a clear signal to just drop this whole idea.

Maybe you should split that into two selections. The difference between those statements is more than just one of nuance.

Originally Posted by Roy Munson

Wow, I really didn't think you had any interest in it. I guess I shouldn't have assumed. I also thought that you didn't have time for it at this point. Had I not made these assumptions, I would have nominated you. In fact, I'm going to go nominate you right now. I hope that people are objective, and that the voting doesn't turn out to be a popularity contest. If the "voters" look back on your contributions here, Joe, I think they'll see that you're as qualified as anyone, and more qualified than many. And there's no question regarding how much you care about this site.

Well, there's only 40 hours during the work week, so that leaves plenty of time. And quite honestly, most of the time I'm not at work I'm either downstairs cleaning tubs and feeding, or up here online. And a very big portion of that time is spent on this website--and that will only increase as breeding season gets closer.

Funny that you bring up prior contributions. Slighty off topic, but I was copying and pasting all of my FAQ threads into my personal forum and it appears that the 3 FAQ's have been viewed about 10,000 in combination. I was genuinely surprised about that. Enough in fact that I'm going to go back later tonight and finally finish them off with appropriate links and even tackle a Breeding FAQ.

I certainly don't expect to get squat for votes, and that's fine. I just hope that the addition of a few moderators can get this website back to where it belongs.

Originally Posted by Rich Z

Speaking of which, I will also put a "none of the above" vote when I make up that poll. The purpose of that will be to give everyone the opportunity to plainly state that one of two things: (1) They don't want anyone on that list to be a moderator, or (2) They don't want ANYONE at all to be a moderator here, and wish things to remain as they are now. If that option in the voting gets the majority of the votes, then I will consider that as a clear signal to just drop this whole idea.

thank you Rich............i was wondering if i was even going to be able to vote on this issue, but it looks like now i can. is there any time-frame on when you think the poll might go up.

thanks
galen

I might have missed this, but...

Are we going to vote for one, or more than one? Seems like it would be a good idea to have back ups. Maybe something like 1st, 2nd, 3rd choice? That might give Rich a better selection if the first person gets too tired, busy, etc.

The poll we be put up sometime in the next few days. I wanted to make sure all nominations were in, as they will not be added after I start the poll.

The poll will be multiple choice so you can vote for as many of the candidates as you feel is warranted. The one or more with the highest votes will be the ones YOU ALL choose to be moderators here.

The vote will be anonymous so there will be none of that "why didn't YOU vote for ME?" stuff.

The voting itself will run for a week or so, depending on the turnout.

Rich...I just want to say that I applaud you for deciding to place some moderators here. I think it has been needed for a long time. I honestly hope it helps. I miss the old CS forum family atmosphere!