- Kickimanjaro
- |
- Intrepid Mythic Member
“Oh, it’s a little bit of everything, it’s the mountains, it’s the fog, it’s the news at six o’clock, it’s the death of my first dog, it’s the angels up above me, it’s the song that they don’t sing, It’s a little bit of everything.”
- Dawes, A little bit of everything
Posted by: defnop552
Posted by: OMARRCHR
I myself wouldn't include the public in the decision making simply because they would make it a popularity vote. I would rather have the experienced moderators and employees make the decisions; this isn't my decision though.Couldn't you easily say that when the employees and mods make selections for consideration it is still partly a popularity contest? There's more users than we could ever know who don't post but are on the site regularly and know the rules inside-out. They would make very good moderators but because of their lack of presence, don't get a vote.
Posted by: OMARRCHR
As for the flaw that you see with this, I wouldn't see it being a problem if the right requirements were implemented.
What exactly would you set as a requirement? Account age? In my opinion that isn't the best way to determine a ninja. While it would filter out some users not yet capable of being moderators, it doesn't take into account those who have used the site but delayed making an account. They could be knowledgeable in all the rules and lore of bungie but because of that age rule, can't be considered for moderation duties. Well, "popularity contest" can easily apply because for someone to be noticed, many may consider them "popular." I'll never be a moderator, but I can see that many I recognize on these forums may one day be asked to join the ranks of HFCS. Popularity is an odd term, as it has a slightly negative connotation in this context. We look at popularity as being a person who we all know and like, but really it's just one who is appealing to the general public. May I dare say that all the current moderators would fall under this? Sure, there are some who dislike one for this or that, but generally they are all well liked and respected.
So why, then, would it be unacceptable for the choice of a moderator to be determined in a "popularity contest" as that is what we need. We need moderators who know the rules, respect each other and fellow members, but who are also respected by the community. We joke about Qbix, but we respect him (or am I generalizing too far, I happen to respect him and maybe I'm just projecting that onto the faceless "member" of this site). When a moderator looses respect, that can be dangerous as respect for authority is...well, now I'm about to go into a rant about Cartman, but I think you know where I was going.
EDIT: Damn my rambling, forgot a few points I wanted to make.
I think that the choice to include a new moderator should be left up to whomever decides it already as it seems to work well. I do not think the choice should be up to the public as then it would become the negative form of a "popularity contest" where people only pick the ones that they are friends with and think that because of this that they will be treated less harshly than if they elected someone they did not know. This may actually be true, in many cases, but I still don't think the "vote" should be up to us.
[Edited on 02.13.2012 2:27 PM PST]