Moderators?

stitch626 · Post by **stitch626** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 12:03 am

At the top of each topic page, it says Moderators: none. Who are the moderators and why does it always say none?

Post by **Tsukiyumi** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 12:07 am

I always kind of assumed that we are all moderators, and should moderate ourselves. Sounds kind of zen, now that I think of it...

KuvahMagh · Post by **KuvahMagh** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 12:07 am

I think it is just Graham and Ian, it probably means that they aren't browsing that area of the Forum at that time I would assume.

Post by **Tsukiyumi** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 12:08 am

Their status seems to be "Administrators".

stitch626 · Post by **stitch626** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 12:12 am

Thank you, it just bothered me...

Sionnach Glic · Post by **Sionnach Glic** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 9:17 am

To clarify a bit more, Graham and Ian are admins. There are no mods at the moment, because we haven't really seen the need for them, though I think Graham mentioned he was thinking of apointing one or two sometime before.

Reliant121 · Post by **Reliant121** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 1:04 pm

I believe we have none at the moment because there arent enough members to warrent a mod. Two admins can handle the number of active members we have.

stitch626 · Post by **stitch626** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 9:41 pm

What would the job of a moderator be?

Blackstar the Chakat · Sun Apr 13, 2008 9:51 pm

stitch626 wrote:What would the job of a moderator be?

make sure everyone is following the rules basically.

Sionnach Glic · Post by **Sionnach Glic** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 10:31 pm

Pretty much. Enforce the rules, make sure threads are in the apropriate places, making sure things don't get out of hand, etc. Just keeping an eye on the place, basicaly.

stitch626 · Post by **stitch626** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 10:33 pm

Who would get the job? Would it be based on rank (which seems to make the most sense)?

Post by **Captain Seafort** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 10:42 pm

I expect it'd be based partially on rank, and partially on the ability to do the job while maintaining impartiality. There's nothing worse on a forum than a mod who disciplines or bans members because they've got a grudge, rather than enforcing the rules evenly.

Sionnach Glic · Post by **Sionnach Glic** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 10:46 pm

Exactly. It would have to be someone who won't abuse authority. Remember, mods have the power to edit or delete posts and lock or delete threads. You don't want someone who's a complete jerk running around with that power and getting his/her own back on people they don't like.

Duskofdead · Post by **Duskofdead** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 11:46 pm

I am an ex-mod of the Total War heaven forums at a time when there were roughly 1200-1500 active members. It's no cakewalk, everyone expects you to be reading everything instantly. It's pretty much a thankless job where however you do it, someone thinks you were biased or being too harsh, or too lenient. I would say that as far as volunteer jobs go it was pretty stressful.

Post by **Mikey** » Mon Apr 14, 2008 1:23 am

I think the worst case we had is one in which I was unfortunately involved, and Graham pretty much took care ofit. Aside from that, we pretty much handled our own deal in the "April 4th, 1968" thread, and have seemed to be able to conduct ourselves.