I think the site owes it to the paid up members to allow a vote on mods
My suggestion is that all mods should stand down and then elections should take place for ten new mods, Any Pawn Star would be able to put their name forward and if there are more than 10 nominations then we, the paying members can decide
or is that a stupid idea?
Originally posted by MontaguesGreat idea!
I think the site owes it to the paid up members to allow a vote on mods
My suggestion is that all mods should stand down and then elections should take place for ten new mods, Any Pawn Star would be able to put their name forward and if there are more than 10 nominations then we, the paying members can decide
or is that a stupid idea?
- Joined
- 20 Oct 02
- Moves
- 610682
Originally posted by MontaguesStupid idea. Let the guys who run this site assign the moderators. Theres an old saying about letting the inmates run the asylum.....
I think the site owes it to the paid up members to allow a vote on mods
My suggestion is that all mods should stand down and then elections should take place for ten new mods, Any Pawn Star would be able to put their name forward and if there are more than 10 nominations then we, the paying members can decide
or is that a stupid idea?
1 edit
Are all of the moderators still active?
Uncle Adam doesn't post anymore - does he play?
I suppose they could read the forums and not post but I don't see much action from Flash, mwmiller or ~!Tony!~.
Maybe they aren't as committed as they were when appointed which must have been before I joined the site.
Edit: Add wWarrior and vaknso to that list too.
- Joined
- 20 Oct 02
- Moves
- 610682
Originally posted by billwesthoffI would vote for people I like, that have similar viewponts as myself. And thats the problem. Having a majority in real life is great, in these forums it would be a disaster. Let one group with a certain viewpoint gain a majority here, let them dominate moderator elections, and before you know it you have one-sided forums, I am most certain of this. Its just human nature.That would turn off a lot of good people and would probably end forums as we know it. The guys who run this site have a vested interest in keeping these forums open and interesting to everyone here, they will only pick moderators that are in the best interests of this happening.
sounds like good advice , but just for fun who would you vote for .😉
- Joined
- 20 Oct 02
- Moves
- 610682
1 edit
Originally posted by Dr. BrainAgain, Johan, I would say thats up to the site owners. If there is a serious problem with moderators they will address it, it IS in their best interests. if there are a few out there disgruntled with something recently moderated, I'm sure there was a good reason for it. If not, I trust management will look into it. Hell, I was moderated once, I was sending a personal message to a member I was playing who had succeeded in raising my blood pressure about 100 points. Apparently there are key words that will automatically censor a message. At the time I was highly upset to be moderated. Once I settled down I realized these guys had probably saved my butt big time🙂.There is no doubt in my mind if the list of moderators needs reviewing or changing, these guys will do it. Dont think they are not aware of everything going on in the forums. Geez, the principal owner quit his job to keep this site going. Dont you think he will make sure the site is moderated in the best interests of all?
I am with you on this one Bob.Maybe just review the current list of moderators and appoint a few new ones?