The answer from me at least - I think it is polite and good policy. No more, no less.

And it seems moderators in other forums have no problem with doing things that way.

Too much of the "faceless secret police" odour or perception if things are deliberately being locked with no identity as to whom is doing it. That's just my personal 2¢. I understood Moderation on Flyertalk - when needed - was to be open and transparent?

We have a Talkboard election right now with no less than 10 Moderators in the field. Some are superb Moderators and IMO some are quite unsuited and often lacking in judgement. FT'ers deserve to know who is closing threads in order to make informed votes in such cases, seeing Moderators have been allowed to stand. Some have indicated the individual good/bad track record of personal moderation will influence their vote.

writetorich says his post that was written over and deleted was: "polite, civil and respectful". I do not know - I did not see it, but Plato90s does not dispute or quibble with that description, so one assumes that is a fair summation? It does seem clear it was not a post dripping with obscenity, or personal abuse etc, which is where a fast edit or closure would probably surprise or bother no-one.

Again, I am am not criticising the Moderator concept here - just agreeing that it seems fair and reasonable - indeed universal policy except in AA Forum, that where threads are locked and posts removed, there ordinarily be a fingerprint left by the person doing it so all others can be aware of whose hand was at work. All four are accountable for their own decisions that way.

Plato90s seems to be saying that the AA Moderators do not adhere to that policy?

I would be interested to hear what Randy's thoughts are on this.

-------------------------------------------------------------


[This message has been edited by ozstamps (edited 08-10-2003).]