IMHO, these two suggestions could go a LONG way.

1. No Moderator should be allowed to moderate their own thread.

2. Moderators should either use "ModeratorX" handles with a signature line identifying their "real" handles

or

If using their "real" handle, be required to always put a "disclaimer" at the bottom of the post identifying that the post was being done in the capacity of moderator.

I also have a HUGE problem with the fact that a moderator deleted a personal attack, yet decided to post the "gist" of the personal attack in their own post. That is simply wrong and sure looks like it was done to leave the personal attack "out in the open".

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum.../003743-2.html

skofarrel,

I normally do add a signature line. In the one above, I did not since I made direct reference to my normal handle.



------------------
Craig6z
Buzz & United Moderator
[email protected]

sko vs. J.Lo ...

You are absolutely correct. I apologize for the oversight and will edit my deletion comment at once. Thanks for pointing that out. My intention at the time was to stress that the attack was made upon a party other than me (so as to avoid the impression of impropriety in stifling people who speak out against me), but I fear that in my rush to delete I did not think it through entirely.

As for moderating my own threads, it was a fine line to walk. Neither Randy nor my fellow mods were available at the time and to let the status quo of flaming continue was a far worse alternative than to delete the personal attack on techgirl and lock down the thread. It was a judgement call I didn't want to have to make at 2am but I have no regrets about the way I acted in that context.

[This message has been edited by B747-437B (edited 05-20-2003).]

I seldom agree with Camera Guy but that is a good point - and one which tom911 made just as the referenced thread was locked. Maybe that was why it was locked?

I have no beef at all with B747 in 99.9% of cases, but that instance looked like (whether meant to or not) a pretty clumsy move to ensure his buddy avek00's stupid and tasteless troll comment about techgirl remained visible, even though his "Betty Ford Clinic" post was totally deleted.

Sean writes entertaining trip reports. Always has. He volunteered for, and was accepted as Moderator of that forum. So it is a very difficult position if flames brew up in a thread you started.

The suggestion he (or any other Mod) not be allowed to post in a forum they moderate is not practical or fair - IMO. Many forums have more than one Mod, so this can be worked around. But Sean is on his own, so may in that case need to ask Randy to intervene?

Thank you for not only editing the post, but also for the explaination.

Personally, I do not have a problem w/ a moderator moderating his/her own threads. Yesterday morning, it was quite evident where the 2nd "Amateur Hour" trip report was going (who couldn't?). Privately, I expressed my concerns to B747 and I posted the same sentiment in case someone else had the authority to lock the thread before it got ugly(er).

Clearly, acting as a moderator, B747 upheld the integrity of the moderator position when he a) deleted the personal attack and b) locked the thread. Both of these actions, IMO, were for the best of the FT Community.

********************
On the disclaiming of who is a Moderator or not. I like how Craig6z posts as Moderator2. A reader knows right from the start that the post is coming from an authoritative figure of FlyerTalk.

For me, having it as a signature line at the bottom isn't as good. A) you have no clue if the moderator is acting in the capacity of moderator as you read the post. and B) I usually don't read people's signature lines.

Just my takes.

Folks, no offence here but if this is going to turn into a moderation discussion perhaps we should open a new topic. I am awaiting a response or solution on the topic I started on page 1.

I agree.

------------------
FewMiles
Pretend Moderator
[email protected]

ScottC I agree with you completely. Unfortunately I don't know what the solution is except for more rigorous monitoring / moderating and suspending those who like to attack.

The problem will not go away, I think. The problem poster probably needs time to grow up and get distracted by life and AWAY from FT. I happen to like the suggestion to move towards a board with an ignore user feature. I like some things about the technical side of FT as it exists, but an enhanced bb would enhance the FT experience, as well. I also think a balance should be struck between a warm and fuzzy community and a thick skin, and it's not always easy to do. Also, what about subscriber access? Like, publish an FT password in each month's issue of Inside Flyer and change it each month to something new, so that only IF subscribers have access?

People in glass houses, should not throw stones.

There's a reason that moderators were selected from volunteers and assigned to boards they post often to. It's a way of ensuring the moderators are on hand on a regular basis because they normally read/post in that area of Flyertalk anyways.

We're all feeling our way into the moderated-version of FlyerTalk, but like Craig6z I've tried to be clear when I put my moderator hat on and when I'm just posting as another FT'er.

Can you remove my comments highlighting your original AVEK deletion post, now that the comments I was concerned about no longer exist?

I wish he WOULD. Anyone who doubts avek00 is just a mud stirring troll with nothing positive to add to the UA Forum only needs to go look at the UA board this morning. This is typical and was locked less than an hour back.

I agree with ScottC that this thread perhaps should stay upon the topic at hand.

www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum50/HTML/019669.html

================================================== =======



[This message has been edited by ozstamps (edited 05-21-2003).]