If any Moderator was to resign over the this issue, I would not blame them in the least.

BUT (Love that Bolding), if you resign, then the attackers have won.

Despite the fact that Randy stated his reasons for closing the TalkTeam Board were his lack of ability to ensure it's security, They are already claiming victory over the closure. (Love that logic)

If this group of attackers can twist Randy's words into a victory, they will no doubt be even more emboldened by resignations.

PLEASE (Love that Bolding), do not let this VOCAL MINORITY (Love that Bolding) win.

First of all the Moderators are thanked in many threads and posts throughout FT all the time. This is a good thing.

Second, It would never be appropiate for members to be disrespectful of a Moderator trying to do their job. This is wrong and should be acted upon whenever it happens. Randy, if this is happening may I suggest that you take action. While I have made controversial posts, I have never been rude to or about any Moderator conducting FT moderation. Now win a Moderator is acting in their capacity as a member, that is a different story, I might just tease them a little. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

Third, There is a big difference between discussing moderation of a post or thread, which is the job of Moderators and discussing Members and Moderators likes and dislikes of them or their opinion as to whether they should be banned or disiplined by Randy of FT.

Fourth, Having said that I believe that the overall Moderator group has and is doing a great job. I disagree with the style and substance of a small portion of moderation decisions. No one is perfect, not me or any moderator. I think that overall Moderators are not only doing a good job, but doing so with a great attitude and in total line with the spirit of FT.

I think this weekend could be discribed as seeing the good, the great, and just a little bit of the ugly which is FlyerTalk.

------------------
dallasflyer, Living in Denver and Dallas, oh boy!

Well I don't know any of the people involved, so to me it comes down to how people feel about a few key points.

(a) Should moderators have a place where, in private, they can vent frustrations and discuss moderation issues? Moderation issues are sometimes going to result in discussion about specific members - those posts don't write themselves.

(b) If the owner and provider of the board decides that such a forum be private, should his wishes be followed and those private discussions remain private - not to be selectively posted in public forums?

(c) Should people who deliberately and selectively use private information to disrupt flyertalk, either by attacking volunteer moderators or by trying to portray themselves as victims, be held accountable for their actions?

Yes to all three from me.

So, for you, this is about "winning" or "losing"... http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/confused.gif

What a mindset-revealing post...

Nice try.

Quoting out of context is a VERY poor way of making an argument.

If you look at ALL of the posts, you will see that I am not the one claiming victory.

Huh?

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/biggrin.gif

Now that was quoting out of context...the previous post was not... http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

This is a thread populated by adults?

WOW

Good. Because those posts speak the truth. They show the moderator's annoyances and opinions of the poster's in question. I know I was labelled as being disruptive by the OMNI moderators at one time. That is how they saw my actions in OMNI, i.e. a comment relevant to my posting activity here on FlyerTalk, not a personal comment about me.

I guess you're not on the onelist either.

Yeah, well, Randy seems to value every member of FlyerTalk equally, even people I dislike a lot. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif Likewise, I believe he values every moderator equally and appreciates the time they put into these volunteer positions. If a bunch of them get fed up with the crap that people like you give to the moderators all the time, then yeah, some of them would think of resigning. Randy will just have to move on without their help.

What is "cute" is your ingratitude and your dumping on the people who are trying to help Randy to make this a better place.

Perhaps they couldn't be bothered to reply to you, because they know it's pointless? Perhaps they feel that Randy's not speaking up on their behalf. Just because they don't say something does not mean they necessarily are happy with the status quo.

Yet at the same time you've got an axe to grind with a few of them. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/rolleyes.gif

Yes, the fact that he doesn't see everything and doesn't act on everything means that you can proceed to harass other FTers with impunity.

I'm not sure how IBM fits into this! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

FewMiles..

FewMiles: Before you pressed "submit reply" after typing that last post, did you consider:

1) Does this post violate the TOS?
2) Is this post constructive or helpful in any way?

I think everyone now knows who doesnt like whom.

I don't mean to pick on you exclusively: nearly everyone posting here (including myself) has been guilty of not giving these questions due consideration lately, it would seem.

These discussions are great to the extent that they are enlightening, IMHO, which is why I keep coming back to them, but can't we make our points and cases in a positive and generic rather then a negative and personal way?

Ironic, I know, that a lousy drunken lout like me (whoops, TOS violation) would be the one calling for decorum. But there it is....

Deep down OZ is a wannabe moderator.

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/thumbsup.gif

Please also see:
http://www.flyertalk.com/pasttalk/ft...ML/000502.html

Based on the outright personal attacks made against some of our members, I think it would be appropriate for some moderators to resign. I was disgusted by some of the posts from TalkTeam that I saw this weekend - it was like watching a lynch mob.

[This message has been edited by work2fly (edited Feb 04, 2004).]

I would like to think that for Randy and the majority of posters the intent here in ORP is to create lemonade out of the lemons. For some on either side of the issue it seems that they prefer some sort of bitter drink to continue as the norm.

I dislike at times to post about being a ref on these boards as generally my thoughts about it are that most can not relate to it or the sports references go over the heads of those whom spend as much time away from physical exertion as possible. But others have posted some thoughts about moderating being like a ref. But after reading Scott’s post on page 1 and the responses by SPN (whom I do not think is a Ref) I felt it might be useful to post some thoughts on this with the intent being the making of lemonade.

When I was first turned to reading this section early Monday morning I was going to post some thoughts about officiating and moderating that I believed would be helpful but I think that waiting until more issues had been aired publicly will hopefully make this thesis a bit more constructive.

One thing in at least the United States is that all soccer referees are volunteers. At the level I officiate at (we whom all have jobs someplace else that runs the gamut from lawyers, teachers, firemen, airline pilots, software engineers, etc., etc.) have to make decisions that affect professionals. In other words as a volunteer I have to make judgment over peoples livelihoods. The only way that one can get to this level of the game is by developing an innate sense of neutrality tempered by fairness. For the one thing in my perception that is also alike here as there is that the “Laws of the Game” are as permeated with gray areas as the TOS here at FlyerTalk.

The second thing that we do as volunteer officials is always act in a professional manner in any situation where we may be perceived as officials. That is to say that if I go to a game as an observer and I may be in a situation where I am going to make critical comments aloud of the official who is doing the game it is important that no one else be able to easily perceive that I am also an official.

If we are at a training session we never ever mention individuals while discussing incidents. For example an official who is seeking guidance may say that he had a situation and use player from team A and player from team B as descriptors. Generally anyone who has been an official in a game that included player from team A will probably recognize him/her but in most cases the majority will recognize the situation and offer advice until a consensus is formed. The goal is to get consistency among officials. Btw our training sessions are open to players and coaches and some do attend but rarely give input unless asked.

I could offer lots of other examples of what I would consider acting in a professional manner but I hope the two examples are sufficient except I feel it necessary to mention the disqualification of a player or coach. First unlike most moderators (except I believe those in OMNI) we can have a player removed from participation in the game we are officiating and than send in a report and a discipline review board can either extend the suspension or essentially overturn the ruling. Whichever way it turns out I for one do not care. My responsibility was to turn in my report and it ends there. At the next game where the suspended player and I are present it is a clean slate and we both understand this.

So what is it that we do alike? First we are managers of people. Like the policeman on the beat when seeing an infringement of the law/rule we say halt (warning.) Next we pull our gun and shoot in the air (caution.) If the crime continues we shoot you (send-off.) Here the similarities end because several things generally take place in different manners for the policeman and the officials/moderators. The policeman is suspended from active duty until an investigation takes place. Officials and moderators continue on without a suspension of duties. I and the majority of my fellow officials at this point always begin a self inspection of what took place and what we did wrong to get us to the place where we had to disqualify a player/coach.

Let me repeat that. We do a self examination to figure out what we did wrong. We do this for two reasons. 1) So that when the situation (not the individual) presents itself again we will be able to intervene more effectively with the intent being to hopefully thwart the next expulsion and 2) to create an even better game the next time. Now sometimes we find that there was nothing we could do and then it becomes a necessity to discuss this with fellow officials. I can do this quite easily with out mentioning the team or the player/coach but it would not matter if even I did because my fellow officials would be on the same page of what my intent was, i.e. thwarting bitter lemonade and making a lemonade.

We also have inspectors or assessors assigned to the game. The higher the level of game the more likely the assessor will be there. The assessors, who come from the ranks of the officials, duties are to assist the official they are assessing in becoming a better official. Can they go back and change a decision? No way but they can help the official so that they do not repeat the same mistake again and again. Much like moderation I think could be improved. But be clear also that some officials never learn and never advance in the ranks. Some no matter how dedicated they are never make it and need to decide if there time would be better spent cleaning the garage on a Saturday afternoon rather than making decisions in a game involving a couple of division 1 teams.

That leads into the first point that I think presents the most dissimilar burden between moderating and officiating. We as game officials can read body language and we can see eye to eye with the subject of our displeasure. This is a more powerful tool than having the ability to speak the same language. For example in a game that involved two schools who were vying for the NCAA championship one coach had been berating the official in a loud abrasive manner. The official ran up to the coach during a stoppage and inquired if s/he had an assistant. Upon being informed in the affirmative the official than suggested that the head coach begin warming up the assistant. Warning delivered in a humorous manner, warning received and understood. Game continues without incident.

I can not imagine how something like this could be done on a bulletin board. Perhaps the new bulletin board software might have the ability to have type fonts in colors and that this could be reserved for only the moderators and then everyone might understand that one has been given a warning (blue) caution (yellow) or disqualification (red.) But without having the ability to see eye to eye moderating can never come up to the ease of officiating.

I would hope at this point some would understand that being a voluntary moderator or an official is not an easy task. It is for sure not for everyone. I have at times made decisions that were immediately disagreed upon by thousands of fans and have had to listen to a litany of complaints from players/coaches as the game progressed. It is important that it be understood though that the two are different. The booing by the partisan fans is just noise. In fact most times I generally relegate it to the same category of noise that my stereo makes when I am sending noise to the speakers in a test. The complaints by the players/coaches, as long as it is not excessive or abusive has to be ‘read.’ This is vital information for the game that I am officiating because as much as I would like to thing that it is my game it is not. The game belongs to the players. We as voluntary officials are doing a service and we can not forget that any more than the players who are participating can not forget that the service we are providing is enforce the ‘laws of the game.’

It has taken me a lot of years to get to the point where I can to this in an expeditious manner. During these years I have given up a lot of time from my family, (for those of you who know her ask Jerrie about my mistress) abused my body probably in ways it was not meant, (was officiating, had angina attack, finished game, drove to hospital, had open heart surgery) been mooned by a teenager in front of several thousand persons and probably have accumulated a number of non-fans who feel that I am responsible for the fact that they are not NCAA division I coaches.

Why? What motivates one to volunteer themselves? What motivates one to continue doing something that most would find to be despicable? Did someone mention a shortage? Not sure if there is a shortage of candidates for moderator but there is a shortage of officials in the US and other countries that I am familiar with. Ultimately there is a reward and nothing I have read in the above posts mentions what if any are the reward for a moderator.

Speaking as an official the tangible rewards are much like FlyerTalk. I get to meet individuals around the world who do the same thing I do. I get to share with them what we do face to face and I receive some satisfaction from that. But even more is that I whom am long past the age of being a player get to still experience the ‘moment of now.’ I get a mental escape every time I do a game from the normal day to day task of my job as a communication specialist for a large bankrupt urban school district for example. For 90 minutes I am reacting seemingly without thinking and just experiencing the moment. I for one can not see how a moderator could receive that same reward of escape but suffice to say if someone has the same experience as a moderator please let me know.

Job well done! Nice compliment when received and even better when it comes from fellow officials. At a certain point no matter how smart someone thinks they are about moderation the fact of matter is going to be that the moderators are going to know more in their poop about moderation than individual posters will ever know without becoming a moderator. It is the same for officiating. Although this is a reward sometimes it at least for me gets intruded upon by how stupid fans/coaches/players can be at times. (n.b. It is necessary to develop mental tricks to stay focused and for sure I believe a great number of moderators have done this. If you have not you need to do this.)

I receive awards sometimes. Medals, trophies and certificates for officiating and they all hang proudly in my house (ask to see my ‘klutz of the tournament’ award next visit.) These recognitions though seemingly insignificant I am sure to most really do mean a lot to me. I also receive stipends to offset my costs and this usually averages around 6-8k per year. Getting less as I get longer in the tooth and unable to do the higher level games.

Given what I personally believe to be the duties of the moderators and the rewards that they receive up to now I think those of us who are supportive of the moderator team can do a lot better. Perhaps FT can set up a voting mechanism like the annual Freddies and posters could vote for the Best Moderator of the Year. Maybe only ten moderators get nominated by their fellow moderators setting up a dual reward. Maybe I and others would be willing to donate something of significance so that the reward would be satisfying. God knows there isn’t any one posting in this thread that has not benefited from FT and will not benefit even more from a smoothly functioning FT.

For those who read all of this and agree with even some of it lets go make lemonade. Thank you.