FlyinHawaiian, again, I would much rather has this discussion on the TalkBoard Topics forum after Randy gives his approval for it (assuming that he does).

Let me say this, however: Anyone who posts a lot is certain to make some TOS violations, even if they are minor ones.

Whether they result in suspensions or not are generally judgment calls. Yesterday, I saw a post which I considered to be one of the most egrarious TOS violations possible. I reported it. The post was eventually removed by the poster but there was no suspension given.

The mods used their judgment and decided not to give the poster a suspension. They could easily have gone the other way. In neither case would anybody be able to say for a certainty that they handled it incorrectly.

What then is to stop a moderator, in a judgment call situation, from suspending a TB member who he (the mod) prefers not having on TB? Randy, of course, is the avenue for appeal but nobody can truly expect Randy to be a mind reader. He will see a violation, realize that the decision could have gone either way, and and not be able to say for a fact that the moderator erred.

While I do not want this discussion to be about this one case (and I raised the issue before the case came up) there is at least one saving grace here. I can not be accused of personal bias in making this argument.

Both the TB member who was suspended and his potential replacement ran in the last election. I didn't support the suspended member but I did back his potential replacement. (I did this very publicly, in my signature block.)

So if this TB member were to be removed from office, I would get the person I preferred instead.

For all of that, it would be a wrong thing to do. The TB member had more support from the general membership than the candidate I preferred. This is not a matter of punishing the TB member -- he still would not be allowed to post on any forum other than the private TB Forum for the duration of his suspension -- it is a matter of not depriving the membership of the representation for which they voted.

Sorry, if you think this discussion is going OT and I'll save the community from a debate.

Back to posting on miles, points, and drunk phone calls...

Yeah ok.

The simple solution would be to hold a recall election for any TB member who has their posting privledges suspended. I am certain that all of the TB members know where the line in the sand exists as far as the TOS is concerned. If a TB member is so arrogant as to EARN a suspension, then they should be held accountable to the general FT membership.

Again, I very much want to discuss this issue but prefer doing it on TalkBoard Topics -- and then only after Randy has answered the question I posed: Is it permissable to post about moderation policies when no attack is made on a moderator?

I think that by leaving this thread open for so long with no comment from above, it is reasonable to infer that, for now at least, it is ok to discuss moderation policy IN THE ABSTRACT and that Randy wants to hear this discussion before making up his mind.

So this member with absolutely no elected or appointed office on FT says: on with the show!

Richard, that is not necessarily true. And if Randy does permit discussion of moderation issues in abstract, I think the proper place to hold this particular conversation would be in TalkBoard Topics.

Reason: I think that TalkBoard (after reading the input from various F/Ters) should make the final determination concerning its membership. I would like to propose to them that it formalize what I am suggesting with a vote.

Dovster,

As we all know, Randy would prefer that we not post our thoughts in the ORP forum (as he has mentioned before). That's his job.

I'm sure that Randy would like us to stay on topic. I do know that Randy would like us to post constructive thoughts (as many have done already); since this will ultimately make Flyertalk a better place.

Dan

Dan, I am a bit confused by your post. Firstly, you quoted Attorney28 and then addressed me.

Secondly, you said that Randy would prefer that we not post our thoughts in ORP and then said that "Randy would like us to post constructive thoughts."

I agree that we should keep this thread on topic, and that topic is the simple question of whether discussion of moderation policy -- not discussion of individual moderators -- is permissable.

Dov,

Since we've already posted our thoughts, they might as well be constructive.

Certainly, it is possible to discuss moderator pholosophy, especially when there is premature evacuation. See:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showt...ure+evacuation

Personally, I don't see how this poster/moderator was not suspended for that post. It was malicious in it's intent, in response to a trivial difference of opinion. It was among the worst, if not, the worst personal attack I have seen on these boards yet. I will be the first to say it was handled incorrectly.

Skibum_NJ, even assuming that you and I are talking about the same post, and I don't know if we are, it would be a TOS violation to make a post questioning how it was treated by the moderators.

Now let's say that both you and the poster you are referring to are TalkBoard members. The moderator who handled the original post did not decide to suspend the poster, so the poster would be able to continue on TalkBoard. If another moderator were to suspend you for the reply you just posted, you would not be able to continue on TalkBoard for the duration of your suspension -- and all of those who voted for you would be deprived of the representation they wanted.

This is one of the two issues which I want to debate on the TalkBoard Topics Forum -- assuming that Randy states that it is permissible.

RobertS975, the thread you pointed to (and which you started 3 years ago and is still going strong) is a unique situation.

The DL Forum moderators have always agreed to have not only their policies, but also their individual actions, questioned. Personally, I think this reflects great credit on them and shows that they are in no way embarrassed by anything they have done.

What sets it apart is their agreement. Randy holds that to dispute a moderator's call is the equivalent of a personal attack. If somebody gives you permission to make that attack it would not be a TOS violation.

(eg: I started this thread by questioning a call made by Spiff, who moderates the TB Forum. I did so with his permission. He also agreed for me to quote from the PMs he sent to me. Hence, no TOS violation exists.)

As long as Randy holds that publicly questioning a moderator's action equals a personal attack, without such permission it is clearly against the TOS. That is not what is being discussed here.

The issue is whether moderation policies, and only such policies, can be discussed openly. It is my understanding from what Randy has written in the past (and which I quoted in the opening post of this thread) that it is allowed.

Spiff feels that it is not. He is, however, willing to allow it on the TalkBoard Topics Forum if Randy says it is permissible.

What else would you have to add if the discussion were moved to the Talkboard? At best you could remove one level of indirection.