Good for him. I agree. However, as is apparent from the OP, some members have a different perception. Hence the discussion in this thread.

So when you are not signed in as a moderator all of your posts don't have the "moderator" tag under your handle, above the "bio"?

No, this is not correct. We do not have a separate log in as moderators. (with few exceptions) I log in as wharvey and it automatically has "moderator" assigned above the bio. The only for me to remove that designation is to resign as a moderator.

William

You know the answer to that. It's been pointed out many times.

Your complaint is with the software. Asking rhetorical questions about what is a software issue isn't very probative.

And because the software defaults the way it does, every moderator takes pains to make it clear when he/she is acting as a moderator and posting as a member. I suspect that's pretty clear to most folks.

You are welcome to explore my posts. When acting as a Moderator, I sign it as moderator. When acting as a member, I don't sign it as a moderator. I'm not clear why you are still confused since this is exactly what you asked for above:



Most if not all do this. So what is the problem?

And, in any case the bottom line is this: the question was asked. FT Tech staff quickly responded that this was not possible in the current software options. The amount of work to do a workaround would be massive and lead to an administrative mess as dozens of separate forum moderator groups are maintained. So the question has been asked and answered. While the discussion has been illuminating, I hope that John will now close this because further discussion or disingenuous-appearing questions simply appear, imo, to be tendentious at this point.

I think this has been mentioned a few times (mostly by moderators who wish they weren't so identified board-wide), but it doesn't appear that anything can be done.

I like that it gives new members an opportunity to see which community volunteers are around to help them with questions, but I certainly hope that no one would ever read it as someone's opinion was more important than any others.

No, when I post as part of "official business", I leave the sig box checked (like on this post).

Back on the first day of moderation, which was three years ago next week, me and the other original moderator ("Moderator1" a.k.a. "Burkey") decided to be anonymous. Randy assigned sequential handles, at our request.

About three weeks later we decided to end anonymous moderation, after a ground-swell effort of posters to "out" us . We decided to maintain the handle, as a way of people immediately knowing we were acting as a moderator. We added a signature line with our normal name, so posters knew who was behind the posting.

Soon after Burkey and I started moderating, a third moderator was named, but she decided to use her normal handle. I recall there were some instances where people weren't sure whether she was posting as a regular user or moderator, as the old software at that time did not have any sort of flag, Consequently I believe she would add a signature line to designate "official" moderation acts.

There was a pretty long period before other moderators were added, maybe six months. No one else apparently ever asked for a sequentially assigned name. Eventually the de facto practice was to use one's normal handle.

I have to log in and out, to change my handle. A bit of a pain I'll admit, but one wouldn't want to kill off a legacy tradition .

I'm back in "normal" mode.

As a newbie on the job (and still learning my way around here as a mod), I too had the concern of always having the "moderator" title looming under my SN. I don't know if I'm still comfortable having it wherever I post on FT, but when only acting under official moderator business do I ever post a signature stating that I'm a moderator of a particular forum.

Perhaps it should be made a bit more clearer that moderators are moderators when a signature is placed under where they're posting?

aloha

I'm not sure that signatures are the answer, as many people (myself included) suppress the display of sigs, and so they would never be seen by many.

When it comes down to official moderating business, I physically type in:

"slippahs | Hawai`i board co-moderator"

rather than having it in my signature file... It's allowed me to avoid this problem. In any case, it was just a thought.

aloha

So if this were a Bridge game, a "FT Evangelist" out-trumps any "moderator"?

I appreciate the attention this issue has received and whatever is decided, we'll live with. However, there does not have to be some grand technical solution IMO. If you want to correct the problem, change the system so that NO one be designated with the "Moderator" tag. Then, require that all moderators indicate in their signatures that they Moderator of X forum, as slippahs indicates above. So, unless I'm missing something it is not true that nothing can be done.

Further, the signature would ensure that people could see who is a moderator and of which forum(s). I'm not trying to suggest that anyone would think that a moderator's opinion is more important than another's. What concerns me is the moderator who, for example, in a fit of pique, says something inappropriate. (It can and does happen - we're all human.) Unless everyone knows who moderates each forum, it appears that the "moderator" has license to be a jerk. Contrary to what is posted above, I do not believe every moderator takes great pains to make it clear that he/she is posting as a moderator or a member, nor should she or he have to if my suggestion were to be implemented.

Thanks again for looking into the matter.

Per Craig's history lesson, I was the fourth moderator appointed by Randy to assist in UA and Coupon Connection (and before the later initial "wave" of moderators)

Randy asked me at the time to make it clear when I was acting as a moderator and when I was posting as a member by typing in something very much like what slippahs indicates above.

So that's what I do.

This is really pretty simple.

I haven't seen anything of this nature before and I'm confused as to what might make you think a problem exists in the first place? Maybe if you gave an example of where you feel a "moderator" took license to be a jerk.