Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes...

[simcha]

A person who regularly displays contempt for the members is not fit to be a moderator.

Hmm... I wonder to whom you might be referring? :dunce:

 

[ManlyBanisters]

bitching about the moderation of a board that you frequent, but don't own is lame as all get out.

Then you haven't read the thread - there has been very little bitching. Are you saying that attempting to hold a constructive discussion about the moderation of a board of which you are a member is lame?

I understand Voltaire's (only partially tongue in cheek) comment about "[t]he best government [being] a benevolent tyranny tempered by an occasional assassination" which is essentially what we have here at LPSG, and I'm not unhappy with it.

I don't even expect to see much (any) change, there has been enough call for it over the time I have been here and it is yet to happen. The whole point of this thread was to encourage a positive conversation and not a negative one as appeared to be happening in other threads. As far as I can see that is what has happen.

To answers mindseye from a few pages back regarding my capitalising on the timing, actually you are wrong - well, half wrong (or half right, if you prefer that slant :wink. I had no agenda and no idea of steering the thread in any one direction. You seem to assume that I posted this with a goal in mind. I didn't. In that regard, I would have been wiser to post this at a time when there had been no controversial banning, but then I think it would have been a less active thread.

All in all though - this has not become a bitching, mod bashing thread. Lord knows we've had enough of those and they do nothing for anyone.

 

[2322]

bitching about the moderation of a board that you frequent, but don't own is lame as all get out.

Not when you're a paying member (as I am). My gold membership is bought and paid for annually.

 

[2322]

It is impossible to verify every pic,I agree with you there. But it wouldn't be necessary if it was required to have one verified picture, before you post any others. Same as was done for the new Gold Membership offer.

Yet many verification pics just show hands or are taken from (how to put this politely...) artistic angles. They don't show just what it is you're verifying.

I don't think there would be many people getting help from someone else to fake their photos. Most would be embarrassed to ask a friend and what good would it do anyhow? Someone is gonna let me take photos of them and post them here?

Wow! You really are 10% gay! This isn't a big issue for gay guys. Depends what they're pictures of. Faces, I'll admit, at most a kinda sorta maybe. Parts? Much easier:

"Hey, mind if I show off your cock on this big dick website I go to?"

"No."

"Cool. Drop 'em and hold this sign."

"OK."

If you want to sign up the position of personal verifier, you could start with me! :wink:

Oh no you don't! I'M first!

 

[vince]

Yet many verification pics just show hands or are taken from (how to put this politely...) artistic angles. They don't show just what it is you're verifying.

Wow! You really are 10% gay! This isn't a big issue for gay guys. Depends what they're pictures of. Faces, I'll admit, at most a kinda sorta maybe. Parts? Much easier:

"Hey, mind if I show off your cock on this big dick website I go to?"

"No."

"Cool. Drop 'em and hold this sign."

"OK."

Well yeah I guess am a little naive. You got me there. But no system would be perfect. In my long winded post earlier I said-

Fake photos- not a question for the mod team I think. Just a simple new rule. There should be a requirement that if you want to post pics of body parts, then one of them should have a hand lettered sign with your user ID in it as well. It should be next to one of the body parts in question. No veri-pic, no pics of your sexy bits. That goes for those who only post face or body shots as well. If ya want to post pics of your cat, then it's gonna have to have a proof of a rabies certification.

Doesn't seem so difficult to me. Sure there'll be cheaters, but it could reduce some of the abuse. In anycase it's not a huge issue for me. It is for others and it's just a suggestion on my part to help with the brainstorming in this thread. Trolling is a way bigger problem IMO. It leads to bannings and turns off a lot of people.

 

[ActionBuddy]

Getting back to increasing the number of mods, I have an idea: create a nonvoting category -- I'll call it "associate moderator" -- which would have most of the duties of regular moderators but not vote on the bans and thus not be a part of the quorum required.

These associate mods plus the existing mods could provide more coverage of the forums and hopefully quench a fire in an early stage by use of warnings via PM or on the thread. And there would be more "hands on deck" for moving threads, merging threads, and other sundry things.

This is an excellent idea, SteveHd... and it is used successfully on other forum sites.

There are many plus-sides to having "Associate Moderators", as the chosen AM's are usually fresher and more enthusiastic about the site and about getting to know the membership, new and longtime, participate in the forums more frequently, and are often really into the site's Chat Room, as well.

They will more likely be right there if flame wars, Trolls and TOS violations rear their ugly heads... and can make the necessary calls.

An asset of having AM's is that it becomes a "Proving Ground" for possible new, even-headed and respected full-on Moderators, as the "older" Mods decide to retire their duties.

Instead of "blind faith" voting-in new Mods... longtime Mods are able to get to know the AM's by their posts and actions... can groom them... and then recommend them to the Membership.

Assuming that they communicate with each other often.

One positive thing that I have sensed about LPSG Moderators in the 2+ years that I have been around, is that they do generally befriend each other, even when they have differences.

I'm all for AM's!

Onan