h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I think designated accounts for everyone who volunteers would be good along with home pages for people to approach them. People should be encouraged to use them rather than PS or raising an issue mid thread and practically it keeps everything together.

They wouldn't be anonymous except for the mods, but it would draw a line between work and play. Which is always going to be a tad blurred but its healthly to have some lines

Kea

That's the sensible approach and is the one that I think would be taken.

However I do like my scenerios, it's a bit of a pasttime say we were caught up in a sweep and they didn't cherry pick the juicest (richest) sites to sue they went for the lot of us. What if because we are vulnerable because we have no insurance, not much cash for a legal team and we then became the easy target. What if someone said something innocently about suburu fuse boxes and hey presto top of the list, that comment goes mainstream and a big ho-hah results, it could happen you know . What would really make me if it was a 2legs comment

Sorry, bit tipsy, very tired, I should stop

Peanut

Scenarios, that's good. Who's doing the sweep in that one?

I couldn't possibly say without breaking a superinjunction

Well, the h2g2 Editors is a separate account from the ones the italics have in their own names. The Post Team is also a shared account. Why not have an account called h2g2 Moderators that all the moderators have the login details for? Or, if more than 1 moderator will be online at a time, h2g2 Moderator 1, h2g2 Moderator 2, etc. It'd be easy enough to check to see if one of the moderator accounts is being used when you want to sign in and moderate, *if* we have a working Who's Online.

Definitely moderators need to be doing their work from a seperate account. Mods need to be anonymous when they are working.

It might be easier to see which mod has done what if they each have their own account. Depends on how many are needed I guess.

The moderators themselves need to be able to track who has done what, but I would (personally) prefer that information to *only* be available to the mods.

I think that moderation has to be confidential but must be fair. I worry about consistency more than anything else.

B

Fairness and consistency must be two of the operative words. If a moderator makes a blunder there will be the rest of the team to keep things on an even keel - either a consensus to reinstate a post, or remove one that's slipped through. Nobody is perfect, including the potential volunteer mods. I suggest that if they might feel dismayed or aggrieved by having to correct a previous decision when the rest of the team agree something had been incorrectly applied then the position might be uncomfortable for them. Like having a third umpire in a cricket match. You don't see them throwing their hats down on the ground when it is shown their call was awry.

They would have to accept that it is a situation where their personal viewpoint might not always be 100% perfect.

There would have to be an odd number of such persons, and a firm understanding (in case of squabble) that majority opinion will have to stand.

And while it may sometimes cause a delay in dealing with a post, any volunteers should initially be very up-front about people that they know they already have a problem with, and step away as deemed. People that being totally impartial about would be difficult. Of the people generally active, there are perhaps six or seven that I don't think that I could be totally impartial about, based on my reading and interpretation of their posts over the years

Most of the people who have problems with me are unlikely to post anything that would need consideration, except what they post at or about me anyway. I wouldn't see a need to avoid their posts. It is the ones that I often see as angry, vitriolic or just simply out to stir things. Those are the sort that I would feel obliged to refer to the team

Impartiality cuts both ways though. It's easy to say "I don't like that person, I can't mod their posts" but what if you felt a friend of yours was being unjustly punished with disciplinary procedures and bans?

Ben

I would still feel obliged to refer it to a team for concensus. I know that I can not be impartial or impersonal when family or friends are being 'bothered' in any fashion

And if not a team, BTW, any other Mod who happened to be on-line at the time ... Not everything would need group judgement, just a person not attached in any way

On the issue of bias I would think that a mod would have a certain level of self awareness to be suitable for the role. It would make sense that if a mod had a 'personality clash' with someone that they say I think it's a good idea that I don't mod this person, even if they think they could do it fairly just for appearances sake

I would love to be a mod!

The Power!!!

Orf with his head!!

*giggles*

Can you imagine me being allowed access to ALL those buttons?


I diddernt break it. Honest!

With that response, lil, perhaps I shouldn't mention that mods are welcome to volunteer anonymously (to everyone except me, obviously) by emailing h2g2moderators at hotmail : co : uk?