Kade likes to pretend I don't exist, Xach. Last I heard, his stance on almost anything I say is "Auvic, pretty much everything you say is stupid and/or blatantly obvious, so there's no need for me to respond to it."
That said, it doesn't bother me much that he ignores me - so long as my questions make other people think, maybe someone else'll ask him the same question, with a couple words changed, and he'll deign to answer it. /shrug
But in any case, I do have a semi-rebuttal to what Marz said.
She's sensitive, which normally isn't a bad trait unless you're a global moderator. As a global moderator, you're constantly going to be getting flack unless you cater to the whims of a specific crowd -- which is seems she does,
You never really specified why exactly being sensitive would be a bad trait for a global moderator, unless it's got something to do with the flack you say she's getting - but then, you say that if she caters to the whims of a crowd, presumably she won't get said flack ( due to the inclusion of the words 'unless you cater' ) and then you say that she does, in fact, cater to the whims of such a crowd.
I could see being sensitive - or, perhaps, overly-sensitive - as a hindrance for a global mod, given all the shit they get pretty much any time they attempt to act so as to enforce their authority.
But that whole getting flack thing doesn't seem to make too much sense. Did I misread it somewhere?
I don't feel trust in a moderator's abilities if I know that said moderator is going to take an issue I've had with him/her and discuss it at length with whoever chooses to listen, mostly a good-sized group of friends that aren't moderators nor have anything to do with the issue at hand.
I'll say that I can see this both ways.
On one hand, I'll say that yes, in a way, it's sort of disturbing to think that a moderator is going to ask the opinions of people who aren't mods about whatever issues might be at hand.
And at the same time, I could also see a very good reason for doing so - because as we all realize, mods are, in fact, people. People do, in fact, need some sort of social support system, especially when they're in a position [ read: modship ] that requires them to take shit [ read: your aforementioned flack ] on at least a semi-regular basis. Is it somehow disrespectful to the position that they don't take all their troubles squarely upon their own shoulders, and don't seek out the advice of anyone else?
What you seem to be saying is that anyone who isn't a mod or has nothing to do with the issue can't possibly provide any input that would be useful in any part of the decision-making process that mods go through when they deliberate on whatever it is they deliberate on.
And that, I think, is sort of silly. But maybe that's my own personal stance - see what I did there?
Further more, through-out most of her trial as a global moderator, she hasn't done anything without first seeking the approval of an already-global moderator. At first, this might seem like a good idea, but she's not on trial to see if she can come to a moderator with a problem and then exact the punishment said moderator tells her to do. She's on trial to see if she can handle problems by herself.
And the major reason I took issue with that previous quote, Marz, is because you followed it with this:
In the first bit, you talked about how it's bothersome to you that Familiar consults people that aren't mods, and have little-to-no connection to the case at hand. And in this bit, you're saying that it's also a detriment to Familiar's performance as a trial mod that she consulted people that
are mods.
And so, more or less, what you seem to be saying - as you said at the very end - is that Familiar, as a trial mod, is somehow expected to see situations and make decisions without consulting anyone ( because consulting a non-mod isn't good, consulting unrelated people isn't good, and consulting mods isn't good either, and presumably, consulting the people that brought up the issue isn't bound to lead to anything productive ) at all.
But the question I have for you is this: if Familiar
did, in fact, act without consulting the other mods, how does that make her a good trial mod - or, for that matter, a good mod at all? If anything, haven't there been very obvious cases in which mods have made spur-of-the-moment decisions
because they didn't consult other mods, and some sort of fallout ensued because of it?
If you can't think of one, I have one for you:
Somewhere at the beginning of 1337's ban, Moondog explicitly mentioned that he didn't believe he could, even though he had been the person to originally ban 1337, hold an unbiased opinion about the banning, and removed himself from the discussion about whether 1337 deserved to be banned, and if so, for how long.
( If I've recounted this incorrectly, Moon/1337/whomever, feel free to correct me. My memory's hazy. )
I'm not saying that your point here is completely invalid, Marz - but imho, I'd much rather have a mod that bothered to consult,
just in case rather than a mod who didn't.
In the best case scenario, I get more time to chat with my friends before I get my perma handed to my criminal ass.
Worst case scenario, I have to deal with and/or /ignore whomever the hell it is that I'm trying to get kicked/banned.
and her handling of the problem was to make EVERYONE a moderator, which is... unnecessary and did little to solve any of the constant bickering that goes on in there.
As far as this goes, I
believe this happened while Familiar was simply the mod of the room she created, and not during her term as a trial mod. I may or may not be correct on this, though.
Your post, torn to shreds? Maybe.
I don't think I called your credibility into question, though - and if there's any 'smart comments' that don't make sense/need better explaining, I can try and reword things.
See? That wasn't so bad, was it?
Poll
