Inks' approvals as a moderator of Forum Community

[BushKenya]

This place needs more GOP Mods, not less.

The problem there is that there are virtually no Republicans around here who are suitable, sufficiently active, and willing to do it.  We're having this very discussion right now in the Mod board, and the prime candidate thus far has an Independent avatar.

Obvious solution: BushOK for moderator!

I wouldn't mind taking over the spot of the next moderator to resign.

[© Tweed the Younger]

he's a caricature of a bad moderator.

[Torie]

Strongly approve.

Of course! Inks seems to be doing most of the "work" while you just goof off and have fun.

I strongly disagree that any of the moderators are biased, or that there is agitation to remove them, for ideological or partisan reasons. I have never observed that. Sure, they are human, and may at the margins be influenced by the personality of a poster - but not the color of his avatar or ideology.

[Joe Republic]

I wouldn't mind taking over the spot of the next moderator to resign.

...

[Platypus]

I'm  very pro-Inks generally, and neutral on his moderation. There are better mods, there are worse mods... on this forum and the net in general.

I actually have more problems with The Mikado's moderation, to be honest.

[Grumps]

Inks is one of those completely incompetent in the moderating department.  Always the wrong decision, every time.

Sam gave Phil a new signature quote.......ugh.

[Torie]

This place needs more GOP Mods, not less.

The problem there is that there are virtually no Republicans around here who are suitable, sufficiently active, and willing to do it.  We're having this very discussion right now in the Mod board, and the prime candidate thus far has an Independent avatar.

Had a lot of turn downs eh? I mean, I can think of some suitable candidates myself.

I don't think the color of an avatar is of particular importance myself. If it became obvious that a mod was operating with a partisan or ideological bias, rather than enforcing the Terms of Use, the posters here would not tolerate that for long - including myself. But I have not ever seen that happen myself, as noted above. The charges I have seen of partisan or ideological mod bias have been in my opinion singularly unimpressive and unpersuasive.

[Californian Tony]

Politico's pathetic attempt at politicizing the moderation issue is truly despicable.

[TJ in Wisco]

Strongly approve. He seems to be more faithful in his enforcement of the ToS than most everyone else. Perhaps he's a little strict, but stict enforcement is much, much better than selective enforcement.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

I wouldn't mind taking over the spot of the next moderator to resign.

...

wasn't Bushie the one who came up with the current infractions system?!  Just one more idea from Bushie and the Forum will cease to exist, at least for most of us.

[© Tweed the Younger]

Strongly approve. He seems to be more faithful in his enforcement of the ToS than most everyone else. Perhaps he's a little strict, but stict enforcement is much, much better than selective enforcement.

is this not the very antithesis of the above supposed virtues (?)

It's inappropriate to joke about having sex with a 16-year-old.  Sorry, but that's my rule.  If you don't like it, don't post on the Forum Community board.

[Senator Napoleon]

If moderators get to make their own ToS, shouldn't they be elected?

[Sibboleth]

Eh, the ToS is a bit of a joke.

[Grumps]

Eh, the ToS is a bit of a joke.

Most are.  A touch of common sense, mixed with a splash of maturity and courtesy is all that's required for this cocktail.

[Sibboleth]

Eh, the ToS is a bit of a joke.

Most are.  A touch of common sense, mixed with a splash of maturity and courtesy is all that's required for this cocktail.

Personally I prefer petrol.

[Grumps]

Eh, the ToS is a bit of a joke.

Most are.  A touch of common sense, mixed with a splash of maturity and courtesy is all that's required for this cocktail.

Personally I prefer petrol.

[For Oklahoma]

He's a likable guy, but he's not that great a mod. We need some yellow avatars to be mods

[Smid]

I don't have a problem with any of the mods or how they enforce the rules. Inks does a great job.

[TJ in Wisco]

Strongly approve. He seems to be more faithful in his enforcement of the ToS than most everyone else. Perhaps he's a little strict, but stict enforcement is much, much better than selective enforcement.

is this not the very antithesis of the above supposed virtues (?)

It's inappropriate to joke about having sex with a 16-year-old.  Sorry, but that's my rule.  If you don't like it, don't post on the Forum Community board.

The ToS fobids sexually oriented material. While Inks' wording in that post is not very good, joking about having sex with a 16-year old would be a violation. It's not something followed very closely on here, but the ToS does say that so Inks can infract it.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

The ToS fobids sexually oriented material.

Then, I'll have to rethink the plans for my next 8 threads.

[Inks.LWC Supports Chuck Hagel]

Strongly approve. He seems to be more faithful in his enforcement of the ToS than most everyone else. Perhaps he's a little strict, but stict enforcement is much, much better than selective enforcement.

is this not the very antithesis of the above supposed virtues (?)

It's inappropriate to joke about having sex with a 16-year-old.  Sorry, but that's my rule.  If you don't like it, don't post on the Forum Community board.

The ToS fobids sexually oriented material. While Inks' wording in that post is not very good, joking about having sex with a 16-year old would be a violation. It's not something followed very closely on here, but the ToS does say that so Inks can infract it.

Ultimately, that's what it comes down to.  And Dave's objections to profanity are applicable to this issue too.  It's not good if a school sees a post like that while one of their students is on the forum.

[dialectical fetishist]

No kid who sees a swear word on the internet is going to have a massive moral breakdown. In fact, most of them probably already know the word anyway.

[JulioMadrid]

Strongly approve

[© Tweed the Younger]

Strongly approve. He seems to be more faithful in his enforcement of the ToS than most everyone else. Perhaps he's a little strict, but stict enforcement is much, much better than selective enforcement.

is this not the very antithesis of the above supposed virtues (?)

It's inappropriate to joke about having sex with a 16-year-old.  Sorry, but that's my rule.  If you don't like it, don't post on the Forum Community board.

The ToS fobids sexually oriented material. While Inks' wording in that post is not very good, joking about having sex with a 16-year old would be a violation. It's not something followed very closely on here, but the ToS does say that so Inks can infract it.

the problem is that there is loads of "sexually oriented material" posted every week that goes unmoderated

[President Marokai]

Eh, the ToS is a bit of a joke.

Oh it definitely is, which makes it hilarious when some of the moderators get all uppity about enforcing it very literally as if it is the word of God, and then will, on other issues, just sort of let it slide.

The ToS fobids sexually oriented material. While Inks' wording in that post is not very good, joking about having sex with a 16-year old would be a violation. It's not something followed very closely on here, but the ToS does say that so Inks can infract it.

"Sexually oriented material" now apparently equals talking about sex? This is exactly what I mean when I hate on the arbitrary nature of ToS enforcement. People weren't posting NSFW pictures or links to porn sites, which is what "material" would be. "Material" doesn't mean conversation. If we're taking this definition, virtually any discussion of sex on this site ever suddenly falls under this umbrella!