Quote:
Originally Posted by Necromancer
You should be considered as one of the next potential moderators RVCA. Ive always thought that was the case not long after you became a member here at MB.
|
Oh, thank you! But I don't know if I could handle it
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuitarBizarre
If history means nothing and strict adherence to the rules is everything, then doesn't that mean someone could insult someone, recieve a temp ban, return off that temp ban, insult the same person again, and continue the pattern indefinitely providing none of the insults were severe enough to warrant a permaban in and of themselves?
|
I meant "history means nothing" in the sense that someone who has been a member for 5 years should receive no more leniency than someone who has been a member for 5 days. To think that one would gain exception or preference simply because they have longevity on their side is the symbol of a fundamentally flawed system of law. Of course I didn't mean that someone could repeatedly break a rule while the mods disregard their past offenses, so perhaps I misunderstood the question.
Quote:
|
And, on the same token, doesn't that mean that if a respected member had a bad day, got drunk and said a few things they would later regret, that member could be permabanned regardless of the positive contribution they otherwise make to the community at all other times?
|
Sorry, but even if David Bowie got drunk and murdered another person, I'd still want the same punishment for him as I would for some lowlife scumbag who has never contributed anything positive to society.
Quote:
Moderators being able to justify their actions - No problems here. I don't think we currently even HAVE a problem with this.
Community Majority Opinion means nothing - Sorry, not with you on this one. The amount of time devoted to trying to please the community should be limited to avoid moderators getting distracted by the more...insistent...complainers, and often I think there are people who bitch about modding decisions for the sake of bitching about mod decisions, but the potential exists for genuine errors to be brought up by the community and resolved and that should be given weight.
|
That's perfectly fine, and I agree that mods should
listen to to and
consider the majority community opinion, but I absolutely disagree with the notion that the "majority opinion" determines what's right. If there's anything I've learned from American politics, it's that the judiciary system is designed not to uphold majority views, but to protect the minority (when they are in the right) from those majority views.