Warbird Information Exchange

I don't know if the software would support it, but you might be able to introduce community flagging of inappropriate posts. It might make the moderator's job easier, and his actions more defensible in the face of a disgruntled poster.

I think the anonymous moderator thing might be a good thing, and easy to implement. Existing mods could set up new accounts with new names and mod from those accounts, and it is doubtful anyone would know who they were. (They could also keep separate email for those accounts, so the stalkers don't get their favored email address). It might be a nuisance for them to log in/out using two different accounts (if they wanted to keep their old one), but it would go a long way to insure their anonymity.

_________________
What is red, furry and on your six?

Oops, I meant ZANE, not Zand. This keyboard is real inaccurate today.

_________________
"I love the smell of 100LL in the morning."

This will not work, deleting a post of a member without letting them know what was wrong is a bad idea. all that will do is piss off the poster. I think the way JDK and others did it with the red text to warn when a thread was crossing the limits was the right way to deal with problems, it is just too bad their are some people here who do not get the hint.

Just my 2 cents.

Cheers Dave C

*snorts coffee out nose*

_________________
"I knew the jig was up when I saw the P-51D-20-NA Mustang blue-nosed bastards from Bodney, and by the way the blue was more of a royal blue than an indigo and the inner landing gear interiors were NOT green, over Berlin."

The police continue on with the interrogation .

_________________
"No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!" R.R.

Welcome to the USSA! One Nanny State Under the Messiah, Indivisible with Tyranny, Higher Taxes, Socialism, Radical Environmentalism and a Loss of Income for all. Boy I'm proud to be a part of the USSA, what can I do to raise taxes, oh boy oh boy!

it's easy to be a hard ass behind a key board, but if half the crap shoveled out were face to face you'd see an entirely different scenario. bottom line..... i treat people how they treat me. i never look for a fight, but i'm not a door mat either.

_________________
tom d. friedman - hey!!! those fokkers were messerschmitts!! * without ammunition, the usaf would be just another flying club!!! * better to have piece of mind than piece of tail!!

.
I agree with the proposal that Mods be given anonomous ID's if they so wish, and the flip side proposal that forumites be required to post under their own names and not anonomous nicks, (this would also stop the habit of some banned posters simply appearing under a new name and continuing on their normal behaviour!)

But the biggest improvement we could all make for the quality of the debates is not to leave the Mods to deal with bad behaviour on their own, and for us to back them up.

We all need to set higher standards from ourselves, and reject bad behaviour from others, and not be the Silent Majority!

In the recent JDK resignation one of the posters named by JDK belatedly offered up an apology via a third party member, yet has left his offensive post (below) that caused the problem in place without deletion, ammendment or written apology, it sort of makes his apology rather hollow and meaningless.



(god knows why he is still here given his stated desires to go away?)

We all need to stop turning a blind eye to such posters and their crap!, I dont really care if they have family or drinking problems etc, if they are going to behave badly in public they need to confronted by us all and made to understand such behaviour wont be tolerated, and be held accountable for their behaviour, not given effective support and condonement by our collective silence.

By leaving the individual Mods to be hung out to dry by these problem posters, we let them think the Mod is the only person rejecting their behaviour, leading to accusations of victimisation etc

Our Mods are just fellow members of the forum who have put up their hand to help manage the site, "we" the silent majority need to cover their backs, and not accept this crap anymore.

I have challenged a few offensive views online in recent times simply because if I allow those views to stand unchallenged my silence is condoning them.

Lets all back the Mods, and not permit another Mod to suffer the crap JDK suffered recently to cause his resignation.

Lets see and force honest and open apologies, and removal of offensive posts by the problem children themselves by understanding from us ALL that their behaviour is unacceptable, and require improved behaviour in the future, or ALL request that they move on elsewhere.

I can imagine how disgusted JDK felt to be attacked in such a way simply because he is volunteering to help enforce the rules for the benefit of us all, and fully understand his decision to quit, lets not leave any more Mods alone in the firing line!

regards

Mark Pilkington

_________________
20th Century - The Age of Manned Flight
"from Wrights to Armstrong in 66 years -WOW!"

Mark, what I don't understand is why someone would behave in such an offensive manner just to be forcibly banned from a site such as this. Am I missing something ? Why would you try for months to be banned? If you don't want to be here, then don't come here. Go somewhere where you genuinely want to be.

_________________
"You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind each blade of grass..."
Admiral Isoruku Yamamoto

[quote="Mark_Pilkington"].
Lets see and force honest and open apologies,


Mark, I agree with all of your sentiments with the exception of the excerpt above. It may be possible to force an apology from a recidivist but I very much doubt that it will be an honest one.

My $0.02 on anonomous Moderators

I am a Moderator on a military discussion board (Tanknet)

All of us are anonomous, and post under the name 'Moderator'

We RARELY delete posts, and only in cases where the post is over-the-line offensive, an advertising link, or something which could be considered violating military security.

Our proceedure is to notify the offending poster to edit their own post and remove or delete the offensive material.

There is NO APPEAL of a Moderator's request/decision.....NONE!

ARGUING WITH (which appalled me the first time I saw it here) OR FAILING TO COMPLY WITH MODERATOR'S REQUEST results in a minimum of 2 weeks suspension of postiing privilages.

The fate of repeat offenders is decided by the Moderators behind closed doors (a separate Forum accessable only by Moderators) and is un-appealable unless a Moderater opens the appeal to review by the other Moderators.

Tanknet is not a democracy, it is run for the pleasure of the Staff, which consists of a group that originally set it up and financed it and a select few that have been invited to join the Staff.

I would strongly advise, at the least, INSTANT BANNING OF ANYONE NOT CONFORMING TO A MODERATORS REQUEST.

Just my two cents...................

I don't know who made that post, but if it were hellcat it'd be rather hard for him to remove it as he's banned

Thanks Bruce

Yes it was him, and I wasnt aware that he had been banned, but I guess he got what he was asking for, (and apparantly deserved) and instead of being deleted his post of 3rd of June will stand to show why he got it.

regards

Mark Pilkington

_________________
20th Century - The Age of Manned Flight
"from Wrights to Armstrong in 66 years -WOW!"

June Bannings:

http://warbirdinformationexchange.org/p ... hp?t=30375

What is "account spoofing"?

_________________
.
.
Sure, Charles Lindbergh flew the plane... but Tom Rutledge built the engine!

Visit Django Studios online or Facebook!

Posting under several different names at different periods, in this case 'sabredriver', HGUSU and Migace to name but a few.