Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="roguerouge" data-source="post: 4157867" data-attributes="member: 13855">Okay, adding an additional layer of hierarchy might be a cost to this proposal, which may or may not counter-balance the benefits of it.I'm not fully sure what the proposal means yet. The idea is in its very early stages of discussion. Moderating the discussion is a pretty huge power, of course. But the mods influence the owners and administrators of the site, and they do other things as well: they generate content (such as the April Fool's Day), they run the business, they determine who gets to advertise (c.f. the heated discussion of "God Hates Elves" parody ad banner). Perhaps they would work as a moderator and an advocate for their constituency's interests or perhaps they would work solely as an advocate.I think the particular duties of this position would be best decided through discussion. It was an argument for a benefit in the spirit of "Many hands make light work," not "Let's toss Moderator X off the island." The proposal is not to get rid of the moderator system entirely, but to experiment with a change to the system that might lead to important benefits, both tangible and intangible.It's an experiment, not a radical change.Certainly! Of course, to make a Simpsons reference, Homer could contact his new alien overlords in many different ways, but that doesn't make for an effective form of self-determination.  Good question. One would assume that anyone could run, but there could be a run-off system that gradually eliminates fringe candidates. Anyone got any ideas? Fear of change is an important emotion to acknowledge, and obeying that emotional response may be the wisest course. But it also might not be.As for the later concern, a recall system or term limits or limited duration terms should be discussed.</blockquote>

Verification