Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Pielorinho" data-source="post: 3391665" data-attributes="member: 259">I think I know the thread you're talking about, Delta.  If it's the one I'm thinking of, after post 136, the overwhelming majority of posts were bickering about issues not germane to the thread topic; I'm certain any of the moderators would have closed it.I see what you're saying about conflict of interest, and I can see how you're seeing that there.  Indeed, we mods often ask one another behind the scenes to step in in a thread that we're participating in, because we don't want to have our own position bias us in our moderation actions.When we don't do that is when the moderating decision is so easy to make, as it was in this particular example.  Especially on weekends, when other mods may not be around as much.I've really not been aware of this happening often (as you say, "fairly common").  Would you mind reporting this post and including a few other cases where you feel that this has happened?  That's probably what would be most helpful to us in deciding whether a policy like the one you suggest would be helpful.  If the only examples of this happening are examples where all us mods agree that the moderating actions were self-evidently required, then we're unlikely to institute such a policy; but if there have been several cases where a moderator acted questionably (in our viewpoints), then that'd be different.Daniel</blockquote>