I'll give you that, it's hard to understand someone who thinks of rep as anything but a toy and space-saver.
And it's hard to reconcile that with someone who says mods can't enjoy the board without the ability to use it to attack other posters.
As someone who cares very little about rep, I just don't see this as a good idea. I think it'll end up causing problems in the future. I may be wrong, I hope I am, but I don't think I will be. I only have a couple of questions / comments: 1) Who asked for the change? Us? If not us, then what mod was insisting on it? 2) I think that if a mod is willing to quit just to repwar, maybe they weren't cut out to be a mod to begin with.
And again, if a rep war is absolutely nothing, why are the rules about which forums you can do it in? Why is it unfair for mods to engage in rep battles when they had unlimited rep? Here's an interesting quote from an admin: Guess who said that?
It's no more "attacking" than flaming in the Red Room is. The ONLY reason mods were not allowed to repwar in the first place is because they had unlimited rep when no one else did. It's the reason the policy hasn't changed for admins - we have unlimited rep and can't set it to be otherwise. Rosencrantz: 1. The admins requested it because we were losing too many good moderators because they considered being able to be a full member of the board more important than moderating a forum. No mods requested the change. 2. It's no different than how most of the mods wouldn't want to be mods if they weren't allowed to flame and troll (within the rules) in the Red Room. Would you blame any of them for that?
And you've proved my point - people take rep more seriously than posts, even as irrational a position as that is. To get jackasses and idiots to stop being such, well... I'm willing to take advantage of that.
If the only problem with a moderator is that he or she takes the rep system a little too "seriously", then I for one am not going to quibble.
Actually, I used to be on the other side of the fence on this issue. Ironically, it was things Volpone said that made me rethink my stance, as well as losing POTN, who did an excellent job as a mod. The idea that sometimes rep can be a deterrent for certain personality types and the idea that there is no good reason to deny it when mods can be just like everyone else on this board in almost every other way, brought me around to supporting their view on the matter. So, I have been periodically bringing it up over the last year or so. The timing of the implementation is just coincidental, and only looks bad if you have an agenda already and want to assume the worst about people. I would be very surprised to see much change, aside from mods not having to bend over and take it without the ability to answer back. I guess we will see.
Your point seems to change a lot. I would think that proves my point - that if people do take rep more seriously than posts (which has been my point from the beginning, whereas yours was 'it's just a toy') then a mod that goes on a rep jihad is going to have meaning. And when that meaning is specifically perssonal prejudice against a poster by a member of the staff, it calls into question their role as an impartial arbiter. It's the same reason there are laws against police harassment. A cop doesn't have to ticket you to be harassing you.
Try and recall POTN quit so he could neg rep me after having basically no contact with me at all, nor I with him. Then he spent four months, I swear to god, four months negging me, trying his hardest to get me into the red. I think he gave up around Christmas or some such. I've never spent that much time trying to neg someone. And yet...he's mod material?
He did the job well, yes. That is generally what I care about in a mod not what they do with their rep. If he did something regarding warnings or bans that was questionable then I would have issue. If a mod in a rep war warn the person he's warring with, do you really think the rest of WF and the rest of the staff won't notice if it's unjustified? If that happens the mod in question will be dealt with...if it happen a lot, I imagine the rule will change again.
Er...it was either the posters who asked (That would be US), or the mods. In this case it really does apply....
What we need are acknowledgments in the rules that there's a difference between bullying and trolling and that rules against the former will be strictly and severely enforced. Trolling is just the price you pay for minimalist rules. Bullying in order to get people who disagree with you to shut up, on the other hand, is a real problem in a forum dedicated to discussion. Intimidating threats are clear bullying, not mere trolling. Rep war in general straddles the boundary and many times falls under the bullying rubric; whether or not you believe it should actually be successful as a bullying tactic, the bullying intent of rep war is often pretty clear. Moderators who rep war inevitably will give the appearance of bullying. What differentiates wordforge from trollkingdom is that minimalist rules are a tool here, not a goal in and of themselves. The goal here (IMO, of course) has always been to have a forum that fosters productive and entertaining discussion (and, at this point, fostering a sense of community has been an implicit goal as well for a while), and the belief has been that minimalist rules are a good tool to help bring that about. Bullying is a problem that wasn't really considered, however, when the rules here were being drawn up. It simply wasn't a real issue at trekbbs, and it took a while for it to become an issue here. But it is one now, and we either need rules in place to deal with it or the willingness by Elwood to make command decisions to shut the bullies down. Otherwise in the end we'll just be a lesser version of trollkingdom, with all its problems and none of its virtues.
There still hasn't been an answer to my question. WHO asked for the change? I never saw anyone post a request HERE. Where was it requested, and who asked for it?
It's either in an A51 thread that hasn't been released, or there was bleating about it in private chat.
It's been an ongoing issue for years now, going all the way back to when Volpone was a mod. A number of people, myself and Volpone amongst them, didn't like the fact that being a mod was equivalent to the Muslim concept of dhimmitude - you were an easily abused second-class citizen. This might work for a mod at such heavily-regulated places like TBBS, which is ruled rather like one of those "zero tolerance" schools where kids get expelled for saying the word "knife", but it doesn't work here because WF is a considerably looser place. More like "Deadwood", where Sheriff Bullock not only goes armed but occasionally beats the shit out of Al Swearingen (and vice versa). But beatings aside, Bullock doesn't use his authority to shoot Al and have done with it. I don't know for sure, but if I had to guess I'd say since this was instituted now because a number of staff have left and the peeps in charge wanted to get rid of one of the factors that might keep a person from taking a mod position. Not the conspiracy that people seem to think it is.
The problem I have with this argument in general is the idea that you can be "bullied" by an anonymous internet nerd. It's freakin' text on a screen. How can you be bullied? Agree on the fundamental difference between WF and TK, tho.
I just don't see how not being able to engage in rep wars makes a mod a second-class citizen. I've been here for years and never engaged in one.
It's part of the fun, Rosencrantz. Plus, previously, if some turd wanted to rep war against a mod, the mod was defenseless. And I know of at least one poster here who's only logging in to neg people, whilst refusing to combat people directly. That, too, is going to change.
It's not just that, its not being able to say certain things and taking a lot of abuse. Be honest, mods here take a lot of shit.
What, exactly, can't a mod say? I understand, very much so, how frustrating having your hands tied like that can be, but...how are they prevented from "dishing out", except during rep wars?
