20 Nov 09
Originally posted by RussLOL...Funny stuff Russ!
To be considered you will need to have been active on the site for over a year, fairly active in the forums and have no history of making controversial posts.
Yes, I appreciate that rules out most people, but there must be few people who still qualify, right?
With this statement concerning controversial posts, you would have to rule out at least 3 of your active Mods. 😉
20 Nov 09
2 edits
Rationale for Anonymity
(1) Principle of 'need to know' (Russ & Chris are under no obligation whatever to announce their selection of volunteer staff at a point in time or to muddy the fixed Site Map water by revealing their identities to the site membership rank and file).
(2) Principle of fairness to all members (served by eliminating the penalizing target otherwise circumstantially and permanently pinned to the backs of volunteer mods).
(3) Principle of effective use of limited resources (by creating an environment which enables/leverages unencumbered and effective interaction... rather than strain to become more efficient within a context conducive to promoting inefficiency.
..........................................
20 Nov 09
Originally posted by Very RustyIt stems from an old joke. It wasn't that funny to begin with, I admit.
I know it is not as funny if you have to explain it. Perhaps someday I will get your humour.😕
So, are you putting your name in?
No, I'm not putting my name in. I have a long history of controlversial posts.
20 Nov 09
Originally posted by Hand of HecateDid you read the part about controversial posts?
If at all possible, can the new mod(s) be anonymous? Having them known greatly undermines their effectiveness.
Having said that, I'll volunteer. I'll even resubscribe. I have impressive credentials.
All we need is you as a Mod!
Sure would be nice to have someone who wasn't in the friend group.
A fresh outlook is what is needed, seriously. Not one of the good 'ole boys.