Topic: Moderator accountability

[Peripatetic Phil]

I've tidied up the sentence construction in your post quoted above so it makes a bit more sense. Is your thinking any clearer and more logical than the way you write?

I would respectfully suggest, George, that it might be helpful if you were to set a good example to others by not making a tacit /ad hominem/ attack in a reply to another member.  By all means write something along the lines of "It wasn't entirely clear to me what you meant in your message, but I have assumed that you probably intended to write something along the lines of the following ...", but a question such as "Is your thinking any clearer and more logical than the way you write?" is clearly not an appropriate question for any member to pose, let alone a moderator who should know better and who be setting an example to us all.

You are, after all, the senior moderator on this forum and have been in post for a considerable period of time; if you were to set a good example to others, then they would surely be encouraged to be similarly respectful in their own replies.

** Phil.

[littlechilie]

Would you be willing to stand as third co-moderator, Santa ?

No. I'd have to behave then!  ;D

Nonsense! As you know, I haven't changed my behaviour as a member. Go on, give it a try (take on the role of third moderator) to temper the apparent, extreme moderation style of CH!

I agree completely with the idea of voting. I was going to suggest to CH that no threads are locked or posts deleted unless we both agree but I quickly realised I'd be wasting my time. CH is clearly not a team player and more like a loose cannon.

Phil, you just can't help yourself can you?

[Secret Santa]

If the were to ever be a third mod, it would need to be an outside influence, certainly not yourself SS! That's why I voted for No.

Let's hope you wouldn't be in the running either then LC as your selective reading leaves a lot to be desired for the role.

In particular:

Would you be willing to stand as third co-moderator, Santa ?

No. I'd have to behave then!  ;D

Pretty much gives the game away doesn't it LC...to anyone who's wise enough to read before making an ass of themselves that is.

And if that were not enough, to repeat Phil's comment, to vote no on the basis of one candidate you don't want as moderator (who in fact was never a candidate anyway) says much for your lack of bias and inability to focus on the crux of the matter.

[Peripatetic Phil]

Phil, you just can't help yourself can you?

I'm sorry, I don't understand the point you are trying to make Little Chillie.
** Phil.

[littlechilie]

I think the word Click comes to mind ;D yep Click, and three amigos.

[Peripatetic Phil]

I'm afraid you've lost me, Little Chillie.
* Phil.

[Secret Santa]

I'm afraid you've lost me, Little Chillie.
* Phil.

I believe he means clique Phil!  ;D :

[littlechilie]

[ quote author=Secret Santa link=topic=13776.msg118151#msg118151 date=1427800569]

I'm afraid you've lost me, Little Chillie.
* Phil.

I believe he means clique Phil!  ;D :
[/quote]

SS, fortunately for me I don't discriminate regarding race, colour, or education! It's a shame people still feel the need in modern times!

[martinvic]

I've tidied up the sentence construction in your post quoted above so it makes a bit more sense. Is your thinking any clearer and more logical than the way you write?

I would respectfully suggest, George, that it might be helpful if you were to set a good example to others by not making a tacit /ad hominem/ attack in a reply to another member.  By all means write something along the lines of "It wasn't entirely clear to me what you meant in your message, but I have assumed that you probably intended to write something along the lines of the following ...", but a question such as "Is your thinking any clearer and more logical than the way you write?" is clearly not an appropriate question for any member to pose, let alone a moderator who should know better and who be setting an example to us all.

You are, after all, the senior moderator on this forum and have been in post for a considerable period of time; if you were to set a good example to others, then they would surely be encouraged to be similarly respectful in their own replies.

** Phil.

But he won't he can't help himself, he has always been the same. Hence why, I believe, not many on here have any respect for him as a member, let alone a moderator.

Surely you must see that moderators are usually well respected, skilled, contributing, members, with good communication/people skills, within their community.
Which to me George has none of the above.
But you carry on supporting him Phil, for whatever reasons you may have.

Oh and I expect LC meant, Clique. Yes that would be it.

[Peripatetic Phil]

I believe he means clique Phil!  ;D :

SS, fortunately for me I don't discriminate regarding race, colour, or education! It's a shame people still feel the need in modern times!

I think SS was just trying to be helpful, Little Chillie.  Had it not been for his helpful explanation, I would never have understood what you were trying to say.  As to there being a clique, I am afraid you could not be more wrong -- I have lost count of the number of times that SS, George and I, in some combination, have disagreed with each other, sometimes expressing ourselves in less than moderate language which we might with the benefit of hindsight regret, but on the one issue of the need for better moderation on this forum, I believe that we are, for once, united.

** Phil.