Putting aside melbye's post for a moment, I think it might in fact be a good idea for the mod team to reconsider their stance on how they go about the process of actually moderating. Having all mods need to weigh in on pretty much every single decision, is a rather cripplingly ineffective way of doing business. Sure, it has the benefit of making sure everyone's always got their asses covered, because if there's a mistake, misjudgment, etc. it's on everyone....but at what cost?
As Hiku just admitted, and as I know from personal experience, this process is simply too slow to be satisfactory for anyone. Users feel frustrated that things aren't getting done, and - unless I was completely alone in that boat - I'm pretty sure mods are often frustrated just the same. Most decisions are really fairly straight forward, and don't require this huge brainstorm. I mean really, if you're on the mod team, after a certain amount of time there's simply gotta be a trust between you all that you know what you're doing. If there isn't, if there are people there that you feel shouldn't be moderating without supervision...well then you gotta drop them.
Now, nobody's perfect, so of course there's gonna be some decisions made now and again that need a second look. A correction here and there. Each individual mod is less shielded by the whole. But that's ok. Or at least it should be.
Even in cases such as with CaptainExplosion, who perhaps requires a more in depth discussion on how to handle him long term, they could easily be placed on a shorter leave of absence by a single moderator taking action, to allow for that discussion between mods to take place without giving that user the opportunity to continue being disruptive, or giving the impression to the community that you're letting certain behavior stand.
Just my two cents.
Existing User Log In
New User Registration
Register for a free account to gain full access to the VGChartz Network and join our thriving community.
