At this point its clear I was the only thing holding things in the mod team together

How can you explain threads that are so bad that mods had to change their titles or their content or even close them but not bad enough to reprimand their creators especially in repeat offender cases?

"Original post" doesn't equal "Thread". Thread title and original posts are important on getting the discussion going but the thread quality depends on everyone who participates in it and should only be determined by the quality of the discussion.

A thread value should only be measured by the interest it garners, if it manages to find an audience and regardless of intention, literacy, insight, intelligence or the disapproval of spoiled brats who can't stand when something isn't molded to their taste.

A thread validity should not be determined by one person or group of like-minded individuals (sans the website owner/s) as a wider variety of users means a wider variety of interests, values, beliefs and opinions need to be taken into consideration.

There is something as objective quality. If OP is not including vital information it does not improve discussion, it hinders it. If the discussion is truly worthy then someone will make a worthy thread. Discussion is not thwarted by requiring a minimum quality of the opening post that will improve discussion.

The value of something is not strictly correlated to quantity. Or strictly speaking: If the opening post is already trash, the resulting discussion has little hope to be very fruitful.

Do you think it hurts discussion if thread creators have to put a little bit of effort into their posts?

1. If a healthy discussion is still taking place, title/op quality is meaningless. If not, the thread had already defeated itself.

2. It hurts discussion if posters put little effort into their posts, op included. They are mostly just hurting themselves, though.

All of the points are excellent, and I'm here just to voice my support. At times, it's almost infuriating what kind of stuff is allowed. I don't think all of the 'crimes' are severe enough to warrant moderation (unless very small moderations can be handed out too, which I don't think is the case), but obviously repeat offenders should get moderated anyway, even if all the offenses are small.

You say yourself that poor OP quality hurts discussion. So why not start improving that part first? And I don't agree that they hurt only themselves. It hurts the forum as a whole when too much trash is allowed through. It invites the wrong people.

I kinda doubt that people who don't care about thread quality care much about who posts the thread. Also it's not like people are instantly banned for making bad threads. They will get their fair warnings fist.

I'm pretty sure those popular users are able to adjust their posting habits when they are properly warned. It's not like they're posting out of altruism.

See it this way. If those people had been warned from day 1 the following things would've happened: 1) they would stop posting trash and have an eye on their thread quality while becoming more popular. 2) They would stop posting instantly and and you wouldn't have to ban them in the first place. Sounds like a win-win for the forum.

Ahh, so this is why you mentioned wanting to become a mod. So that you could enforce these ideals

VGPolyglot said: Ahh, so this is why you mentioned wanting to become a mod. So that you could enforce these ideals

No, being mod is just for all the internet pussy. Just ask Rol.