I agree Pronto.
If someone was doing a fine job and people were happy with their work then why should they take time out when they may be in full swing and giving themselves for the service of others on this sight?
It seems rather counterproductive to me. Whereas if things weren't working out then maybe someone else could offer to fill the roll and maybe then a vote could be implemented or something.

 

@duskwings - Please try to consolidate your posts into one, using the Edit feature.
Also what kind of restrictions do you have in mind? So basically according to your idea, the mods should change after say, 1 year. Is it going to help anything?

Just because there were few bad apples, there's no need to throw away the whole basket, right?

 

The only time limits that should be in place, are those removing powers from mods that have overstepped their boundaries in relation to what the site owner has in mind. Coincidentally, those are exactly the times limits that are in place right now. No need to politicize forum issues when they are being dealt with effectively as is.

 

feel free to edit my posts.
The only restrictions i thought about is time, i still think it s more than fair to confine the task to a limited period,and i said it could be renewed if a mod was appreciated.but this would mean that someone would have to take the time to review that mod s action during their charge, or making polls among usrs to decide if someone deservers to remain a mod.
At that pont that would really become too much ridiculously political for a music site.
And ur right about bad apples,but i tell i ve never seen a bad apple among the the mods, nonetheless the time limit would grant that we d get rid of a bad apple if there was one in the future

 

Hi duskwings
Don't you think the continual changing of staff would just disrupt the flow of the service if it's running smoothly?
Why change something if it's working.
Obviously if there are concerns or complaints then it would have to be looked into and appropriate changes made, maybe through a democratic process.

 

What privileges mods have anyways, they can edit/erase/move thread and edit comments, but when you complain to SAiNT about them, they don't have nothing, believe me, nothing, if anyone of you ever complained, you knew how that went, in favor of member and mod apologized, so yeah, dunno what's left there to take from them, but again, maybe things drastically changed in my absence and mods now have different treatment, if that's the case, I'm sorry for false info than

 

hi DieM, i could agree with u if the changes took place often,i never established ht e amount of time,it s not my work doing it and it would be silly since we re discussing on a hypothesis.
I don t think that changing people would change the service since the people who are supposed to make the site working smoothly respond to the guidelines given to them by the site owner,i think.
If u want to compare the site to a democracy,put it this way: u change the politicians who run the country but u don t change the constitution,right?same here: the site works for two reasons:the rules are simple and clear,and it s not a porn site,so u don t have wankers trying to get off annoying every other because of the rules,moderators are the instrument that make sure that these rules are respected.but people are not eternal,i said it before, were lucky with the ones we have now,are we sure we will have the same luck in the future?

 

@xsze - Exactly, I don't get it as well.
Mods here (not sure about AZ) do not get special treatment, they're just like regular users, only with few more privilegies that allows them to move a threads, posts, edit or delete content. No access to internal releases whatsoever.

 

Guys ,let me be clear. the site to me works perfectly, but i m not the one who laounched three threads here on audiosex and one on audioz to clarify what happened with all the catalyst story,that i wasn t aware of.
But after reading those threads i simly thought that the easiest solution to avoid that similar incidents happen in the future would be a time limited charge for moderators.
And i simply put a poll here, i din t write to saint telling him to put a time bomb on u all.
But once again, catalyst was a good mod,at least he was with me,and i found him a correct person,who,according to what i read, turned "bad".If it happened to him, why couldn t it happen to someone else?then we would have to read four more threads of explanations on why another mods lost the charge?
It wouldn t change our lives, none of us is paid to be here,but i don t see why this should happen.

 

Last edited: Oct 5, 2015

Hi duskwings
We'll have to see how it goes eh?
Anyway I'm sure Saint will let us know in due course if there will be any policy changes.
At least it's being discussed here and he may take some of our ideas into consideration

 

It's a character trait. Admin status has (almost) nothing to do with it. Still, a preemptive strike of distrust towards the staff is not going to improve anything. Also there were approx. 8 moderators during the last 4 years. Only one turned rogue.

 

Before I even think about voting, what chain of events occurred for this topic to even exist?

 

@djlight78 - Check out Lounge and Forum News and Updates.

 

No one should be above the bad and the good... wisdom words.
Corruption is inherent to human being, thats why is so problematic.
Institutionalization is a work that everyone should know the real meaning before post an emotional response, because history do not lie and first we should understand the problems of the past before repeating it.
I study a lot about institutions in university (besides my music diplomas), and the first problem is:
The institution is created for a purpose and this must be its first directive right?
Wrong! As soon the institution is created the first purpose is self defending or defending particular groups inside the institution.
Here in Latin America have an ONG derived from USAs Tuff Love. In my opinion is vastly superior with more than 2000 affiliated groups.
Here the rule about directors is simple: Change after 6 months, and no one can imagine how hard is to happen, just because people loves any kind of power and it leaves to isolation, lack of critics and loss of creative change. The prejudice of preconceived.
Good institutions know the staff must be dynamic, that ideas must change with experimentation and that new blood is the key of future survival.
You can pray with the best intentions, but without vigilance its nothing!
By the way: the hell is full of good intentions.
No one can do good music without skill or new air!

 

No need to ostracize the mods. The hysterics will die down soon enough.

 

Hi ovalf
Isn't that why we should have a review system maybe even backed by a voting poll so that a power structure doesn't take over
the overall good of the sight again?
I know that some humans can be easily deluded by their own sense of perceived greatness disregarding what's best for the system as a whole.
At least this way if someone gets too big for their boots then the majority will just vote them out.
I do however know that not everyone is corruptible, especially on a small scale as this.(Saint would be a good example)
So, wouldn't it be wise just to let that person continue to do what they are good at as long as they stick to the rules and folks are happy with the service?

Anyway I've said enough on this subject. I respect others opinions on here and will now shut up!

 

Last edited: Oct 4, 2015

Well, Saint will be always the boss, cannot change that.
More important than a vote i the merit, if you help people without being a Dick its a good candidate.
The system can only be good with auto critic and external critic, if its open and clear its something really good, thats why Cat must remain here, not necessarely in staff but in dabate.
I like votes but it is nothing without the above.
See my avatar:
Shitty music is pop... Because only 13yr old buy music...
So vote and music are emotional and imature. My diplomas in music do not mean respect.
Changes must be paired with reviews, reviews are the hard part.

 

Andrew i think that's a key point you've touched on there....is endowing someone, anyone, with mod status a poison, or is it to be taken case by case...can mod status bring out something bad in people..maybe they've had hardship at home or with family and they can then take that to the forum with their powers?
was catalyst a mod AND an admin, would that be where part of the problem lie..he wasn't subject to answering to anyone?

 

Last edited: Oct 4, 2015

yeah, could forum members vote for the mods to represent them, obviously after being vetted by SAiNT..like a member of parliament is voted in...how would you feel about that?

 

Last edited: Oct 4, 2015

@Pronto - It is indeed possible. An admin or a mod should understand what kind of power is he/she 'empowered' with. That old saying, with great power comes great responsibility. Turning rogue usually takes time, and is near impossible to guess on first encounter.
Also the affected personalities do have sort of 'switch' or 'turning point' which turn them rogue. At that point, they might not be even aware of their actions.