Tweet
Ming, I hope you realise that there were no hidden insinuations in my previous post, which you replied to. I made some suggestions, and I appreciate your feedback, but I don't see the need for some of the defensive positions you take. And the "popularity contest"-angle is ridiculous, to be quite frank. If a person is appointed moderator, it's hardly a popularity contest either way to allow the people he moderate on to contribute their immediate impression of whether he's suited for that position or not. To be non-binding for the admins, of course, as I stressed it, but indisputably of value to both admins, mod(s) and posters. In short the community. Grand word, but that is also what this site is, I'm sure you'll agree.
Maybe I'm reading you wrong, but the last two snippets you quoted me on do not reflect any personal grievances on my part, they were intended as observations of a more general nature..
I suggested the evaluation, not as a vehicle for raising hell about having been personally treated "unfairly", but as an outlet for poster feedback of overall performance. As a parallel, I don't recall any of my dissatisfaction with Urban Ranger arising from any action he has taken against me - I don't think he ever has, in fact - my ever-increasing negative view of his moderatorship has been solely based on how I perceive his politicizing and fairness or lack thereof toward others.
In closing, as usual I think you tend to over-emphasize the "private site-thing". You're right of course when we cut down to it, but when people make suggestions in a positive spirit it's a bit disappointing to get the private site-speech over again, and being told to find another place to post "if you don't like the way it's being run around here". An honest suggestion should be taken as such, no more, no less. Certainly not as an invitation for anyone - moderator or not - to convolutedly encourage people to piss off.
Or maybe it's just getting a bit late here.
Maybe I'm reading you wrong, but the last two snippets you quoted me on do not reflect any personal grievances on my part, they were intended as observations of a more general nature..
I suggested the evaluation, not as a vehicle for raising hell about having been personally treated "unfairly", but as an outlet for poster feedback of overall performance. As a parallel, I don't recall any of my dissatisfaction with Urban Ranger arising from any action he has taken against me - I don't think he ever has, in fact - my ever-increasing negative view of his moderatorship has been solely based on how I perceive his politicizing and fairness or lack thereof toward others.
In closing, as usual I think you tend to over-emphasize the "private site-thing". You're right of course when we cut down to it, but when people make suggestions in a positive spirit it's a bit disappointing to get the private site-speech over again, and being told to find another place to post "if you don't like the way it's being run around here". An honest suggestion should be taken as such, no more, no less. Certainly not as an invitation for anyone - moderator or not - to convolutedly encourage people to piss off.
Or maybe it's just getting a bit late here.
Comment