Definition Of A Moderator

[colorado_cowboy]

Definition
moderator
At a forum, someone entrusted by the administrator to help discussions stay productive and within the guidelines.

Information
Good moderators are essential for good forums; great moderators are essential for great forums... and the absence of moderators typically leads to ghost towns inhabited only by spam bots.

Basic moderator duties include deleting or modifying inappropriate posts, educating newcomers about forum guidelines, and possibly deleting accounts of repeat offenders. Additionally, moderators may be experts in their field who can help minimize unanswered questions.

Most moderator openings are volunteer positions, although there may be substantial indirect rewards. These highly visible positions can lead to enhanced status within a community. This can even translate into business leads, as potential clients have an opportunity to get familiar with the moderator.

Bill your comment

Hmmm... A federal court was not so sure about that one.
Now back to lurking

Was completely uncalled for, you were neither being fair or nuetral by making such a comment. If your going to moderate than moderate, if your going to post your opinion on a certain topic than you should at least allow the other members of the forum to comment about your opinion. Locking the topic shouldnt be an option!

 

[700UW]

I concur with cowboy 100%

Bob, I have to disagree with you it is Kevin's boards, not Bill's.

 

[usfliboi]

I think the rules are for us not them. I see CC has a lot to see hear and learn on here. LOL

 

[BillLumbergh]

Was completely uncalled for, you were neither being fair or nuetral by making such a comment. If your going to moderate than moderate, if your going to post your opinion on a certain topic than you should at least allow the other members of the forum to comment about your opinion. Locking the topic shouldnt be an option!

Where is it required that I be "fair or nuetral {sic}" when posting my opinion on a topic? Moreover, where is it indicated in the post in question that it was not fair or not neutral - a standard that I do not see being applicable in general to posters on a message board. The court did what it did.

Now if I was going to follow the guidelines enunciated by you in your post, then I would say about 15 - 20 members of this board would not be members of the board.

Finally, with respect to closing the threads, it was clear that certain posters felt the desire to question a public warning and to question the motivations/intent of the moderators. Given that the warning was straight-forward, unequivocal, and direct, why should the thread be allowed to continue to descend into a "why, why, why" discussion?

 

[700UW]

Come on Bill, I said my peace, even PMed you my concerns, you can open it up and get it back on topic.

 

[AOG-N-IT]

I see no problems with someone being identified as having served cokes....what the hell?...it's part of the job isn't it? ashamed?....try another line of work. I think we are all smart enough to appreciate what a small fraction of that job intails that aspect. Who cares except the overly sensative anyway?

Heck... I tend to shuffle a lot of papers in my aspect of the job..would being called a "paper-shuffler" inflame me? Frankly hell no....but then again I'm secure with whom and what I am....and I'm proud of what I contribute to the operation. Try flying without those like me...you'd hate the results.

If everyone regardless of what they do at airline X looked at life with this in mind..What would it be like if nobody did what I do here?.....you might just get a grasp of how really important your job really is to all of us.

BTW....BILL is still a heavy handed moderator , and all too often only reacts to what he happens to not agree with. Nuf said !! I wish Todd or Eric were ruling the roost here..they were at least friendly and fair...but he does give advanced warnings in his defense

 

[usfliboi]

I see no problems with someone being identified as having served cokes....what the hell?...it's part of the job isn't it? ashamed?....try another line of work. I think we are all smart enough to appreciate what a small fraction of that job intails that aspect. Who cares except the overly sensative anyway?

Heck... I tend to shuffle a lot of papers in my aspect of the job..would being called a "paper-shuffler" inflame me? Frankly hell no....but then again I'm secure with whom and what I am....and I'm proud of what I contribute to the operation. Try flying without those like me...you'd hate the results.

If everyone regardless of what they do at airline X looked at life with this in mind..What would it be like if nobody did what I do here?.....you might just get a grasp of how really important your job really is to all of us.

BTW....BILL is still a heavy handed moderator , and all too often only reacts to what he happens to not agree with. Nuf said !! I wish Todd or Eric were ruling the roost here..they were at least friendly and fair...but he does give advanced warnings in his defense

lol amazing how eyes and ears see and hear things differently

 

[colorado_cowboy]

This board is a business plain and simple!

A moderator's job is to make sure that certain rules are followed, if he/she can add to a topic to possibly correct some misinformation that's be given is one thing but to post a snide remark is way off base and IMO his post was way off base.

Bill overstepped his boundaries as a moderator when he decided to add his 2 cents but when he realized he opened a can of worms and things were getting to hot he decided to jump back into his role of a moderator, chastise 700UW for suggesting that a certain flight attendant stick to his job and serve cokes like he's paid to do Bill became upset and within minutes closed the topic.

Again, IMO if Bill would have read the boards and made sure everyone was minding their P's and Q's like he's paid to do this whole incident would have never occurred.

Bob, Bill has responsibilities, posting on a topic that appears to be out of his realm of expertise Im sure isnt one of them.

USfliboi, rules apply to everyone!

Im certain that now that I have posted how I felt about Bill's behavior it'll only be a matter of time till Im either sent to the cornfield or possibly banned altogether.... oh well, such is life <shrug>

 

[PITbull]

Where is it required that I be "fair or nuetral {sic}" when posting my opinion on a topic? Moreover, where is it indicated in the post in question that it was not fair or not neutral - a standard that I do not see being applicable in general to posters on a message board. The court did what it did.

Now if I was going to follow the guidelines enunciated by you in your post, then I would say about 15 - 20 members of this board would not be members of the board.

Finally, with respect to closing the threads, it was clear that certain posters felt the desire to question a public warning and to question the motivations/intent of the moderators. Given that the warning was straight-forward, unequivocal, and direct, why should the thread be allowed to continue to descend into a "why, why, why" discussion?

Bill Lumberg,


WHY DID YOU LOCK/move MY TOPIC????? AND WHY DID YOU NOT PM ME ABOUT WHY?

I reported you to THE moderators.

And if you took out the 15-20 members YOU don't like, you wouldn't have a public forum left. <_<

 

[colorado_cowboy]

Bill Lumberg,
WHY DID YOU LOCK MY TOPIC????? AND WHY DID YOU NOT PM ME ABOUT WHY?
I reported you to THE moderators.

Goes to prove not everyone is treated the same on these boards.

 

[sentrido]

Anybody want to organize a posters union? IAUSAUSAP?

 

[PITbull]

I vote that Bill go to the cornfields for a week for discrimimnating against certain posters.

 

[700UW]

Got to agree with cowboy and pitbull.

I have a buddy pass ready to give to Kevin to send a certain person to Iowa or Nebraska for the week, lol.

 

[colorado_cowboy]

I vote that Bill go to the cornfields

LOL... I seriously doubt thats going to happen but perhaps Bills superiors can explain to us why he's allowed to give certain individuals preferential treatment.

 

[700UW]

LOL... I seriously doubt thats going to happen but perhaps Bills superiors can explain to us why he's allowed to give certain individuals preferential treatment.

It seems that is what a lot of posters want to know but never get an answer too.