How do you define the value of a moderator?
There have been only 2 moderators of who's action I have gotten any notice: Jurgen and BDK.
From the forum I learned that Int is a mod as well. His activities remain unseen. Numerous others are listed as mods - their work has never come to my notice.

This doesn't mean they have not been doing work. It just means, I didn't notice or it was just too smooth to notice.

How can you know you know all the work that has been done and all the effects that it has had? If you can't know, how can you judge the value?

Define a metric if you want to compare things - and make it an objective one.

Don't use gay hate chat. Simple.

No.

on second thought, that 19 minute timeout he gave you does make him the worst ever.

i'm gonna let you finish, but fiero and tcs were awful.

i wasn't really around for bone roller but i'm guessing he sucked too.

and pretty much everyone else on the list of mods that doesn't actually do anything.

JulesDogg

Louis I think the problem is a lot of the time it feels like BDK goes looking for trouble where there really isn't any.

Moderators should be like security staff at a bar. If trouble arises you want them to intervene, but you don't want them to go around antagonizing the patrons causing trouble in the first place.

I often feel like he wants it both ways. Before you take this off track, no that isn't a double entendre.

Thrillho - I really am trying to stay on track here. You might have noticed that I did try to give a serious answer to a rather polemic question. But you are right - it is tough for me at times.

Regarding BDK I think it is beyond discussion that he has a certain talent to start conversations (or confrontations, or anger, ...). And he did make use of this talent befor and after he became a moderator. It is in my opinion easily agreeable that while this sort of behaviour is within the limits for any average player it is not desirable for a moderator.

For the time being we have the historically luxurious situation of 3 visible moderators that participate in discussions and give the improvement of the site a try. I don't recall this situation happening before. Not all the attempts seem to go in the right direction for all observers and there is quite a lot of talk about room for improvement in especially one case.

Of course it is legal to discuss the quality of moderation and the moderators. But if you wish to do so, you do need some sort of measure and you need to have access to all facts and activities. If you don't have that, it is just another bashing of some persons based on very personal impressions. You will, as always, have the unsatisfied few be more noisy than the happy or uninterested majority. There will be no benefit for the site.

My point was and is: stop this or make it objective. Else it is not doing anything good.

What gay hate speech, BDK? Nobody else seemed to see me say anything (because I didn't). All you said after was that I said "more". And straight to a ban? Seems like an abuse of power for a conversation you didn't like. Did you screenshot my alleged gay hate speech? Seems like a pretty easy process to do to justify your actions. Perhaps someone else that was in the room at the time? Qaz was there... montecarlo... Nobody seems to have any idea what you were talking about. Maybe you should be in a bit of a timeout until you can learn not to drink and mod at the same time. Not sure why you are a mod in the first place... you continuously instigate at tables and in the forums.

Has anyone ever heard me use any terms derrogatory to homosexuals? Just curious.

If it doesn't quack like a duck, it probably isn't. I don't speak gay hate speech and BDK shouldn't be a mod.

Louis... Thank you for your serious response. Yes, this post was only meant to be a venting ground for anyone else with specific issues with him being a mod to make sure they are well known to those that have the power to select or remove moderators.

The abuse of power is one thing if it is obviously a personal issue with me. However, my main issue with his behavior as a mod is further:

He used his ability as a mod not to warn or -chat... he immediately went to a ban on my entire account, even though he is aware those are not the guidelines IF there was a violation of the few rules we have here.

Additionally, in the process, he is labeling my profile as if I am homophobic. Anyone who accesses my profile sees that I have been modded by the community for 'gay hate speech' which is incorrect.

I don't particularly understand why someone would be continued to be allowed to moderate when he can't be trusted to be sober enough to effectively follow the guidelines set forth for him/her. I only refer to sober as he stated several times that he was drunk last night.

I think I've generally made my point clear. As I said before... I wanted this post to be as much a sounding board as anything for his behavior and whether it is helpful to the site. I don't think we should have to judge whether the 'good' outweighs the 'bad' when someone is supposed to be regulating the community for others.