PDA

View Full Version : Moderators



SquattingDog
September 9th, 2004, 09:40 PM
Traffic is not all that high on this board, however if somebody could help me preview recent posts for content, we can keep this a family oriented board.

-frank

kerryann
September 9th, 2004, 09:48 PM
I nominate Bruce :D
I can moderate in the evenings but not at work.

SquattingDog
September 9th, 2004, 09:57 PM
I second that motion... let nominate Bruce for kinds of stuff before logins in.

WhiteRhino
September 10th, 2004, 08:36 AM
I'm not sure what you mean by this??? I have not seen anything on the site that is a family orientation issue. If it comes up, why not deal with it then?
It seems silly to have to appoint someone to monitor every post.

Or am I missing something?
Jim

brewmenn
September 10th, 2004, 10:38 AM
Originally posted by SquattingDog@Sep 9 2004, 09:57 PM
I second that motion... let nominate Bruce for kinds of stuff before logins in.
I accept.

brewmenn
September 10th, 2004, 10:47 AM
Originally posted by WhiteRhino@Sep 10 2004, 08:36 AM
I'm not sure what you mean by this??? I have not seen anything on the site that is a family orientation issue. If it comes up, why not deal with it then?
It seems silly to have to appoint someone to monitor every post.

Or am I missing something?
Jim
I don't think it's so much a matter of needing someone reading each and every post as it's having people who are watching things and have the power to deal with things quickly if they do happen. If Franks the only one with that power and he can't get on for a while for whatever reason it's good to have other people that can deal with things before they get out of hand. Anyone that follows MJ or any other large message board has seen how quickly things can get stupid.

Plus it helps spread the workload out.

WhiteRhino
September 10th, 2004, 12:53 PM
Ahhhhh!
That makes sense. I just don't want to get carried away with excessive censoring.

Nvrenuf
September 10th, 2004, 10:37 PM
PM me if a mod is still needed. I'm usually online anyway.

JohnnyJ
September 10th, 2004, 11:36 PM
Are we sure that we can handle

http://www.jimcarreyonline.com/movies/brucealmighty/graphics/balogo.jpg

kerryann
September 10th, 2004, 11:54 PM
Originally posted by JohnnyJ@Sep 10 2004, 07:36 PM
Are we sure that we can handle

http://www.jimcarreyonline.com/movies/brucealmighty/graphics/balogo.jpg
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :unsure:
Now that's comedy at it's finest.

SquattingDog
September 10th, 2004, 11:55 PM
:lol: :lol: :lol: I can moderate the moderators !!!! Bruce your hired. I will set you ID up tonight. Let me know if you a have any questions.

-frank

WhiteRhino
September 11th, 2004, 04:48 PM
I was thinking about this and wonder:
Isn't this something that should be handled by the board or a board appointee?

Nothing against Bruce.......... just thinking about protocol.

brewmenn
September 12th, 2004, 11:45 AM
Originally posted by WhiteRhino@Sep 11 2004, 04:48 PM
I was thinking about this and wonder:
Isn't this something that should be handled by the board or a board appointee?

Nothing against Bruce.......... just thinking about protocol.
Yeah, I was kinda wondering about that myself. I don't think theres anything in the bylaws or SOP about it.

JohnnyJ
September 13th, 2004, 08:18 PM
I'd think that this should be within the control of the Website adminstrator.

Personally, I think more of the roles for GL should be turned into Committee Chairpersons rather than "one person do it all type jobs". Too much fluff getting filtered through the BOD, and too many people getting burned out because its their job and feel the can't get help.

This might be another topic..

SquattingDog
September 14th, 2004, 09:36 AM
At the Fall Quaterly we can sort this all out. I had to move fast with board with jeremy's resignation. I have been Keeping Pat updated with my progress.

-frank

kerryann
September 14th, 2004, 09:43 AM
I think I would be shocked and potentially horrified if something like appointing a moderator must be come part of the political process. I would say unless someone has a specific objection, why bring this up at quarterly :huh:

SquattingDog
September 14th, 2004, 09:47 AM
Originally posted by kerryann@Sep 14 2004, 09:43 AM
I think I would be shocked and potentially horrified if something like appointing a moderator must be come part of the political process. I would say unless someone has a specific objection, why bring this up at quarterly :huh:
Um.. be prepared to be shocked and potentially horrified at the next meeing.

-frank

:rolleyes:

kerryann
September 14th, 2004, 10:08 AM
Nope.. I refuse to think the worst of people.... :D

WhiteRhino
September 14th, 2004, 10:55 AM
Please don't make it look like I am making a mountain out of a mole hill.

I just look at it this way: We have a board of directors and I think it only fair to ask them how they feel the web site should be monitored.

If Frank has already run this by Pat, good!

That simple.

Not a big deal.

If they are comfortable with the web master appointing others to have monitoring access, so am I.

But back to the basics: is it necessary?

kerryann
September 14th, 2004, 11:00 AM
If I continue going out to events the board is going to grow. It is already becoming more active, so I would say yes. There are lots of undesirables on the internet who love to start trouble. As we grow you will see these types popping up. Right now, we do not need one, but in the event that something happens and Frank is not available right away, having a moderator is really important.

brewmenn
September 14th, 2004, 11:15 AM
Originally posted by SquattingDog+Sep 14 2004, 09:47 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(SquattingDog &#064; Sep 14 2004, 09:47 AM)</div>
<!--QuoteBegin-kerryann@Sep 14 2004, 09:43 AM
I think I would be shocked and potentially horrified if something like appointing a moderator must be come part of the political process. I would say unless someone has a specific objection, why bring this up at quarterly :huh:
Um.. be prepared to be shocked and potentially horrified at the next meeing.

-frank

:rolleyes:[/b]
I pretty much expect the subject to come up and I think it&#39;s a discussion that needs to take place. Not just with regard to the web site but also with some of the other jobs like Marketing director, DAL, and Membership secretary. We have discussed all of these jobs here and seem to agree that these jobs might be done better if a group of people shared the chores. I&#39;ve wondered if we need to to have specific wording in either the bylaws or the SOP&#39;s outlining how and what parts of these jobs can be delegated to other members. Considering that we only meet 4 times a year I don&#39;t think it&#39;s practical to require the board to vote every time someone want&#39;s to delegate a chore.

WhiteRhino
September 14th, 2004, 12:43 PM
Last 2 posts: I agree with both.

lgottler
September 14th, 2004, 09:28 PM
I&#39;m around as well if more work needs to be done than can be handled...


Lucas

kerryann
September 14th, 2004, 09:39 PM
I offered too, but they said bruce was enough for now.. I don&#39;t see bruce or frank here now.. Lets wreak havoc.. :lol: :o

kerryann
September 15th, 2004, 10:37 PM
Bruce...
Frank threatened to moderate me for saying foshizzle :blink: :blink: :blink:
Please teach him all of the younger lingo so he doesn&#39;t go wrongly banning people.
:lol:

brewmenn
September 15th, 2004, 11:57 PM
Originally posted by kerryann@Sep 15 2004, 10:37 PM
Bruce...
Frank threatened to moderate me for saying foshizzle :blink: :blink: :blink:
Please teach him all of the younger lingo so he doesn&#39;t go wrongly banning people.
:lol:
Whats an old fart like me going to know abouut "younger lingo"

Do I have to get one of my kids to review your posts?

kerryann
September 16th, 2004, 01:15 PM
You may be old.. but you are still younger than gramps.. I mean.. Frank :o ;)

SquattingDog
September 16th, 2004, 01:40 PM
Originally posted by kerryann@Sep 16 2004, 01:15 PM
You may be old.. but you are still younger than gramps.. I mean.. Frank :o ;)
Hey &#33;&#33;&#33;... that hurts... I can read you know.

-frank

kerryann
September 16th, 2004, 01:54 PM
You know I am just teasing you... besides you have to learn all of this lingo.. so you will know if your kids are swearing and stuff right in front of you ;)

PeteC
September 22nd, 2004, 10:27 AM
Dang, I am too late to upstage Bruce and get my own monogrammed ban stick. :lol:

No matter what the size of the board, or the amount of activity, this is still a public access board and as such is a ripe target for attack from internet idiots. Bringing the decision process of who moderates the board before the GL board is a fine idea. But in the meantime, we need more than one moderator. As has been said, Frank can not be here 24/7.

Personally, I feel that all decisions regarding the monitoring of any board should remain with the administrator. The the GL boards set some guidelines, but let Frank do his job.

Roadhouse
September 22nd, 2004, 04:32 PM
Originally posted by WhiteRhino@Sep 11 2004, 08:48 PM
I was thinking about this and wonder:
Isn&#39;t this something that should be handled by the board or a board appointee?

Nothing against Bruce.......... just thinking about protocol.
I dont know why....hes not making rules or changing the way GL runs. Just making sure we don&#39;t call each other names and swear on the board.

Besides I&#39;m not sure the word Website is even in the By laws. :D

WhiteRhino
September 22nd, 2004, 05:24 PM
Roadhouse, what you say is true.
It seems as though everyone thinks I have something against Bruce. Not so&#33;&#33;

However, GL operates under the guidance of Roberts Rules. And, Frank is appointed by the board or the president. (not sure how it came about exactly) Any committee, either by rules or courtesy, should consult their board for things that are ultimately a reflection on GL. Not to slow up the process or burden them with too much extra stuff, but to get their opinion. They must be kept in the loop. Keep in mind, they volunteered for the position. And Pat is always saying to call him for any GL issue.

So........................... and I mean sooooo...............
All I was suggesting when this first came up was........................

Did anyone run this by Pat or any part of the board to get their opinion.

Keep in mind, if something goofy happens, it still becomes a reflection on GL as a whole. I think it would be really sad that if someone were to get moderated for something they thought was appropriate, called our pres to complain and he was not even aware that someone had moderation authority.

As PeteC said, "let the board set some guide lines". All I was asking was if anyone consulted the board for any guidelines.

Even Bruce said that he was thinking about the same thing.

Roadhouse
September 23rd, 2004, 07:51 AM
Originally posted by WhiteRhino@Sep 22 2004, 09:24 PM
Roadhouse, what you say is true.
It seems as though everyone thinks I have something against Bruce. Not so&#33;&#33;






Jim you should......we all have something agianst Bruce, who let him in here anyway? :D

WhiteRhino
September 23rd, 2004, 08:17 AM
Jim you should......we all have something agianst Bruce, who let him in here anyway? :D [/quote]
There&#39;s something we all agree on&#33;&#33;

brewmenn
September 23rd, 2004, 09:26 AM
Originally posted by WhiteRhino@Sep 22 2004, 05:24 PM
Roadhouse, what you say is true.
It seems as though everyone thinks I have something against Bruce. Not so&#33;&#33;

However, GL operates under the guidance of Roberts Rules. And, Frank is appointed by the board or the president. (not sure how it came about exactly) Any committee, either by rules or courtesy, should consult their board for things that are ultimately a reflection on GL. Not to slow up the process or burden them with too much extra stuff, but to get their opinion. They must be kept in the loop. Keep in mind, they volunteered for the position. And Pat is always saying to call him for any GL issue.

So........................... and I mean sooooo...............
All I was suggesting when this first came up was........................

Did anyone run this by Pat or any part of the board to get their opinion.

Keep in mind, if something goofy happens, it still becomes a reflection on GL as a whole. I think it would be really sad that if someone were to get moderated for something they thought was appropriate, called our pres to complain and he was not even aware that someone had moderation authority.

As PeteC said, "let the board set some guide lines". All I was asking was if anyone consulted the board for any guidelines.

Even Bruce said that he was thinking about the same thing.
I totally agree with you. I don&#39;t have anything against me either :rolleyes: but don&#39;t want to be put into a position of doing things against the boards wishes.

And like I said before, I think this really touches on a larger issue that probably should be discussed, that is, What are the guidelines for allowing people in elected and appointed positions to delegate parts of thier jobs to other GLFWDA members.