MY vote: Aye

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=588360&forum_id=2#7692567)

I think people are just misunderstanding what's going on (not sure why given that the sticky thread goes into a ton of detail and is pretty specific about the fact that NO POLICIES ARE CHANGING).

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=588360&forum_id=2#7692654)

having mods is fine

the problem is that he was so public about it.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=588360&forum_id=2#7693015)

transparency = people freak out

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=588360&forum_id=2#7693036)

Seriously, what's changing? I don't get what the fuss is about -- but if someone has a legit reason for me or anyone else to be concerned (especially since I primarily post from work) I'd appreciate if they would briefly articulate it here.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=588360&forum_id=2#7692749)

users should only gain mod powers when a new board is created (thus assigning the new mod to that board) or existing mods/admins leave and there's a need to fill a void

simply deciding one day "let's make six users moderators" is how successful message boards fall apart

this has just been my experience in the past, anyway

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=588360&forum_id=2#7692780)

As for hurting communities, yes I'm very well aware of that -- look what we had to deal with when we bought Law Student Paradise. No one is getting special privileges around here, and if someone steps out of line they will be gone, period.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=588360&forum_id=2#7692801)

if you really want to do things to right way, 1. call it something else besides a mod, which has a negative connotation, 2. very clearly delinieate the scope and limits of their powers (I wasn't aware of no policy changes despite reading your OP, no one knew if IPs would be visible), and 3. give a more thorough vetting process for selecting the people doing the button pushing

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=588360&forum_id=2#7692902)

As for vetting, the people selected are about as vetted as anyone can get on this board.

Any ideas about a new name?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=588360&forum_id=2#7692921)

saying that "it's a bad thing because it's a bad thing" doesn't convince anyone that this will be problematic. Can you please offer anything more concrete?

Thanks.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=588360&forum_id=2#7692821)

I don't believe you can moderate effectively unless there is a certain distance between you and the community

as GTO has pointed out, these mods will not have significant powers, so there is hope, but there is still potential for abuse

I admit I know nothing firsthand about the NYCFan situation, but the things I have read raise questions about GTO's willingness to check abuse when it arises (let me emphasize that I could be completely wrong in my impression of that situation)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=588360&forum_id=2#7692938)

i'm not sure how you get around that. if you're suggesting that you/rachmiel will be monitoring the new mods, why even have them to begin with?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=588360&forum_id=2#7693112)

What if they're just "mistakes" like every time Fan does it.

Dumbass.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=588360&forum_id=2#7693141)

Seriously, I think you're envisioning some sort of radical policy changes that are just not going to happen.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=588360&forum_id=2#7692904)

If GTO wont drop NYCFan's mod duties after abusing it for the nth time, we cannot believe that he'll keep other mods in check.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=588360&forum_id=2#7692988)

Author: red swingline™ stapler

Backstory:

NYCFan is a Harvard UG troll who has been called out by the Harvard Crimson. He self-outed by copying his letter to the Crimson onto Xoxo. GTO secretly gave him moderation duties months ago, he abused his powers to ban posters who bashed Harvard, then GTO took his moderation duties away. One or two college poster started spamming the board out of resentment for secret mods. Out of spite for this spam, GTO reinstated NYCFan. Every single college poster called him a tool for it but he kept him as a mod. A few days ago, NYCFan went back to work deleting any reference about him on the board. People found out, GTO had to undelete some posts, and every one wants NYCFan to stop moderating. GTO won't have it because they both share a harvard email address and are totally BFF!

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=588243&forum_id=2#7691510)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=588360&forum_id=2#7693167)

Author: red swingline™ stapler

Link here:

Date: May 24th, 2006 5:14 PM

Author: Great Teacher Onizuka

Demodding NYCFan this past Sunday morning was one of the hardest decisions I've had to make involving this board.

However, remodding NYCFan this afternoon was certainly one of the easiest choices ever.

Some advice: if you want to convince someone that mods are a bad idea, it's generally not a good idea to spam the hell out of the board. It's also not very smart to attack one of the people making the decision with racial slurs like here http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=422025&mc=13&forum_id=1#5846508

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=422081&forum_id=1#5846583)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=588360&forum_id=2#7693171)

Author: red swingline™ stapler

Complete pwnage of GTO here;

Date: May 25th, 2006 1:27 PM

Author: theghostofsnappy

Subject: just my worthless thoughts

The real issue here seems to be less with the fact that there *was* a mod, as technically since we have admins, we have mods, but with the way it was done: the whole gestapo-type, secretive and underhanded manner in which it was carried out. Even after it was suspected that 'fan was a mod, and it was asked, we never got a straight answer.

One would think that with the history of this board and how it came about, the powers that be would be a *little* bit more sensitive to the whole moderator issue. In all honesty, GTO, this was probably done in the absolute worst way it could have been. Really, what did you expect? And what was the reason for keeping everything hush-hush?

You know why nobody emailed you? Because very few people know how to. The email address isn't exactly the most visible, now is it? We've been over this before, but for whatever reason, you like to tuck it away on a sub-page of the main page - which nobody really visits. Why not have this 'contact' link at the head of each forum? Its akin listing emergency phone numbers somewhere randomly in the yellow pages.

Furthermore, do you think you could be any more ambiguous with the contact link? Who/what are we exactly contacting? The webmaster, moderators, the owners, or Jesus H Christ? This "Staff" thing is pretty worthless, and as you've said yourself you're barely on this side of the board. Why would anybody want to contact *you*? You're not visible...which of course brings up another reason to let posters know who the mods are. If there *is* a problem, we know who to get in touch with.

And out of all the posters to mod, you picked 'Fan? How stupid was that, really? He's the one that gets picked on the most, so great idea, hand the kid that's being bullied a gun. He's never presented himself as the most balanced poster, now has he? And as you've more or less implied, 'fan is a troll. Again, brilliant decision.

Everything that you've hoped to accomplish by making 'fan a mod could have been done without all of this headache. Simply being up front with the community, being a little transparent, and making a better decision with a choice of mod(s) would have been fine. But no, you have to be all cloak and dagger about this whole ordeal. Then you bitch and moan about spam (which, for the record makes the board no less legible than does say, one-sided trolling, or racist trolls - or do those only matter when they go after *you*?). You've proven that the only way to get your attention is to spam the board. This is the bed that you made - it may be a festering pile of dung, but its your bed nonetheless. Enjoy sleeping in it.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=422081&forum_id=1#5851479)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=588360&forum_id=2#7693179)

Did he delete posts with his real name, or just those talking about his character?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=588360&forum_id=2#7693203)

I summarized the rest a few posts above. And he's still doing it by editing other people's posts.

Date: February 28th, 2007 10:38 AM

Author: Joe (Caltech '04)

He not only deletes posts that use his name, he also deletes posts that even REFER to the fact that he has the ability to delete posts and criticize his artificially-enforced anonymity!

He uses his powers in the context of arguments in which he is personally involved and generally against those he disagrees with.

He is a horrible and horribly biased moderator who has the audacity to demand respect which he has NEVER given to others. He is not shy about name-calling, using others' real names, and posting outright lies even when requested to stop--but then he turns around and deletes entirely TRUTHFUL posts if they make him look bad or disagree with his point of view.

I have registed a complaint about this at contact@autoadmit.com as requested.

Clearly you guys (Rach, Boon, and GTO) can run your board how you want, but even rudimentary principles of fairness demand that the individual known here as "NYCFan" be de-modded forever. (As I understand it he was on probation for this already with further violations to result in permanent de-modding. I believe those violations have occurred. This is not the crux of the argument, but it does enhance it.)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=587506&forum_id=1#7683876)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=588360&forum_id=2#7693312)

And yet he is still a mod...

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=588360&forum_id=2#7693343)

And he deleted any reference to a thread where he was insulted by the Harvard Crimson. It didn't identify him, it just mentioned his moniker. Even GTO had to undelete the thread but most of the content had been lost.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=588360&forum_id=2#7693230)

NOTHING HAS CHANGED. It's just other people are handling those mundane tasks now.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=588360&forum_id=2#7693091)

You obviously know that it's a position that should be given to someone who is responsible and trustworthy, otherwise you wouldn't have held "nominations" and hand-picked posters for this job.

The problem is that many of your choices leave a lot to be desired. You should really stop acting as though your "moderators" don't really have any power, and nothing has changed.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=588360&forum_id=2#7693158)

if it really doesn't matter who does the "moderating," since it's just organizational stuff, why did you have to have nominations at all?

TITCQ

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=588360&forum_id=2#7693202)

Seriously, what do you want me to do here?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=588360&forum_id=2#7693231)

Author: Vector (I stopped believing)

It's not just about what you do. How you go about it makes a huge difference. You don't appear to have grasped this concept yet.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=588360&forum_id=2#7693080)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=588360&forum_id=2#7693256)

b)As has been said, the choice of mods who have repeatedly been embroiled in board drama was dumb. Like I said before, I like chancemeeting a lot as a poster, but his spasticity and penchant for histrionics makes him less than ideal for mod.

c) Did you even take one second to reflect on how your own biases filtered your choice of mods? I'm sure their political leanings had nothing to do with your impression of their suitability. Of course, you're capable of perceiving this only as conspiracy theory.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=588360&forum_id=2#7693359)

1. call it something else besides mods. even something whimsical like GTO's deckscrubbers would work

2. CLEARLY delineate the scope and limits of their powers. your # 1 point, which wasn't evident in your original thread, is that nothing has changed policy-wise - someone else is just doing the grunt work. i didn't even know that until this thread started. sell that. make sure people know mods can't edit, see IPs, ban, etc. the oversight and list of changes mods can do is good

3. limit the available discretion for people doing this. lay out clearly what they can do, and what the criteria for them doing it is. for example, what is spam? is it just when they feel things are getting crazy, or is it x posts in y minutes? what is outting? is it when they feel like someone's being outed, or is it a real first name, last name, or initials being posted? what about pictures? etc. it should be clear to everyone when and why a post/thread is being moved/deleted/whatever. transparency is your friend, not your enemy

4. most importantly in picking the Deckscrubbers, you need to find people that are a) not involved in board drama and thus wouldnt be tempted to abuse their powers, however slight, and b) give posters a voice in choosing/vetoing them.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=588360&forum_id=2#7693280)

The pauliewalnuts things is a false outing. We're not protecting pauliewalnuts, but the guy that person is claiming is pauliewalnuts. We did the same thing when MC outed the wrong guy as Moonshine Hillbilly.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=588360&forum_id=2#7693300)

http://www.xoxohth.com/thread.php?thread_id=588474&mc=71&forum_id=2#7693608

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=588360&forum_id=2#7693679)

I mean, I see the virtue of getting the threads into the right classifications, so that people here for legitimate content don't have to read some sick weirdo's incest threads.

But I don't see any particular virtue to giving a few posters the ability to delete post and threads. If they are only going to be used for anti-outting purposes, I suppose that's fine. I'm not not sure I see that as a realistic paradigm in the intermediate to long term.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=588360&forum_id=2#7693277)

and if there is mod abuse, deal with it on your own.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=588360&forum_id=2#7693332)

The silence is deafening.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=588360&forum_id=2#7698285)

bring in rach and boondocks.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=588360&forum_id=2#7695134)