Who do you think would make a good moderator?

This is the wrong way to go about something like this. If it becomes a popularity contest the worst candidates will win.

 

Exactly. I vote for Libhater. I'd nominate myself, but I don't have the time to deal with a bunch of (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*).

 

Popular, No.

Respected, Yes.

 

So when will we know who the new moderators are that replace the three who are resigning?

 

I nominate, DonGlock, Brewskier, and AceFrehley.

 

"We have such sights to show you...."

Thanks, but I decline.

 

Everyone loves me right? Surely I am a candidate!

 

Angedras.....Cubed.....Flylicker.


All three have shown indications of level headed understanding of the requirements a Moderator must have to be respected and respectful.

Unfortunately....should they gain the responsibility, we will not get the opportunity to enjoy as many posts.


Whoever takes this job....understand you will be giving up a level of freedom and atmosphere by doing so, it is important to know this going in. You will be compelled to avoid participation in more than a few threads to avoid being considered biased should you need to act.

 

I'd vote for ya!

 

I vote for RP12, Dr. Righteous, and Custer for libertarians. On the liberal side I vote Perriquine or Osiris Faction. On the Conservative side I'd vote Marine1

 

No point in nominating me, as I've made pretty clear my lack of interest to the powers that be. But thanks for the recognition.

 

Me probably.

 

You think all racists are conservative. I don't think so.

 

If they're that bad then they'd probably be pretty unpopular to begin with

 

Seriously? On PF?

 

Reporting for duty...

 

Why not you?

 

I've only been here a month, but I have to say the trolling and flaming by extreme left and right people here is out of control. I've been personally insulted two or three times for giving an honest (usually pretty moderate) opinion on things. There's even cursing masked by the () and you could have kids reading it.

If this site is supposed to be a debate sight, some of the moderators need to step up their game and start cracking down on this stuff. I could mention right now 8 to 10 posters who I've seen that troll, race-bait, and insult others. I'm actually thinking about closing my account here because it's getting old quick.

As far as possible mods go, SaneCentrist (I think that's their name) seem pretty fair, and Lriemon is a pretty reasonable person who I've never seen them sling insults in the month I've been here. Another one I think controls themselves well is Alfalfa. I've disagreed with Lriemon on a few things, but they always kept it mellow.

 

Alfayfa, the guy who swears it's a fact that Zimmerman lied even though there is no evidence supporting that position and people have hit him with plenty of evidence supporting the fact that he's telling the truth, you mean that Alfafa. That's against the forum rules so you think we should have a rule breaker as a moderator?

 

They've been cool to me lol, but I've only been here a month so yeah

 

Disagreement with an opinion does not equate to a lie....we generally call this debate.

 

Stating something as fact that is actually proven to be a lie and then ignoring that fact is lying.

 

in your opinion....which is the point.

Expecting a Moderator to decide which opinion has merit is EXACTLY what no one wants.

 

The one backed with reputable links and facts are fact vs the one where the user is just making it up as they go along.
Easy to tell in lots of cases.
Now Alfafa claims the blacks weren't going to riot if OJ was convicted. That it was all a lie. There is such a thing as historical fact, stuff everybody already knows is true.

 

It seems you feel Moderators should decide who wins a debate....rather than the members doing so.

In this case, you simply post the rebuttal material....and accept the fact your opponent is an idiot.


Welcome to the debate process.