>> The reason will be that in my eyes, despite all the controversy, the majority of the threads here discusses important enough issues, both technical and social, that help people here to grow more knowledgable and assertive.
>>
>>Rather than threat to stop the entire chatter section, the UT staff should propose more, mild, moderation. Also I think it's a good idea to give the starter of the thread the possibility - and responsibility - to be the initial moderator of that thread.
>
>The initiator of a thread is not a good choice for a moderator, by very virtue of having a stake in the dispute.
The initiator's possibility to moderate should be limited to giving a warning or a ban for the thread only due to bad mouth language, really sarcastic comments towards a member and derogatory ad hominem arguments. These are the items that come to mind. If other people start to think low of someone's moderator behavior (see it as either too permissive or too restrictive), then they'll likely skip next threads started by that person.
And there's always the other moderator with likely more power.
Groet,
Peter de Valença
Constructive frustration is the breeding ground of genius.
If there’s no willingness to moderate for the sake of good debate, then I have no willingness to debate at all.
Let's develop superb standards that will end the holy wars.
"There are three types of people: Alphas and Betas", said the beta decisively.
If you find this message rude or offensive or stupid, please take a step away from the keyboard and try to think calmly about an eventual a possible alternative explanation of my message.
