[user104658]

Right but this is exactly my point, guys; Moderators want to engage as regular members and do so, but members (multiple members of all persuasions) don't feel like they can engage with staff as normal members when things start getting tense. Whether that's "the case or not" is largely irrelevant. Even I feel like I'm "on thin ice" at the moment tbqfh, and whether that's true or not, all that really matters is that it's possible and therefore it - as I said - creates a two-tier system.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Right but this is exactly my point, guys; Moderators want to engage as regular members and do so, but members (multiple members of all persuasions) don't feel like they can engage with staff as normal members when things start getting tense. Whether that's "the case or not" is largely irrelevant. Even I feel like I'm "on thin ice" at the moment tbqfh, and whether that's true or not, all that really matters is that it's possible and therefore it - as I said - creates a two-tier system.

So what is your proposed solution here then? Mods are not allowed to post? Seems the only way you would be happy, or do I have that wrong? Please tell me how you reckon this apparent problem could be solved.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

So what is your proposed solution here then? Mods are not allowed to post? Seems the only way you would be happy, or do I have that wrong? Please tell me how you reckon this apparent problem could be solved.

Choose between sticking to considered, balanced posts that don't take sides when it comes to contentious discussions, or choose to be a regular member who can freely get into contentious discussions.

The vast majority of threads don't fall into the category of being contentious issues but on those that do, in my opinion, yes mods need to remain impartial or the threads become completely unbalanced.

Is it unfortunate? Sure. Is it fair? Nope. That doesn't mean it isn't a real issue.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Choose between sticking to considered, balanced posts that don't take sides when it comes to contentious discussions, or choose to be a regular member who can freely get into contentious discussions.

The vast majority of threads don't fall into the category of being contentious issues but on those that do, in my opinion, yes mods need to remain impartial or the threads become completely unbalanced.

Is it unfortunate? Sure. Is it fair? Nope. That doesn't mean it isn't a real issue.

Issue here is, who decides which threads are contentious?

Like, near all BB posts would come under that. Even silly threads in c&g could be classed as this.

So whats really the solution you are proposing is that mods just do not post at all. I am fairly happy with that as I would just be a regular member so I could post, but I am positive that admin would not be able to find anyone who would moderate a forum, without actually posting on it, for free. The only way they could do this realistically, is to start paying moderators, the same as DS and other forums do. And I don't think thats realistic either, for them to start paying for mods round the clock.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Issue here is, who decides which threads are contentious?

Like, near all BB posts would come under that. Even silly threads in c&g could be classed as this.

So whats really the solution you are proposing is that mods just do not post at all. I am fairly happy with that as I would just be a regular member so I could post, but I am positive that admin would not be able to find anyone who would moderate a forum, without actually posting on it, for free. The only way they could do this realistically, is to start paying moderators, the same as DS and other forums do. And I don't think thats realistic either, for them to start paying for mods round the clock.

To be fair I understand that it's a bit of an impossible situation without many, or maybe any, real solution but - helpful as I know this will be - I also think it's important to remember that "a lack of available alternatives" is not the same as "a good situation".