[Z]

Originally Posted by Ammi

..do you not think though that because you and Ben both did 'step down', which you felt was the 'right thing to do..' because you couldn't spend the time moderating that you felt it needed..it kind of shows we have the right mods and who would make that decision if they felt they should without any other changes to be made..

Well, in all of the time I've been here, the only people to step down have been Lauren, Ben and myself. Ben stepped down for a practical reason; Lauren and I stepped down because it was ruining our enjoyment of being members of the forum and we didn't want to be impartial all the time, we wanted to take part in conversations that we otherwise wouldn't have been able to for fear of being accused of being biased in some way. So I don't think that's the case at all, I think there are plenty of people who would happily hold on to the position without ever giving it up willingly (see: all of the people who have been demodded due to inactivity) because there's no prompt for them to think about it. If you know that you're going to be really busy in real life, you're not going to think "oh I should probably give up that moderating position on that forum I use" - but if you were asked to consider whether you wanted to carry on for another year, you might know that you wouldn't be able to commit so you would terminate your contract, as it were.

I suppose what I'm really talking about isn't popular elections for new mods, that was never the point, I'm asking whether there should be year long commitments to being a moderator instead of it being more like a club with lifelong membership.