Oh, I wasn't arguing about whether having moderators is a good idea or not
My post was purely a response to Hazeel's argument in favor of generals because of alt-attacks.
I'm too Unaligned to have a forum signature.
Hazeel
said
:
If Option 1 wins, we're going to have a bad time. We're going to have a miserable experience because of some uncontrollable trolls and/or alt spammers. It might only happen one day out of a whole year, but it's gonna set people off. They're going to cry for change, a new vote, or leave. We'll end up having a new vote and probably adopting another (or old) system.
If Option 2 wins, we'll either rush our elections and have bad results that **** people off or we'll plan our election process, the politics will cause drama and **** people off. And, in the end, it'll probably lead to another vote to change the system by the time the next election comes around.
If Option 3 wins, people are either going to accuse Dethal of being biased and showing favoritism or else claim he's trying to be too "Politically Correct" in FC terms and selecting poor choices just to avoid stepping on minority toes. It doesn't matter how well he chooses the generals, there's going to be resentment from a lack of choice. And from here we'll either have someone demanding ownership of the FC because they think they can do a better job or--you guessed it--a demand for a new system.
Accurate assessment, but Option 3 is so clearly the lesser of the three evils (as I've explained many times in previous posts).
DMMetalaane
said
:
But I think the mild annoyance of having to remove kebabs is a sacrifice worth taking if the general discourse of the chat is improved by moderators.
And they do so, demonstrably. Anyone who was regularly active about 2-3 weeks ago would be able to testify to that.
Patrolling Lore FC almost makes you wish for a Great Revision.
25-Mar-2016 20:45:52
- Last edited on
25-Mar-2016 21:01:09
by
Raleirosen