|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 6501 days) Posts: 756 From: Calgary, Alberta, Canada Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Should administrators be neutral? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
CanadianSteve Member (Idle past 6501 days) Posts: 756 From: Calgary, Alberta, Canada Joined: |
In asking whether administrators of any one forum should be neutral, i don't actually mean they shouldn't post their own opinions. But they should be neutral in the sense that they respect all opinions, especially those that conflcit with their own. That is, they should not take advantage of their position to cast aspersions and maintain biases. While there was at least one other example on a forum i suggested, Does Islam need a reformation?, which just closed, the final comment of the admin is another. Here it is:
"Witching HourAllah be praised. Closing this sucker down." The Admin made it clear in an earlier post that he never thought this forum should have been accepted and that he considered it innately racist. His final comment should be understood in that context. Interestingly, his opinion never changed, despite that the work of many respected Muslim writers and scholars was referenced and quoted.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1473 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
I could quote others by the same admin. There's really only one admin offender along these lines.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminJar Inactive Member |
The thread was closed because it reached the 300 post mark. It had nothing to do with the content. You were given complete freedom to post your assertions. The closure was standard procedure and had nothing to do with the content of the thread.
New Members should start HERE to get an understanding of what makes great posts.
Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:
Message 1 Thread Reopen Requests Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum Other useful links:
Forum Guidelines, Style Guides for EvC and Assistance w/ Forum Formatting
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
CanadianSteve Member (Idle past 6501 days) Posts: 756 From: Calgary, Alberta, Canada Joined: |
In no way was i suggesting that the forum was closed because of bias. I was only referencing what i consider to be innapropriate behaviour on the part of an administrator.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminJar Inactive Member |
Okay.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Monk Member (Idle past 3953 days) Posts: 782 From: Kansas, USA Joined: |
I agree. I never like it when admins post bias or sarcasm while operating in admin mode. Admins should be neutral and limit snide remarks to their non Admin persona.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 423 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
I'm just curious. What do you find biased, snide or sarcasm? If I had said Thank God, how would that have been different?
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
CanadianSteve Member (Idle past 6501 days) Posts: 756 From: Calgary, Alberta, Canada Joined: |
It indicated pleasure and relief that a forum you disliked had reached 300 posts and would be closed.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 423 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
And you base that on exactly what? That I said "Witching Hour Allah be praised. Closing this sucker down."? Boy, if that ruffles your feathers, I apologize. I thought it was a rather nice way to end a discussion on Islam.
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
CanadianSteve Member (Idle past 6501 days) Posts: 756 From: Calgary, Alberta, Canada Joined: |
If I misread your intent, i apologize. But, in light of your initial rejection of this topic, in light of your opposition to it being accepted anyhow, and in light of a post or two of yours expressing disdain for it and any information I presented and opinions i expressed (i could look it up for the specifics, if necessary), I'm not convinced I misread you. But I'll leave that door ajar (no pun intended).
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1473 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
You are being disingenuous again, typically evasive. You fought that thread like nothing I've ever seen here before. You often let threads go some way past 300 but there you were ready to pounce at 299, making your own sarcastic post #300. You recently posted an admin warning note to Eltonian James on another thread in which you pronounced his post factually wrong. Well, that's the very matter that was under debate. You can't rightfully just pronounce him wrong in admin mode. You also closed a thread I had posted on with a sarcastic put down of my beliefs along the lines you'd normally express in nonadmin mode. YOu get away with this a lot here. I'm glad Canadian Steve is bringing it up.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1496 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
I'm a big fan of yours, Jar, and I respect you a lot and am proud to number you among science's defenders, but I gotta side with CS and Faith on this one. (With no reluctance on my part; when someone is right, they're right and there should be no shame in pointing that out.)
Consider it, perhaps, part of the principle that we have to hold the evolution side to higher standards because of the shortcomings of creationism. It's unfortunate but we're big enough, right enough, to deal with it. (And hey, we all want creationists here to debate with, so we let them get away with a little more to accomplish that. Unfortunate but necessary.) It's not just you, I think CS and Faith are wrong to single you out in this regard, but I too would like to see a lot more detachment from the moderators. I think it's bad enough when admins post as both moderator and participant in the same thread; sometimes one post right after another. And the occasional "oops didn't mean to post that as a mod" doesn't help either. The humorous fiction that a person's role as mod and participant constitute separate "personas", and that's somehow a guarantee against abuse, strikes me as glib and insulting to the intellect of someone who might very well have a legitimate complaint of bias or abuse. It started out as a joke, I believe, but it's increasingly bandied about as though it's a legitimate response to an accusation of mod power abuse. Mods posting as their regular usernames already enjoy an increased level of cachet and authority bestowed on their posts and positions. Even more so when they appear, no matter how subtlely, to favor one position over another in offical moderator posts. I don't believe that any mod is abusing their power and position on purpose. But I call for mods to hold themselves to a very high standard of conduct and not be lax about drawing the line between participation in a debate and as a referee of conduct. And I say this as someone who has been, and absolutely supports having been, singled out and made an example of in an effort to hold evolutionists to tighter standards. It's bad enough that we allow the same person to be both referee and player in the same "game". Admins shouldn't be making it look even worse by allowing even the suggestion of favoritism to creep into their posts.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminAsgara Administrator (Idle past 2331 days) Posts: 2073 From: The Universe Joined: |
As a moderator I think that I try very hard to be fair and unbiased. I admit that it is difficult at times to keep my personal thoughts out of my moderation posts.
The mods here do not hide their personal feelings and the views of the mods have been discussed on various threads over the years. I suggest that anyone wondering about the moderation here go to the Members button above and do a search by "username" with Admin as the search criteria. Here you will find the 19 members that have ever held a mod position here (AdminMike was a joke that backfired on a member, and the last name was a troll thinking he was a big shot). Now, please look at the number of posts listed for each of these mods. What do you think can be said about the majority of mods with less than 40 posts? Now comes the commercial. I strongly suggest that members* who have a problem with the moderation on this site step up to the plate. Want to be a mod? |
Replies to this message: | |||
Message 14 by CanadianSteve, posted 08-17-2005 12:29 AM | AdminAsgara has not replied |
Message 14 of 23 (233915)
08-17-2005 12:29 AM |
Reply to: Message 13 by AdminAsgara 08-16-2005 11:43 PM |
|
This message is a reply to: | |||
Message 13 by AdminAsgara, posted 08-16-2005 11:43 PM | AdminAsgara has not replied |
Message 15 of 23 (233921)
08-17-2005 2:26 AM |
Reply to: Message 1 by CanadianSteve 08-16-2005 10:17 PM |
|
This message is a reply to: | |||
Message 1 by CanadianSteve, posted 08-16-2005 10:17 PM | CanadianSteve has replied |
Replies to this message: | |||
Message 16 by AdminNosy, posted 08-17-2005 2:38 AM | wj has not replied | ||
Message 18 by CanadianSteve, posted 08-17-2005 10:07 AM | wj has replied |
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024