The choices are clear. Post your opinion if you wish but be aware that the moderator may delete your post if you cross any of his/her unstated forum rules.


My Personal opinion:
The current moderation is nonsense and exhibits no form whatsoever. It is heavily biased and when there are no forum rules pertaining to what a moderator may or may not take action on, it is unclear at best. At worst it's a tyrants dream.

I think the moderator is showing some bias, but perhaps that is part of a learning curve.

I don't think it is biased, a little heavy handed at times, but not biased.

I didn't vote because I don't believe the forum moderator's are biased, but I also don't think they are doing a "Great Job".  As stated by many others on other moderation topics, there has to be consequences depending on the severety/consistancy of the forum rules that are being broken.

I also agree with Alien in that I believe this is a learning experience for all of us, including the Forum Moderator's. I'm willing to guess that the ones employed by Ken to do the moderating haven't done moderation before and since there was only recently a call for moderation, it's still a new system.  Trying to find an even playing ground that both allows strong opinions which are so prevalent in the contribution forums but also keep things from getting out of hand can be difficult. We have a lot of passionate people in this community, which is great, just so passionate that sometimes they can ruin other passionate and even new community member's enjoyment.

Anyway, I think we all need to be patient and not take the actions of the Forum Moderator's to heart so much at this point. The community is going through a transition. I also think it's important to continue to have posts such as this one that may help Ken, Gerri and the forum moderators what the community wants to see as well as possibly give advice to what types of moderation works best in these kinds of forums.

I would have voted for a middle-ground option here if there were one to choose. In the end, I voted that they're fair and doing a good job.

I think that rather than being unfair, they are often incomplete or "late to the party". I had an exchange with another user in a thread where I was called a lot of names. The posts were there for days. In another thread, I apparently said something "off topic" (can't remember what it was) and it was deleted within 6 minutes. 

Shortly thereafter, the posts where I was called names were also deleted from the other thread. Some still remained, but most were gone. It seemed like they were playing catch-up. In their clean up, I lost some posts which had received good feedback. That's the way it goes, I guess. There's a saying that the law is a blunt instrument. I think we've seen that here with the moderation.

I think the mods are not here all of the time. I don't think they're biased against any of us. I think they are not thorough though, and that gives the appearance that some are allowed to do as they please.

I don't believe it's biased but I do believe that this poll should be in the "Website Discussion" forum.

Quoting Dr. Killpatient:

Quote:
Quoting m.cellophane:

Quote:
In their clean up, I lost some posts which had received good feedback.

I don't think it affected your count.  When a thread went poof in which I had a post that had a green arrow, that post no longer displayed in my list of recent feedbacks but my count did not change.

I'm not sure that m.cellophane worried about his reputation .
But a post that received good feedback is supposed to be "correct", so should not be deleted. That is how I understood his post, perhaps because I fully agree with that.

Quoting Dr. Killpatient:

Quote:
...the reader thought the post was helpful or liked what was said.

That is what I called "correct". If we consider people do not like insults, a helpful and non offensive post should not be deleted.