Them good ol' moderation blues...

Thank you Eliot for your slightly suspicious attitude. While I understand that many may, have and possibly do suspect that those with power here may be tempted to abuse it, I attempt to remain impartial and do not take advantage of any access I have, except when I have to. I use the same facilities as all other registered members have access to. In fact, I have abstained from voting all together in some instances, like now.

As for moderating comments, if I think something is unfair or lacking in substance, I may moderate it down regardless of the focus and usually with only a poor rating. Purely offensive and clearly Trollish comments will get a Complete Rubbish, and obvious SPAM I will take more direct administrator access with.

When all is said and done, when you have a voting system like that which exists on this site, then it is important that you have more people voting equitably. It is human nature to react to things that offend, yet we do not acknowledge that which we like. As I have access to the logs, I can tell you and anyone else who reads this that the number of negative votes that get posted far out-weigh the positives by a league and a half. Occasionally, there will be a flurry of positive voting for certain threads, and there are really only a handful of consistent positive voters of which I am one of.

In addition, results of voting for Comments and Replies (which I do not have access to by the way) I assume are, based on apparent trends, far less suported than voting for entire threads. Negative votes however appear to be far more abundant than anything else.

The system is provided to give users the power to regulate content on the site and in order for it to work effectively, it needs to be used effectively. Currently, it is not, in my personal opinion, as we have a distinct lack of regular supporters and a large number of rebels.

Absit invidia (and DFT :nono:)

Jeff Watkins

Looking for an Agent? Read this first!!