Is BootedCat Here Also Moderator Footski?

I’m quite happy for it to be known that I am the moderator referred to. I am a British academic and my language is what you might expect of one such. I don’t do ‘matey’ - on fora or in real life. I have been appalled by the level of animosity directed at the former DPR moderators by a small but vocal group. In 20 years on DPR, I never had any interaction with a moderator and don’t know any of them, though I disliked one or two. I think this thread will put off anyone from becoming a moderator on this site and, though I won’t be bullied off the forum by some extremely aggressive and unpleasant people, I shall certainly think carefully about whether it’s worth acting as a moderator.

I am not sure if you are putting your hand up as the moderator Footski in my op or as the member who sent me the PM I posted later in this thread.

Either way, of course you are entitled to your opinion and post it just like I and everyone else is.

But it is the portrayed authoritative tone, intentional or not, in the PM I posted earlier and in your post attempting to shut down the "DPR Moderators are still at it" thread that imo is not appropriate from anyone who is not in an official moderator role.

There was talk in the "Moderation" thread of trying mediation as opposed to moderation on dprevived and I am totally supportive of that model at least as a trial.

Heavy handed moderation dpreview style will not work here at all looking at the overall comments from members here on dprevived.

And I politely replied informing the sender of the PM that me posting facts about someone is not necessarily a personal attack.

Agree

I'm not sure who with :-)

Thanks for piping up. I think of lot of this has to do with the pent up frustration of years of having DPReview mods, as per the rules, not allow any discussion of moderator behaviour. I have seen many instances where mods were heavy handed, unfair, or simply plain wrong. But if you question them, even politely, watch out. You may lose your account. That isn’t moderation…that is simply, dictatorship. I’m glad we’ve had the opportunity to discuss it here. Maybe a bit to heated. I understand the difficulty as I admin and mod Facebook groups into the many thousands. I’ve been successful at it because I simply do the opposite of what happens at DPReview. Seeing these same people in control at the new DPRForum has given me pause to participate there…well, that and the constant begging for votes on a poll thread.

I’m glad you are here and look forward to your perspective.

First of all, props for speaking up! That said, regardless of how people feel about the DPR moderators, I think they should be welcomed here. Same with the trolls. Conflict is not merely inevitable, but necessary -- who wants to come to a boring forum where everyone tows the party line and/or is afraid to veer from dogma?

The problem is when people in a position of power are not held accountable for their actions. The question, then, is what is the method of accountability? Don't know. One idea I had was that mods would not have term limits, but they would be overseen by a "Mod Squad" whose members would have term limits. People who feel wronged by a mod can appeal to the "Mod Squad". If the "Mod Squad" feels the moderator should be removed, then they would present their case to the "governor". If the governor finds merit in removing the mod, they would present it to the forum and put it to a vote. If a "significant" portion (which may be much lower than a simple majority, as it It is important to not only protect the majority but also protect the minority from a tyranny of the majority) feel the mod should be removed, then the mod is removed, and the position opened up for those that want to have a play. However, I'm sure there are significant holes in my idea, but it's what I've been thinking.

Here's another idea -- WolfsHead can be a personal handler for Bob, alfn, and me. : )

@GB

I fully support the concept of a "Mod Squad" but imo it should be all or part of the Admin group.

The moderators/facilitators must be accountable to Admin imo, not potentially a group of member friends.

If a mediation type model is adopted for the moderators/facilitators then permabans would need to be approved by Admins who would first ask the offending member to show cause as to why they shouldn't be banned.

I'm not sure who makes up the Admin group, but I think it's important for the "Mod Squad" to be refreshed from time-to-time, so as to mitigate "corruption".

Ah -- I see what you mean. The "Mod Squad" should be chosen from volunteers by the Admin, and my vision of how they operate is more of a mediation team. They wouldn't have power to censure or remove a moderator -- they would try to work things out with the moderator, and, if they can't, bring it to the attention of the "governor" who may take action at that point, to include putting it to the forum members in a vote.

Absolutely.