ayo can i get a list of sitewide mods?

I knew the mods were perverts

ftr we can't lock this thread because of EIII's "in b4 thread lock" post way upthread

haha

lolol I mixed up this thread with the other one, oops

anyway you can't lock this one because there's a picture of a kitten and a dog hugging what kind of a heartless monster does that

safari slash mod pron

madaslashgar

imo it was kind of hilarious and sad how jhosh made a pretty reasonable suggestion about mods leaving their attitudes at the door when doing mod business and got a truckload of mod 'tude.

i think me & jhosh hugged it out off-board.

well he did start out with "revoke wmc mod privs" so

xpost

i really don't think i brought very much attitude through the door at all, is what baffles me.

tbh i missed that post before the other jhosh post, i can see how that sets a bad tone for what he was trying to say

give a short explanation of mod actions explaining how a thread or poster has broken the rules or mores of ilx

― ice cr?m, Wednesday, December 2, 2009 2:05 PM (3 hours ago) Bookmark

this is the important part, not the who did what first.

haha, I was wondering if you'd seen that because I kept looking at your post and going "... Really?"

xpost: [Removed Illegal Link]

oh that's annoying

That is supposed to be a link to the admin log, which has exactly what you are asking for.

I think the notes currently on the admin log were put in after the fact.

xpost hoisted by yr own petard :P

p.s. the log only does that if the admins fill it out

yeah but pretty much every important mod action it does get filled out - i mean if i do a comedy yellow card, i dont bother, but if someone gets banned, im not going to leave it blank, and i think this is generally the case

Notes are always put in after the fact; you can't specify reasons when banning or locking a thread. If you mean they were put in after jhos complained, that might be true but I don't think this thread had anything to do with it (only WmC can say for sure but most of us try very hard to keep that info updated unless it's just "uh fix this typo/delete this accidental duplicate thread" type requests)

also sarahel, the blank always gets filled in after the fact, mods need to go to the admin log afterwards and fill it in

xpost yep what dan said

no I meant that the reasons were changed after jhos complained.

if thats true, and you know it, i am envious of your spare time re:admin log observation

my love of the admin log is well-documented.

you guys close ranks really fast at the slightest bit of criticism.

lol u paranoid

How is saying "only WmC can say if this thread prompted him to update the admin log" "closing ranks"? At this point, I think you're just criticizing in order to criticize.

How does one becoIme a mod? I am just curious.

err become

and how does one becalm a mod?

Don't participate in threads like this.

she will ban herself

I am really curious - that is all.

therefore, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the universitatus committeeatum e plurbis unum, i hereby confer upon you the honorary position of sitewide mod

masonic rite - ur selected and led into a cave thru a secret entrance and u must repeat the oath of stet in latin while holding aloft a scroll upon which the entire admin log 2000-present day is inscribed

a lot of it had to do with filling in times when people would be online so there were no dead spots where it was unlikely a mod would be available. i think i also got asked because i was a pretty dissenting opinion on a lot of policy threads (hence my board lawyering is not necc a bad thing comment upthread to max).

also i am really really charming

^^ not an actual masonic rite.

ur selected by a single tap on the shoulder - in ur case literally as RS is actually the secret illuminati controller of ilx

masonic boom rite

i know the mod process so i can never be a mod - neither can any of u now sorry

How does one becoIme a mod? I am just curious.

― bear say hi to me (ENBB), Thursday, 3 December 2009 00:00 (37 minutes ago)

Back in the old old ilx days, the call went out for a bunch of ppl to step forward to help admin the site, as it was getting much busier than before. As i remember it, the 8 or 9 people who stepped backwards last got the poison chalice handed to them.

In more recent years it's been kind of ad hoc, if the need was felt for more admins, ppl who seemed sort of OK, not prone to flying off the handle got asked. the odd one was daft enough to say yes.

see, I feel bad that that's actually true, because there are people who weren't prone to flying off the handle before they were mods and maybe are a bit more now.

could you give specific examples of "flying off the handle"?

demanding citation for every general statement, for instance

basically i think hes asking whether you are referring to me or dan or both

more broadly i don't just mean current mods but the whole year of tombot that imo poisoned the well and brought out a lot more discontent about the "get in there and mix it up and defend mod decisions" style of modding. even if noone's been nearly as bad since, i feel like it kinda set a bad tone on both ends of things.

ban em all, let mod sort em out

i mean the haughty tone you guys often take is kind of that of elected officials facing a hostile muckraking media, which has started to feel increasingly ridiculous. the whole "grin and bear it, it's just a message board" attitude should cut both ways, which is to say i don't understand why anyone would take a thankless volunteer gig like modding if they didn't have the disposition to be really chill about it most of the time.

see but the only reason i get in and "defend" mod decisions is because i agree with them, not because im circling the wagons or anything. i have a ton of confidence in the current mods (mostly because i am one of them and i am awesome).

xxpost

in response to that i am going to return to my previous uh dude we are people response from upthread. the only way you are going to get people that are dispassionate about mod stuff as mods is if they are detached from the community in general, which means they would be pretty shitty mods

fair enough

demanding citation for every general statement, for instance

― ess-tee-oh-pee (some dude), Thursday, 3 December 2009 12:36 (18 minutes ago)

lol @ this

in response to that i am going to return to my previous uh dude we are people response from upthread. the only way you are going to get people that are dispassionate about mod stuff as mods is if they are detached from the community in general, which means they would be pretty shitty mods

― bearinthebumpercaremoticon.jpg (jjjusten), Wednesday, December 2, 2009 7:45 PM (42 minutes ago) Bookmark

ideally all that personality and passion and bias that every poster has would be dropped when you put on the moderator hat. being able to pull that off is why i would never be a good mod.

that is cute but totally unrealistic