It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Mods/SuperMods/Admin ???

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Nov, 27 2005 @ 06:54 PM
I see! Thanks for answering my questions!

posted on Nov, 27 2005 @ 07:04 PM
Just A Thought

Originally posted by One Man Short of Manhood
You could probably however make my posting life a living hell.

I should think before I hit the "submit post" button.

It's never bad advice to suggest that a member think before posting.

However, as for whether mods are free to abuse members, that's a more complicated subject.

Speaking as a former Councilor who now is free to spend my spare time lounging around drinking beer, munching chips, watching The Game -- and of course, preaching from my chair about ATS -- I can relate that moderator abuse is one of the most common complaints members submit.

Despite the fact that at least 99.9% of those kinds of complaints tend to be utterly bogus (surly and disruptive members are prone to label the mods as “Nazis” when they don't get their way), there are rare occasions where a member has a point.

Mods are human, and when the fur starts to fly, they do have the discussion forum equivalent of a gun in their hands, after all.

But one thing I learned in monitoring the Complaints forum is that every complaint of moderator abuse, no matter how patently ridiculous, is nonetheless investigated by several different people, including all the kinds of staff members mentioned in this thread.

If a mod should be found to be using his or her powers inappropriately, that's the fastest way to being “de-modded”, and if it's egregious, can lead to a ban of the former moderator as well. Every staff member knows this, and you better believe they take it seriously.

So while UM_Gazz may joke about what he might do as an admin, I can assure you that, joking aside, he takes his job as a moderator very seriously.

And if someday he should be handed the “rack o' skittles” admins are given, I'm confident he wouldn't go around banning people willy-nilly like Thomas does.***

The Right Ban For The Job

Originally posted by masqua
I'd better mention it was 'the odd man out' remark that prompted the post above, since TC is an administrator. I meant no disrespect....

Recent developments with the banning hammer and the subsequent silence on this hilarious thread has got my jittery.

No need to worry. Thomas bans because he loves.***

Naw, really. If you'd have seen all the behind-the-scenes deliberation I've seen about banning members, you wouldn't be worried.

While “accidental” bans can happen, the senior staff is very conscientious about correcting such (rather unusual, and often amusing) problems, and never deliberately bans someone without careful consideration of the circumstances.

The fact that I'm still here is proof enough of that.

*** I am so totally kidding about that... or am I? WooOOooOOooOOoo.

posted on Nov, 27 2005 @ 09:40 PM
Since we're on the topic of mods here, I just have two questions to ask. The first is, has anybody ever been de-modded against their will? And the second is, did we ever figure out what happened to MacKiller? Because I really miss him.

posted on Nov, 27 2005 @ 10:10 PM
Demodulated Signals

Originally posted by cyberdude78
Since we're on the topic of mods here, I just have two questions to ask. The first is, has anybody ever been de-modded against their will?

Bearing in mind that I don't speak in an official capacity and may well be mistaken, I believe the answer to that question is "yes".

However, it is a longstanding (and wise) staff policy to generally not discuss such things out of respect for the members involved and in the interest of minimizing unnecessary drama.

Banned Of Brothers

Originally posted by cyberdude78
And the second is, did we ever figure out what happened to MacKiller? Because I really miss him.

As in the case above, the staff rarely discusses banned members for the same reasons that it does not discuss staff disciplinary actions.

The decision to ban a member can be made for many different reasons, all of them invariably involving some severe violation of the Terms And Conditions Of Use or another, but banned members are unable to speak in their defense if we discuss them in the forums (since they can't post) and are still entitled to respect as former fellow ATSers, so discussion of them is discouraged.

It's not a “forget them and never speak of them again” sentiment as best I can tell, but simply a recognition that when a member must leave for whatever reason, the less said, the better.

I used to feel differently, but having seen a bit of what goes on behind the curtain, I now strongly agree with this policy, and hope my fellow members won't misunderstand the intent and reasoning involved.

For what it's worth, there are some banned members I also miss sorely, but the only thing for it is to wish them well wherever they may be.

posted on Nov, 27 2005 @ 10:26 PM
Well with I didn't think it was actually disciplinary action taken against him. I just remember hearing that his account was hacked or something, and Skeptic lost contact with him or something. So I was just sort of wondering if that mysterious disappearnce was ever solved.

I wasn't trying to get disrespectful to Mac, I've just been curious as to what happened. Because one day I'm in the Mackiller fanclub, then he's gone.

new topics

top topics
<< 1   >>

log in