Time Minimum for Moderators

[BossC]

The rules were finished last fall. Here is the topic:

viewtopic.php?f=126&t=147344

Best of luck.

BossC

[packrat]

As a regular Joe, there are a few things I'd like to see:
--For one, an age minimum. For me, it would be 30 or older. Of course, that would probably eliminate too many people so I'd settle for 21 or older.
--Secondly, one of the qualifications should be the ability to write complete sentences, including punctuation marks and proper capitalization. Spelling errors are okay. The need for Hooked on Phonics isn't.
--Thirdly, I think that anyone who ASKS to be a moderator should be turned down automatically. It should be by invitation only. If you guys don't already know who amongst the members would make a good moderator, then that is just sad.

And no, I don't want to be a moderator. But all in all, I'm glad you finally came up with some parameters. It's a start...

[countrygal23]

As a regular Joe, there are a few things I'd like to see:
--For one, an age minimum. For me, it would be 30 or older. Of course, that would probably eliminate too many people so I'd settle for 21 or older.
--Secondly, one of the qualifications should be the ability to write complete sentences, including punctuation marks and proper capitalization. Spelling errors are okay. The need for Hooked on Phonics isn't.
--Thirdly, I think that anyone who ASKS to be a moderator should be turned down automatically. It should be by invitation only. If you guys don't already know who amongst the members would make a good moderator, then that is just sad.

And no, I don't want to be a moderator. But all in all, I'm glad you finally came up with some parameters. It's a start...

srry. i hope no one is mad at me

[BossC]

--Thirdly, I think that anyone who ASKS to be a moderator should be turned down automatically. It should be by invitation only. If you guys don't already know who amongst the members would make a good moderator, then that is just sad.

I AGREE!!! BUt that's not how it works, so we had to come up with some rules.

As for the age thing, you are SUPPOSED to be 13 before you join fanmail, but age doesn't mean maturity, so it is kind of half and half on that one .

BossC

[dfreely]

--Thirdly, I think that anyone who ASKS to be a moderator should be turned down automatically. It should be by invitation only. If you guys don't already know who amongst the members would make a good moderator, then that is just sad.

Isn't that true. This forum is the only one I know where members can apply to become a moderator, and it obviously just makes things worse.

For the age minimum, it sounds like to me that kids shouldnt be allowed to be a moderator just because they are young. im 12 and i know ALOT about fan mail and i help people out who are older than me.

While it's nice to have moderators that are knowledgeable and helpful, the job of a moderator is to edit and delete posts as necessary, remove spam, ban members, etc - it's not just simply knowing a lot about something and helping people out.

[packrat]

As for the age thing, you are SUPPOSED to be 13 before you join fanmail, but age doesn't mean maturity, so it is kind of half and half on that one .

BossC

Boss, that was exactly what I was speaking (or typing) to. Maturity. While I can agree that being 21 years old doesn't guarantee a certain level of maturity over a teenager, it does help a bit on average. That's also part of the reason why I don't like the idea of people asking to be moderators. It's hard to sort out the intentions of the person submitting the request. Most of the young kids look at the "glory" and not the responsibilities. Not all. But most. Okay, so that was me several ice ages ago.

One other thing just occurred to me. This may be a bit off-topic, but I think it ties in somehow. The mods, or even the trainees should be enforcing an obscure thing known as bulletin board etiquette. The one I'm specifically refering to is typing out one's words. We have members here from all over the world who's first language isn't "English-cell-phone-text-speak," and I've seen more than once where they've been tripped up because someone replied in texting shorthand. (Not to mention that it hurts my eyes. But that's another subject for a rainy day.)

[khackdrums]

For one, an age minimum. For me, it would be 30 or older. Of course, that would probably eliminate too many people so I'd settle for 21 or older.

30?! That's a bit unrealistic... An age requirement of 18 would be more practical. Of course, there would be room for exceptions.

Khackdrums

[legendwithoutaname]

There is a current GM that just pads their count and rarely post anything of value other than Congrats blah..blah

[marokee]

~

[packrat]

For one, an age minimum. For me, it would be 30 or older. Of course, that would probably eliminate too many people so I'd settle for 21 or older.

30?! That's a bit unrealistic... An age requirement of 18 would be more practical. Of course, there would be room for exceptions.

Khackdrums

While I don't see it as unrealistic, I am realistic enough to know that it won't fly. I'm not so much speaking to an age level per se, but to a level of maturity. Since maturity is extremely difficult to discern, about the only way to attempt to find relatively mature people to fill any open position is to have an age minimum. I don't foresee a need for exceptions. If no one is available that meets the criteria, it most often is better to do without.