I'll try to clarify my opinion.
Fotonut, I'm not against moderation of either flavor (passive or active), I simply asked a question which you chose not to answer. In case it wasn't clear the question was, what irreversible harm occurs if a moderator is not standing at the ready 24/7/365?
The harm would be that once a thread goes haywire there's no stopping it except with active moderation. If that harm is irreversible or not, i'll leave in the middle, to some it is and to some it wont be.
And once a thread has gone sour, there is basicly only one option left to the mod as far as i can see, and that is the placing of a ban.
Catch problems as or before it starts with a edit to the post or a warning post.
Maybe something like this, "Poster, tone it down, Mod". Both ways are a way of warning the offending poster and others who would like to add fuel to the fire.
You seem to be saying that the "dont take things too seriously" statement is not accurate, why do you feel that? This is in actuality, really just an internet forum, right?
Oh, both statements are accurate. The first one i agree with in part, one
should not take things too seriously, (
but clearly some do ).
The second statement is often used by those that would like the mess, once started, to continue, as if to say that because it is a Internet forum, it means that even basic manners and civility can be thrown out of the window.
Therefore, my conclusion is, moderation needs to be active not retro active.
The powers that be DPR have decided that (active) moderation is the way to go, not only in the FTF but in other forums as well. There must be a reason they plan to go this route, that reason most likely, is the continuing disharmony in some of the forums.
That's just my 0.02 euro cents. (and which are devaluing as i type, :x)
I hope i have answered your question.
Greets.
Fotonut.
--
Snap snap - click click.
FujiLinks -
http://fujilinks.110mb.com/index.html
