It appears that some of the campaign speeches might get lost in the day to day replies of this forum. So that all may find those speeches I think that we should make them sticky and combine them so that they are easy to find and not spread out across the topics of the forum.

At present Zero, Tyler, Asguard, Thor, Xev, Cris, GB-GIL Trans-global, CounslerCoffee and James R are the candidates to date.
***wet1***


Greetings to you all of sciforums Religion subforum.


I have been religious, so I completely understand how theists feel. Right?

Not really. You are a unique person. The fine blend of acquired knowledge and inborn talents that you possess is unique to you alone. There are far too many variables in this world for any person to claim to know all of the ones that apply to you.
In that sense, I really can’t claim to know what you think or feel. No one can.

However, I can honestly tell you that I do make constant efforts to understand people. I try hard, by utilizing my intuition to correct the flaws of my knowledge. The flaws in question are prejudices.

True, prejudices are ugly, but they are an understandable vice. In the good old days when mankind scampered around in animal skins and clutched wooden spears, such methods of instinctive pattern recognition were necessary to survival. There simply was no time or energy to spare on puzzling over whether it was the right thing to do or not; there was only life or death.

Now, it is no longer necessary. Our species has dominion over all others, and our survival no longer depends on such devices. There is no longer any excuse for prejudice, save unbreakable habit. We must strive to overcome it by constant mental effort.

I have been religious once. I attended a Presbyterian junior high school, and I grew up with Catholics. My family is slightly Buddhist. Now I am atheist. I realize that some of you are not well disposed toward atheism. I also realize that some atheists are not well disposed toward theism, either. I will not try to be defensive; all I will say is that I am only atheist because I have found that it works for me, and any effort to try to proselytize someone is solely based on self-righteous prejudice. There is no proof that one’s religious view is superior to anyone else’s.

Though I have my prejudices, I strive to break them down. As moderator, I will cooperate with my moderating partner to guide the Religion subforum toward that general direction. The Religion subforum has recently been steeped in prejudice. It needs a pair, theist and atheist, to guide it back to the place of intelligent debate and discussion it once was. The fact that I have prejudices of my own to overcome will help my performance. The difference that sets some apart is that they recognize their shortcomings. I recognize and freely admit that I have serious flaws of my own.

In this light, I ask that you vote me for moderator. As an atheist who freely admits his transgressions of close-mindedness, and who will strive to overcome them and apply the lessons learned, I propose myself as a worthy candidate. I will consider the general will of the people above all others in the Religion forums in my decisions to help me guide it. So help me, people.

Hello, Religion Forum!

Are we excited?

I can't hear you!

That's better.

As your supreme lea... err... moderator, I plan to be fair, even when I don't like doing it. I won't delete posts just because they're posted by Theists, or because they're sort of stupid, like the topic "jesus-blood".

I will only remove content that is offensive as well as clearly not nessecary to that persons' communicating their ideas.

Also, I will be sure to take open suggestions from the people (you) before and after I am voted in.

I won't be irresponsible... I promise. That means that I don't delete Whatmuscles' posts.

Oh, and I won't block anybody.

Also, I have much more time to do my job than any of our other lose... err... I mean candidates have, so I won't do a job from far away like some of our moderators do.

I won'd delete posts just because somebody asks me to. That isn't fair.

Also, I'll give tax cuts to the poor, and raise taxes for the ri... uhm... oops, wrong campaign :o

So, in conclusion, tonight was wonderful!

Be sure to vote for me!

THANKYOU RELIGION FORUMS!!!

I'd like to see other campagining speeches by the other candidates...are GB and me the only ones?

Well so far I'm with zero here. /me watches for others to start campainging.

Took me more than an hour. During class. Sorry teach but I had to.

Hello everybody. Im running for the new moderator position.

First of all Im a theist who holds science in the highest regards. Now 5 reasons to vote for me.

1. Im not bias towards anyone. I treat everyone fairly.

2. I will not seek the banning of anyone unless they have done something very awful.

3. I will never delete an atheists post and I will never delete a theists post. I will only remove obscene material.

4. I will remove profanities. My goal is to keep sciforums clean.

5. Im not a crazed theist. Yes they exist, but I will not block them, they should be heard like everyone else. They can have very good points to. As can crazed atheists.

*EDIT* I have been a member since 10-05-01. Ive watched this place for a long time. So I think that I have the right kind of experience.

Thank you.

Counsler Coffee

Personally, I think sciforums needs something of reform. A few people have told me they aren't going to delete a thread if they become mod. I'll be completely honest - I will.

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=13614
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=13437
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=12725
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=12318

And other such threads would be done away with. My policy (and I assure you this is my policy right now, I'm willing to bet that discussion with other mods and a better understanding of how the job works would change the policy in some small ways) would be to close these threads and then after one or two days at the most, delete them. Anything generally deemed as excessive as far as swearing or name-calling goes will of course also be edited. I will not delete every swear word, but I will not let anything unnecessary stay.

And if it's not myself, please, can we get a long-standing member? I'm all for Xev, Cris or JamesR from the list you gave us Dave. If I had to pick one I'd say Xev, but it really just comes down to who's not going to deal with bullshit. I do not agree at all with the idea of a newbie getting the job. Frankly, I think this is a task best handled by someone who has watched the way sciforums functions for a long time.

Edit to Add
I would like to add that I do not believe whether myself or the other potentials are an atheist or theist is of any issue. The same as I would not base my vote for philosophy forum on what school of thought one follows, I see no reason to consider whether someone is a weak/strong atheist, agnostic or theist (or whatever else). In fact, I believe it shows to high a focus on the issue if you made a point to say that you are "an atheist who won't be prejudice" or "a theist who is open minded" (not singling anyone out here). Let's just deal with who's going to do a great job on keeping the forums clean and on topic.

Everything said here also stands if the Philosophy section wants a mod. And for the Philosophy mod if not myself, without a doubt it's Xev.

When I saw "Tootin' My Horn" I thought it was a bizarre euphemism for masturbation. Your links are buggered.

I promise to send dirty pictures to everyone who votes for me.

I'm an anarchist. I won't close threads unless I absolutely have to, and I am not easily offended.

However, I have little patience for stupidity. If someone like whatsupyall posts things with no redeeming value, I will warn him.

Sciforums risks turning into an idiot's sandbox. I will reverse this trend, but I will not in any way stifle speech, as freedom is one of the very few things I hold sacred.

If I have to close threads, I will. However, I promise to hold that as a last resort. And I'll be willing to listen to any and all complaints...even if they are about your ex-girlfriend stealing your favorite cds.

That said, I will enforce the rules with a lot of flexibility.

If not me, I would definitely support Tyler, Cris, and/or JamesR.

The religion forum needs very little moderation, despite what many might feel.

It does, however, need someone to be familiar with day-to-day activities and be aware of potential offensive or abusive behavior. And during my past 3 years posting in this forum I have seen very little such behavior.

Neither is a moderator needed to generate new ideas or promote discussions. The nature of the subject and the strong feelings involved guarantee there will always be strong content.

I would like to see a moderator who very definitely adopts a hands-off approach. Only in very clear cases of offensive or abusive behavior would intervention be required. Deletion of profanities is another area of direct action but then only where the offensive usage becomes unnecessarily frequent. Swearing is a normal part of life for most people; I see no reason to pretend that this forum is not real life as well.

The deletion of threads should be extremely rare and only in very clear cases. All posts here are to a large degree a matter of creativity, and while some might find some posts offensive or disruptive others might find them to be revelations and an opportunity to view and learn about extremes of human attitudes and behavior. Having that as a permanent research record has value.

On a more positive note a moderator should try to promote courteous behavior between members despite their strong opposing views. And try to discourage ad hominem attacks but instead encourage members to attack arguments and not people. The distinction can be subtle but is the best way to promote courteous debate with potentially extreme content.

The moderator when acting as a moderator as opposed to being a regular poster should maintain complete neutrality when it comes to religious beliefs. The objective of a moderator in this forum should be to take the minimum action necessary to ensure a high quality and courteous powerful debating environment.

Hi everybody,

I do not claim to be an expert on religion. My particular area of expertise is physics, and I already moderate the Physics and Maths forum.

I do not believe it matters whether the moderator of this forum is religious or an atheist. Their ability to be a good moderator is not tied to that. If you're interested, I would put myself somewhere in the middle, with a leaning towards atheism on the grounds that atheistic arguments usually seem more logical to me than religious ones.

If you choose me as a moderator, I will take a fairly hands-off approach to moderation. There are three topics which are said to be most controversial in conversation: politics, sex and (you guessed it) religion. Therefore, it is not uncommon that discussions of religion can become quite heated at times. People on both sides tend to hold strong views which are difficult to sway. A wise man once said that you cannot hope to argue somebody out of something they have not been argued into in the first place, and I think that's particularly applicable in respect of religious convictions of every type.

I <b>will</b> take action in the following cases:

* Where a post or thread attacks a person rather than their position. (A certain amount of this is expected - I'm talking about nasty personal abuse here.)
* Where a post appears to be intended only to inflame members of a certain religious or social group.
* Where an excessive amount of swearing appears. I don't mind the odd swear word. Mostly I am concerned about swearing directed at people rather than their ideas.
* Where a poster posts many threads on essentially the same topic, or continually injects irrelevant arguments into unrelated threads.

I realise that moderating Religion is likely to be much more difficult than moderating Physics. I do not pretend to have all the answers from the start. If I need advice, I will certainly poll posters to the Religion forum for their views on the direction the forum should take.

I am unlikely to be very involved as a poster to the forum. Hopefully, this puts me in a good position to be fair and unbiased in moderating.

Well, I guess I better follow the trend and write a "speech"

Right, lets see.
- I respect peoples believes until they show an obvious disrespect to mine and say I'm "wrong".
- I am extremely hard to insult (moreso lately).
- I don't proclaim to know everything about everything
- I think anyones views are acceptable unless it is totally irrelevant to the thread/forum or is abusive or insulting to a person or group of people.
- Keep a close eye on any possible flame-wars (sometimes they produce something of value. Keyword, sometimes)
- Not fussed about "profanities" or "curse" words as long as it doesn't hinder the flow of the thread.
- I'd treat everyone equally; Friend or Foe, Old or New, Atheist or Theist
- I would be happy to co-moderate with anyone
- And I spend lots of time on Sciforums so problems would be dealt with ASAP

Well, thats my feeble attempt. I really didn't want to do that. I hope I didn't come off as sounding like a politician :(

My reflection, dirty mirror
There's no connection to myself
I'm your lover, I'm your Zero
I'm the face in your dreams of glass
So save your prayers
For when you're really gonna need 'em
Throw out your cares and fly
Wanna go for a ride?



however, as much as i like you...my vote goes to:

Who are these speeches supposed to win over. Porfiry or the members?

If this is a democracy, I vote James R, with Xev being my second choice, even though she's just as special as James.

If this is not a democracy, I'll just be happy pretending my two bits mattered :D.

Neb,

A bit of both I think, but I suspect the hope is that the voters choice will also match with Dave's requirements. If not then it will be interesting. But Dave is God here so who knows what might occur (religious innuendo in a religious forum intended).

question: does that James R guy ever post in this forum?

I really, really don't want the members to vote. Not that it makes me look silly, I don't care about that. There are some members that will deliberatly vote for the stupid choice (which ironically would be me).

I think Dave should have chosen from the nominees

Obviously I have veto.

Ok, Counsler and I have just been discussing something and have concluded that there is a possibility that there could be some vote rigging.

There is a chance that people could create mulitple accounts and vote for themselves over and over again. Now, I know the nominees are smart guys and I'm not pointing any fingers at anyone. But if we can think of it, anyone can. And if it has happened, it would have been done on moderation.

I don't have any hard evidence to back this up. It is just an idea. But I have noticed that there has been a lot of new members today and a majority have not posted.

Again, not pointing any fingers and I'm not implying anyone has or even would do such a thing. I'm just saying it is a possibility.

Thank you for your time

That will not be too much of a concern, Thor. Should such happen it will be apparent. Thanx for bringing this to the forefront though.

The votes have not substantially changed since last night's totals.

No problem.

I just hope people don't think I'm pointing any fingers. I'm merely pointing out a possible flaw in the system.

Thor,
It's pretty trivial for me to check who has voted. I'll take a look at any votes from new members and see if any of their IP addresses match other members. Since this isn't anonymous (from my perspective), there's no chance for cheating.

Ok, thanks for clearing that up. I had an incline that you could do something like that

<i>question: does that James R guy ever post in this forum?</i>

Yes, I do.

For example, see some of my extended arguments with the infamous tony1.

As I said, I probably won't post to this forum a lot, but if appointed moderator I <b>will</b> look at every thread, and will keep a careful eye on the forum to see that it runs smoothly.

Chances are I will throw in the odd post or two from time to time. I wouldn't be volunteering to moderate this forum if I wasn't interested in the discussion here. I enjoy speculating about God, and I like learning about different religious views. This is one way to do that.

Uhh... I take that back.

As moderator of the Religion forums, I will try to allow as free of speech as possible (and so I will not delete such topics as Tyler has said)

However, I will be sure to uphold the rules that y'all agreed to when you registered here.

I will remove any obscene, vulgar, sexually-orientated, hateful, threatening, or illegal content from posts.

While some may see this as my raining on their parade, this IS after all what you agreed to when you signed up.

Also, I will be sure to delete repeated name-calling (the first time you call a person a name, I will not extract it from your post unless it is obscene, but I will remove such things as "little children" or "retard" if they're used excessively)

-------

Now, let me review some statistics on some of our other candidates (nothing hurtful, hopefully)

James R, on average, posts 3.29 posts daily. Much of this count is from earlier, when he was a more active member. Unfortunately, we cannot check statistics for the past month.

He has made 1351 posts. If you search for these posts, you will find the more recent ones are concentrated in the forums not in the philosophy section, but rather in forums on science. While there is nothing wrong with this, can you really expect him to know exactly what has been going on in this forum for the last 6 months?

All I can say about Thor is that most of his posts are in Free Thoughts. But, if you don't vote for me, he is one of the candidates I would reccomend.

Cris is another good candidate. But let's see how many posts he makes a day-- 2.85. However, from what I can tell, most of these are in religion. Another person I would reccomend as an alternative.

Xev is, although one of the favourites, a little too hot-headed, and often finds it hard to keep from calling Theists (and other people who are 'wrong') names, or finding ways to bash them not nessecarily relevant to the discussion. Would you want a moderator like that? While I admit I have done that in the past, I've cut down on that quite a bit in the past month.

As for Coffee, most of his post are in fact NOT in the religion forums. And, despite his claim of being here for quite a while, took quite a long intermission from any posts at all until about two months after I arrived here.

There's nothing really for me to say about Zero here. I just think that often he has a hard time understanding what is meant to be humourous and what is not. But other than that, he's one of the best choices.

As for me, I make 6.77 a day on average. I have many posts, probably half of which are in Religion (the other in Politics, with a small amount in Free Thoughts and a few in other forums)

I am not a n00b, as I registered about 7 months ago.

James R, on average, posts 3.29 posts daily. He has made 1351 posts.

As for me, I make 6.77 a day on average.

Perhaps you should compare quality of posts rather than quantity.

Hi GB,

The analysis of the post rate is interesting. But as you state there is no way to see periods of activity. All we see is an average since the time of joining. For example I will have been here 3 years on 1/1/3. I joined 1/1/0. Clearly I must have been so bored with the millennium celebrations that I chose to spend my time at sciforums instead of partying. Now how is that for dedication?

But I have also had several periods of a month or more when I haven’t posted at all. That would certainly have been enough to reduce my average. These periods have been when I have been engaged in major projects at work or when there has been a lull in sciforums activity. There was a time when days would pass without any posts in Religion. You should realize that the active membership has been much lower than it is now.

But to be an effective moderator does not necessarily mean that he/she must be an extremely active poster. Remember that there is a ‘REPORT’ button on each post that alerts a moderator to an issue, and there are also PMs. All you really want is for a moderator to react quickly and know enough about the subject material to be able to make informed, fair and intelligent decisions.

The real value in James is his cool-headed neutral objectivity. His agnosticism is a real benefit here since he has conditioned himself to try to see both sides of the argument. And the evidence of his posts shows that he is not easily swayed by biased and subjective arguments. That attitude makes him a perfect candidate for a fair and just moderator.

I have to agree with Cris. Post count is irrelevant. If you look at Adam's posting rate it says that he posts something like 16.75 times a day. We all know that Adam post's a lot more then that.

As for my low post count; when I first joined sciforums I mainly stuck in the scifi section. People were nice there and not as rude as they were in the other forums. I was afraid of big posters like, Tiassa and Xev. They made me feel inferior. I had the thought in my head that maybe I shouldn't post in this forum because this person is going to rip apart every little word. And they do that. But I realized that that's the way its going to be so I went for it. For the last few months most of my posts have been in the religion forum. Especially since Ive become a theist.

Oh and I have been here quite a while. So Im not a n00b, Ive actually been here longer then you GB. Just because I don't respond to a thread/post doesn't mean that I don't read it. Sometimes the topic is uninteresting or someone else has already responded with something that I would have said. So really, do I need over 2,000 posts to qualify for a Mod position? Seriously?

*EDIT* I just want to say that I did not start the mud slinging... if thats what this is?:bugeye:

<i>James R, on average, posts 3.29 posts daily. Much of this count is from earlier, when he was a more active member. Unfortunately, we cannot check statistics for the past month.</i>

A few points have already been made, but I'll reiterate them:

1. The count is an AVERAGE over the whole time I've been a registered user here. Lately, my post rate has been considerably higher than that. But this is irrelevant anyway because...
2. Quality should count for more than quantity. Take the most active poster to sciforums - Adam. Many of his posts are cut-and-pastes of news stories. I'm not saying that's a bad thing, but it's certainly easier to do that than to come up with thoughtful original content.

<i>He has made 1351 posts. If you search for these posts, you will find the more recent ones are concentrated in the forums not in the philosophy section, but rather in forums on science. While there is nothing wrong with this, can you really expect him to know exactly what has been going on in this forum for the last 6 months?</i>

Yes, because...

3. The post rate is no indication at all of the READING rate of posts. I read far more posts than I write. I follow the Religion forum far more closely than is apparent from the number of posts I make to the forum. I suspect a lot of other people are in a similar position across sciforums. How many "lurkers" read but seldom post? More than you'd imagine, I think. I post when I have something I want to say.
-----------

I would not like to run any kind of negative campaign against any other candidates. At this stage, I will restrict myself to expressing my support for Cris, who at the time of writing is leading the poll anyway. I think he would make an excellent moderator for this forum. If two moderators are appointed, I would be very happy to cooperate with him.

Originally posted by (Q)
James R, on average, posts 3.29 posts daily. He has made 1351 posts.

As for me, I make 6.77 a day on average.

Perhaps you should compare quality of posts rather than quantity.

I am not referring to seniority.

It shows less community involvement, not quality of involvement.

Cris-- yes, that is very dedicated.

And yes, I have been here when there have been long stretches of no posts in the Religion forum. Like I said, I'm not a n00b :p

However I don't have projects to do at work-- I sit home all day on my ass and do stuff on the Internet. I translate some games to English from Japanese, watch a bit of TV, post a few things at Sciforums, read a couple hundred posts, make a few more posts, wait to see if anybody replies while I'm still at sciforums, go to other sites, come back to Sciforums maybe an hour/5 hours later and check to see if there are any replies to my posts, and then I check to see if there are any new posts.

Now, while I was considering answering an RFP from a local agency needing a webdesigner for a legal kiosk project, I by no means need this money and I would be glad to spend this time at Sciforums instead. You see, while most moderators here may check in 3 times a day at best, and once a month at worst, I check 10-15 times a day at best, and once a week at worst.

So, if somebody makes a post and you're busy on a project, if you're the moderator, you will not be able to take care of that post if it is against forum policy, but I can delete it promptly-- or can I, if I'm not a moderator?

You see, while you're at work (even normal hours), I may be watching a soap opera on tv, bored to death because all the posts at sciforums seem rather boring, and there is nothing else I want to do online or elsewhere in my house.

While I may sound like a loser, I have stuff I do. But generally it's stuff like answering friends' questions about English grammar, or translating games for those gamers not able to read Japanese. So yes, I guess I'm a loser of sorts. :p

'Oh and I have been here quite a while. So Im not a n00b, Ive actually been here longer then you GB. Just because I don't respond to a thread/post doesn't mean that I don't read it. Sometimes the topic is uninteresting or someone else has already responded with something that I would have said. So really, do I need over 2,000 posts to qualify for a Mod position? Seriously?'

I never said I had been here longer than you, or that you were a n00b, rather that you took an extended 'vacation' that included when I registered.

And when did I talk about your post count?

And chances are, if you post more in our other forums-- which I can tell from a search that you do-- that you read them quite a bit more too.

Oh, on second thought, maybe you don't know what "intermission" means and thought I meant something else?

1. The count is an AVERAGE over the whole time I've been a registered user here. Lately, my post rate has been considerably higher than that. But this is irrelevant anyway because...

That's exactly what I said in the portion of my post you quoted. Did you read it? Or did you skim?

2. Quality should count for more than quantity.

If I recall correctly, sometimes your post count gets higher than mine, and some times mine is higher than yours. So no, I'm not trying to say that since I have more posts, I'm better.

However, posting frequency is the best statistical indication that can be generated for us on demand of periods of user activity.

Take the most active poster to sciforums - Adam. Many of his posts are cut-and-pastes of news stories.

Most of them? Usually, that's just the start to a topic. And often, they're accompanied by detailed posts that aren't cap stories.

3. The post rate is no indication at all of the READING rate of posts. I read far more posts than I write. I follow the Religion forum far more closely than is apparent from the number of posts I make to the forum. I suspect a lot of other people are in a similar position across sciforums. How many "lurkers" read but seldom post? More than you'd imagine, I think. I post when I have something I want to say.

Yes, but the fact that you post much more in other forums is some indication that you read them more too. But that's just a good indication, not proof.

I would not like to run any kind of negative campaign against any other candidates. At this stage, I will restrict myself to expressing my support for Cris, who at the time of writing is leading the poll anyway. I think he would make an excellent moderator for this forum. If two moderators are appointed, I would be very happy to cooperate with him.

Thus indicating to us that you expect to win. Actually, it seems quite close between you and somebody else. Are you hiding something from us?

"Thus indicating to us that you expect to win. Actually, it seems quite close between you and somebody else. Are you hiding something from us?"

Richard Nixon the second? No! It's GB! Well GB it's become apparent that I'm not going to 'win' the elecetion, so do not consider this mud-slinging from another runner. You see, Mark, there is nothing in his statement that says he is hiding something or expecting to win. All it says is that if Cris wins he would gladly be a duo-mod with him. I would to. I would also with JamesR. Or Xev. Does that mean I know I'm going to win? Nope. It just means I'd happily duo-mod.


"Oh, on second thought, maybe you don't know what "intermission" means and thought I meant something else?"

--- "Also, I will be sure to delete repeated name-calling (the first time you call a person a name, I will not extract it from your post unless it is obscene, but I will remove such things as "little children" or "retard" if they're used excessively)" ---

Now how can I, a faithful member of sciforums, be expected to believe that little bit of your campaign speech when you go right ahead 3 posts later and insult someone?


You're shaping up to be a great politician, Mark.

GB,

I check sciforums about 5 or 6 times a day. I respond to most of the responses from my other posts. So by checking sciforums I meant that I go through various forums and see if there are any new threads. I also use the "View New Posts" button a lot.

I thought that you were talking about post count.:bugeye: It just seems like you were to me.

I have seen many new members merely post because they want to their post count number go higher. I do not do this, for me it is quality over quantity most of the time. As well as it is for everyone who is in the election.

At the present time it appears that Im not going to win. So I would like to congardulate Cris and JR. The people have elected you! To everyone else Im glad that you ran, keep posting and have fun! Thats what this place is about.

-CounslerCoffee

You see, Mark, there is nothing in his statement that says he is hiding something or expecting to win. All it says is that if Cris wins he would gladly be a duo-mod with him.

No, he says IF two mods are appointed he WOULD be very happy to cooperate with him, which makes it sound like he is 100% sure he would be that second mod.

Now how can I, a faithful member of sciforums, be expected to believe that little bit of your campaign speech when you go right ahead 3 posts later and insult someone?

I challenge you to find in that quote something that I stated that I would delete from posts if I became mod. Can you? No, you can't. Because I didn't say something I would've deleted. Would Goofyfish've deleted that? No. What about wet1? Probably not. What about our other moderators? Chances are, no.

GB,

I do not think there is an expectation that a moderator will be available every second just in case a bad case of member-abuse occurs. You make a case where you are available for a considerable amount of time, but do you then not sleep? What happens if an event occurs while you are asleep, would you then expect to be woken? Would you also never expect to take a vacation? Remember that these forums are open 24x7 and are international.

Neither should there be an expectation that the moderators must read every single post in every thread just in case there is a problem. We have the REPORT option for that and there is an expectation that concerned users would make use of that feature to alert a moderator. Remember also that Porfiry is a backup for urgent events.

And while I consider sciforums to be generally important to me I do not see that it is a matter of life and death that a moderator be expected to respond immediately to an event. If you look at the record of such events then there is very little that is so bad that it can’t wait some hours or perhaps a day or two.

But also consider that your position might change and that you will be involved in projects in the future that take you away from your Internet access. Will you deny these opportunities because you feel dedicated to sciforums? Sciforums is good but that would be an obsession.

But mods do have to take breaks and vacations so having two mods for a busy forum such as Religion makes a great deal of sense.

As the n00b issue; isn’t this all relative? One day is new to someone who has 5 days. And 7 months is relatively new compared to several years. At what point does someone stop being new? And really why should this matter?

Cris-- yes, however I could be availible.

And a project-- no, I don't have a job, and I never have, not since I was born. No occupation. And chances are, I won't have a formal one for two or three years yet. I can't have one for at least one year. At least I'm not supposed to.


And being availible is a big plus. That means I can respond to peoples' PMs promptly. That may make the difference between a great mind becoming an active poster on sciforums, or never making a single post.

And no, I'm not always awake, but I have a very irregular sleep cycle, so I'm not always sleeping at the same time each... uhh... lunar cycle. ;)

Xev is, although one of the favourites, a little too hot-headed, and often finds it hard to keep from calling Theists (and other people who are 'wrong') names, or finding ways to bash them not nessecarily relevant to the discussion. Would you want a moderator like that? While I admit I have done that in the past, I've cut down on that quite a bit in the past month.

Perhaps you may as well go back to your origional "Xev is a bitch who is only tolerated 'cause she has tits" argument? :)

Cris and JamesR seem to be winning. Congrats, guys. I have only one concern, well, two:

1: Do you think you'd be willing to delete nonsense threads? Suppose another Mallory Knox comes along?

2: I presume you will moderate with a light hand. Y'all have a life, and likely won't be censoring every little profanity?

Xev,

seem to be winning.Depends on your perspective. While I currently have more votes than anyone else I don’t have a majority of the total votes. I.e. more votes have gone to others. If such a “win” occurs then it should be tempered with humility and a ready willingness to listen to others such as yourself.

1: Do you think you'd be willing to delete nonsense threads? Suppose another Mallory Knox comes along? Yes, no problem. And if I had doubt about something then the members here have already displayed a willingness to discuss troublesome members in polls and dedicated threads.

2: I presume you will moderate with a light hand. Y'all have a life, and likely won't be censoring every little profanity?That is true. Swearing is a normal part of life for many people, it is reality, and people need to deal with that. Excessive usage is another issue.

But the poll isn’t over yet.

All I can say about Thor is that most of his posts are in Free Thoughts. But, if you don't vote for me, he is one of the candidates I would reccomend
Woah, woah, woah!!! Why? I mean, I wouldn't recommend me...wait a minute, I did. Nevermind then, carry about your business :bugeye:
Anyway, most of my posts are in Free Thoughts because I get bored alot. I'm here pretty much all day (Adam can second that as we seem to be in 'Who's Online' alot together). There hasn't been a day since I've joined that I haven't been here.

Regarding the 'Quantity Vs Quality' arguement, you can always use me as an example ;)
But remember that one mans garbage is another mans gold

To answer cris's question
At what point does someone stop being new?
When they feel comfortable with how everything works and how they should behave

Anyway, to break from the norm of 'elections', I'm gonna be honest. I'd love to see Cris and Counsler co-moderate. Everyone else, please don't take this as an insult or anything, but you're all good people and could moderate reasonably well. But I believe these two would make a great team and bring some stability back to the Religion area.

Other than that, it would be ubercool if Xev does it :D

GB-GIL:

There's no conspiracy going on here. Nobody is rigging the vote count. Right now, it looks like Cris is probably going to be appointed as moderator. Whether there will be one or two, I have no idea. And CounslerCoffee has almost the same number of votes as me at the time of writing, meaning I could easily run third or lower.

Best of luck to you.

Xev:

It's not over yet, but I can hear the fat lady tuning up for Cris. :)

<i>1: Do you think you'd be willing to delete nonsense threads? Suppose another Mallory Knox comes along?</i>

If a thread clearly had no content, I would delete it, but that would be a very rare thing I think. Even when an initial post is stupid, other posters often take the conversation and run with it.

If I am moderator and you think a thread should be deleted for whatever reason, that's what the "Report this post" button is for.

<i>2: I presume you will moderate with a light hand. Y'all have a life, and likely won't be censoring every little profanity?</i>

I'm not a prude. I won't censor all profanity. As I said before, I'm mainly concerned about excessive profanity directed personally at other posters, rather than at their expressed views.

James R,

Whew! Good luck to you and may the best man win.

-CounslerCoffee

James R.


i see. i stand corrected.