Closed Thread
Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 126

Thread: So you think you can moderate

  1. #21
    (He is actually in love with you)

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by spidergoat View Post
    I would like to moderate Varda.
    Admit it; moderate wasn't the first word you thought of for that sentence.

  3. #23
    Purveyor of Truth and Fact
    Posts
    5,044
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    OMG! You're second one I'm seconding.
    Kit, you'd make a brilliant mod for SF&F.

    You missed some of your qualifications: rational, fair (to a fault sometimes), sense of humour and definitely balanced.

    PS I'm not in love with you.
    Heh, I appreciate the vote of confidence Dywyddyr... even if I have to stop, stare at your name, then my keyboard, and then your name again for a minute before I can type it

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by Gustav View Post
    i like to moderate bebelina
    Many have tried and failed.

    I would like to point out to our current moderators how Gustav, that you have so much trouble with, becomes docile and obedient like a lamb whenever I am present.

    If you make me moderator this could become a normal behaviour for him.

  5. #25
    God is not inside the box.. NMSquirrel's Avatar
    Posts
    4,895
    um..duh..I want to moderate Religion, Free thoughts if needed..

    i have been here long enough for all to see how i work,
    i also think i have expressed in detail in other threads my qualifications and desires for moderatorship.

  6. #26
    Dr. Probably Not GeoffP's Avatar
    Posts
    20,005
    I wouldn't mind picking up Human Science. I mean, it's what I'm supposed to be bloody doing, it seems. Without giving anything away, I'm submitting two articles on human science in the next month or so. So I like humans, and their science, and science that pertains to them, because I love large datasets freely given to examine dubious ideas. And who doesn't love that? Well, Australians, obviously, but none of the rest of us. Anyway, I can separate shit from sugar, or have so far here and elsewhere. Anyway: I get Human Science, and I understand also the array of models from which we draw our impressions, insofar as biology goeth.

    My heart does cry out for Parapsychology and other forms of madness tho; not because I can believe in it, but because I so desperately want to. Ye gods, what beloved madness brings the youth of Man, where a monster waits in every wood and aliens prowl the stars? Where ghostly apparations stalk their own graves and even Elvis might see fish fall from the sky from his porch in a secluded Alabama retirement home?

    I mean, it's only too bad it's all bollocks so near as anyone can tell, except for the falling fish. But wouldn't it be nice if that sense of mystery could be fed, somehow? So long as no one goes round sacrificing people to Cthulu, I mean. We've been down that road once too often, to my mind.

    Or Sci-Fi also. I reads a bit of it, I does; the usual round of dubious characters.

    Now on to slagging the other candidates.


    ************************************************** ************************************************** *******

    Edit: In my haste, I neglected to cover a few of James' areas.

    I'm interested in Moderating because I think there's a great deal SF could do: as a semi-science forum with a wide range of targeted zones, SF is in an enviable position for growth and development. I believe that SF is really only at its outset, and that it presents a very interesting base for such growth. I don't have many definite ideas on this at present; I think it would be necessary first to see SF "from the other side" as it were.

    Subforum-wise, I were to run Human Science, problems would be dealt with fairly and equitably: in short, scientifically. I'm willing to let people run with arguments so long as there is suitable intellectual or published backing. Flame-outs would be shut down after a reasonable interlude, but the first step would be to post in the thread to try and calm things, taking arguments from either side. I think this might produce the environment that some have alluded a need for. I think I have pretty wide acceptance herein; there are only a few individuals with which it is really impossible to achieve rapport of some kind. Why, my even-handedness is simply legendary.

    If I were to run Pseudoscience, problems would be dealt with by writing the monikers of each combatant on a piece of paper, crumpling them up into tiny balls and then throwing them in the air while standing in the middle of a 4' diameter circle. Anyone whose name landed within the circle would be adjuged reasonable and anyone outside the circle unreasonable and ostracized accordingly, except on randomly selected weekly "Backwards Days" identified by a series of bootstrapped random integer passes using Excel.

    Or, more likely, just the method described above for Human Science, excepting that the bounds of reasonability would have to be stretched to include... well, the mind shudders, really. 'More loose thresholds for acceptance', I guess, relative to other parapsychological arguments, and 'rude laughter', I guess, compared to non-parapsychological arguments. Seriously, though, I suppose that, secretly harbouring a love of the stuff, that I should be slightly 'over-fair' to produce a treatment of the matter suitable for those consuming the sub-forum. And why not? That's what it's supposed to be.
    Last edited by GeoffP; 09-30-11 at 08:58 AM.

  7. #27
    Valued Senior Member
    Posts
    2,788
    Quote Originally Posted by GeoffP View Post
    I wouldn't mind picking up Human Science. I mean, it's what I'm supposed to be bloody doing, it seems. Without giving anything away, I'm submitting two articles on human science in the next month or so. So I like humans, and their science, and science that pertains to them, because I love large datasets freely given to examine dubious ideas. And who doesn't love that? Well, Australians, obviously, but none of the rest of us. Anyway, I can separate shit from sugar, or have so far here and elsewhere. Anyway: I get Human Science, and I understand also the array of models from which we draw our impressions, insofar as biology goeth.

    My heart does cry out for Parapsychology and other forms of madness tho; not because I can believe in it, but because I so desperately want to. Ye gods, what beloved madness brings the youth of Man, where a monster waits in every wood and aliens prowl the stars? Where ghostly apparations stalk their own graves and even Elvis might see fish fall from the sky from his porch in a secluded Alabama retirement home?

    I mean, it's only too bad it's all bollocks so near as anyone can tell, except for the falling fish. But wouldn't it be nice if that sense of mystery could be fed, somehow? So long as no one goes round sacrificing people to Cthulu, I mean. We've been down that road once too often, to my mind.

    Or Sci-Fi also. I reads a bit of it, I does; the usual round of dubious characters.

    Now on to slagging the other candidates.


    ************************************************** ************************************************** *******

    Edit: In my haste, I neglected to cover a few of James' areas.

    I'm interested in Moderating because I think there's a great deal SF could do: as a semi-science forum with a wide range of targeted zones, SF is in an enviable position for growth and development. I believe that SF is really only at its outset, and that it presents a very interesting base for such growth. I don't have many definite ideas on this at present; I think it would be necessary first to see SF "from the other side" as it were.

    Subforum-wise, I were to run Human Science, problems would be dealt with fairly and equitably: in short, scientifically. I'm willing to let people run with arguments so long as there is suitable intellectual or published backing. Flame-outs would be shut down after a reasonable interlude, but the first step would be to post in the thread to try and calm things, taking arguments from either side. I think this might produce the environment that some have alluded a need for. I think I have pretty wide acceptance herein; there are only a few individuals with which it is really impossible to achieve rapport of some kind. Why, my even-handedness is simply legendary.

    If I were to run Pseudoscience, problems would be dealt with by writing the monikers of each combatant on a piece of paper, crumpling them up into tiny balls and then throwing them in the air while standing in the middle of a 4' diameter circle. Anyone whose name landed within the circle would be adjuged reasonable and anyone outside the circle unreasonable and ostracized accordingly, except on randomly selected weekly "Backwards Days" identified by a series of bootstrapped random integer passes using Excel.

    Or, more likely, just the method described above for Human Science, excepting that the bounds of reasonability would have to be stretched to include... well, the mind shudders, really. 'More loose thresholds for acceptance', I guess, relative to other parapsychological arguments, and 'rude laughter', I guess, compared to non-parapsychological arguments. Seriously, though, I suppose that, secretly harbouring a love of the stuff, that I should be slightly 'over-fair' to produce a treatment of the matter suitable for those consuming the sub-forum. And why not? That's what it's supposed to be.
    You have my vote.

  8. #28
    Dr. Probably Not GeoffP's Avatar
    Posts
    20,005
    Thanks Emil.

  9. #29
    Valued Senior Member kira's Avatar
    Posts
    1,577
    Bells was a good mod for Human Science and so was S.A.M. for Biology & Genetic. Maybe they can be reinstated to join the existing mods in that forums.

    Good = fair, balance, and well qualified. Also, they are women (there are no women on the mods squad now, come on, SF!)

    p.s.: no, I am not nominating myself. I have no time, no patient, etc.
    Last edited by kira; 10-01-11 at 10:15 AM.

  10. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by kira View Post
    Bells was a good mod for Human Science and so was S.A.M. for Biology & Genetic. Maybe they can be reinstated to join the existing mods in that forums.

    Good = fair, balance, and well qualified. Also, they are women (there are no women on the mods squad now, come on, SF!)

    p.s.: no, I am not nominating myself. I have no time, no patient, no interest, etc.
    Bells quit on her own though. Also, she isn't too flattered by the women argument.

  11. #31
    Valued Senior Member kira's Avatar
    Posts
    1,577
    Quote Originally Posted by Enmos View Post
    Bells quit on her own though. Also, she isn't too flattered by the women argument.
    I know. I don't say she should be chosen because she is a woman, I just wanted to say that in addition to all necessary quality needed, she is a woman, which is good to balance the mod squads. It doesn't matter if Bells and Sam happened to be men, in my opinion they still make good mods.

    Also, it wasn't the first time Bells gave up the mod position, maybe she would change her mind.

  12. #32
    Valued Senior Member
    Posts
    3,909
    I would like to moderate Physics & Math. I promise to clean the forum of sockpuppets , cranks and posers.

  13. #33
    Valued Senior Member kira's Avatar
    Posts
    1,577
    I retract my statement, I just noticed after I read the OP again, this thread is not to nominate others. So, they can nominate themselves. Sorry for that.

  14. #34
    Valued Senior Member
    Posts
    2,788
    Quote Originally Posted by Tach View Post
    I would like to moderate Physics & Math. I promise to clean the forum of sockpuppets , cranks and posers.
    LOL...clean the forum of posters?
    Only moderators between them....LOL

  15. #35
    Valued Senior Member
    Posts
    3,909
    Quote Originally Posted by Emil View Post
    LOL...clean the forum of posters?
    Learn how to read : POSERS.

  16. #36
    Kitt for SciFi / About Members.

    I third it.

    ~String

  17. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by kira View Post
    Bells was a good mod for Human Science and so was S.A.M. for Biology & Genetic. Maybe they can be reinstated to join the existing mods in that forums.

    Good = fair, balance, and well qualified. Also, they are women (there are no women on the mods squad now, come on, SF!)

    p.s.: no, I am not nominating myself. I have no time, no patient, etc.
    As I recall there was a reason SAM was removed, and that Bells left because of things behind the scenes between the mods. Bells was indeed a good mod.

  18. #38
    Purveyor of Truth and Fact
    Posts
    5,044
    Quote Originally Posted by superstring01 View Post
    Kitt for SciFi / About Members.

    I third it.

    ~String
    Thanks for the support superstring

  19. #39
    Dr. Probably Not GeoffP's Avatar
    Posts
    20,005
    Hell, I'll fourth it.

    ...Who are you again?

  20. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by spidergoat View Post
    I would like to moderate Varda.
    I nominate spidergoat for the religion forum

Similar Threads

  1. By wynn in forum SF Open Government
    Last Post: 07-30-11, 04:16 AM
    Replies: 2
  2. By GeoffP in forum Free Thoughts
    Last Post: 12-20-10, 08:44 PM
    Replies: 4
  3. By kmguru in forum Religion Archives
    Last Post: 08-08-10, 11:15 AM
    Replies: 1
  4. By Norsefire in forum Religion Archives
    Last Post: 04-15-08, 10:03 PM
    Replies: 123
  5. By Michael in forum Religion Archives
    Last Post: 01-28-07, 04:36 PM
    Replies: 85

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •