The People's Choice

Originally Posted by Chameleon Company

Seeing as there was no vetting process for the selection of the Keystone Cops, is anyone surprised that enforcement has not only been spotty, and at times willy-nilly, but that in the end its application was guaranteed to be fraught with silliness ! Not that all who have wielded it have been careless, but it only takes a few loose cannons to start the border wars. Is the new system working ? If I knew what it was supposed to accomplish, I might be able to render an informed opinion ! But being as I could not rationalize the means it was empowered with, I can't begin to assume what its goals were. With that as a guide, its possible it has been enormously successful

If there is a complaint worth talking about here, then me thinks its with the person who decided to ding Ben. That's my $.02 worth ... better yet, to put it in its proper perspective, if Ben ever accumulates enough to pay a fine, then that ding will have cost him about $.07. Hell, I'll PayPal in a quarter to the "Ben Fund" if a few folks will just take a step back and try to imagine even just a few ways that their time could be better spent. Heck, drinking a cold beer is time better spent.

I have been tempted to chime in on this thread a couple of times, but I think this is my cue to do so. First of all, I think referring to us as "Keystone Cops" (and some of the other nicknames I have seen tossed about) is uncalled for. Maybe you didn't approve of the guidelines that Rich chose to narrow the field, maybe the fact that somebody could (if they chose to do so) "buy in" to this group diminishes it in your eyes, maybe the fact that some of the people currently involved didn't HAVE to pay just rubs you raw, and maybe you think that some of us SHOULD NOT have the capability to issue warnings. Deal with it. There was no way Rich could have made people happy, so he picked a way that made some sense to him. Keep in mind - when he has asked for input, he gets crap. If he doesn't agree with a particular piece of input, he gets crap. If he doesn't follow the input...you get the picture. How many times have people advised him to just make the decisions that will work for him, and not ask for input from the membership? Well that is what he did. Many people foresaw problems, and some of them were not disappointed. This is still evolving, and people are trying to get a feel for things.

One thing that should be made clear is that the members of this group are, first and foremost, Fauna members. We are (sort of like) moderators, in the sense that we have the ability to help enforce SOME of the rules. It has been said of the site moderators that they can post & be involved in threads AS THEMSELVES (vs "as moderators"). That is no less true of us...probably more true, in fact, because most of us were pretty active in the forums before stepping into this role. No doubt this could easily cause some confusion if one were to "switch hats" mid thread. For that reason, I commend Randy for sticking with his decision to not issue points/warnings in a thread with which he is involved.

Not enough consistency? Probably not. Different terms and phrases obviously mean different things to different people. Some will put a stronger emphasis on certain issues than others. Some will elect to initially address things personally, others will "shoot first". People complained that there wasn't consistency when there were 4 moderators...adding more people, with different personalities, and different backgrounds, and you naturally have more diversity in how things will be handled. To a degree, that will improve with time. To a degree, the differences will become more obvious. Bottom line is, as long as you are posting within the rules and guidelines of this site, you shouldn't have anything to worry about.

To those of you that put me on your short list - I appreciate the vote of confidence.

I've often thought of moderation in similiar fashion to the right to vote,suffrage etc. I think the term ''right'' is more of a misnomer as it, unfortunately, does not imply qualifications. Maybe an IQ test is a good place to start........

Griz

Originally Posted by WebSlave

ME! ME! ME!

Par for the course. A small subset of members don't like the latest change. So what else is new around here?

Just in case no one has noticed, the decision has already been made and implemented. Opinions were specifically NOT solicited beforehand just for this very reason. I knew for a FACT that it would not be universally embraced, so I decided to not waste my time.

So if you don't like it, please just get over it. You can state you don't like it, if you want to, but that's about as far as it is going to go. It is HERE, NOW, so just deal with it.

I don't expect the way things are set up now to change. That has nothing to do with why I posted the list of folks that I thought would be the ideal moderators.

I posted my list, thinking perhaps instead of just bellyaching about the way some are taking their "responsibility on", perhaps by some of us listing who we thought would be our choices for the job, perhaps some that are currently moderators and not on our lists would step back and think about WHY we chose the people we did, and maybe strive to do things the way that perhaps some of these other folks would do. Maybe I'm giving too much credit to some, but that's all I am aiming for with my list....something to make those people involved THINK before reacting.

In that respect...I don't find this thread useless in the least. That's how I AM dealing with it.

Originally Posted by Griz

I've often thought of moderation in similiar fashion to the right to vote,suffrage etc. I think the term ''right'' is more of a misnomer as it, unfortunately, does not imply qualifications. Maybe an IQ test is a good place to start........

Griz

I totally disagree with this. There are people with a very modest IQ who are born leaders and have a knack for handling people. I know several LEOs and although one is very bright the rest, good officers, seem of average intelligence.

What makes them gifted is not the ability to catch and punish wrongdoers although that is important; it is rather the ability to go in and defuse situations so that they do not escalate, and get the parties involved, if there is an altercation, to settle their differences in a calmer manner.

I think the best moderators are not simply 'ticket writers' although that needs to be done sometimes; rather they are problem solvers.

And then there are those with above average IQ's that misread the underlying meaning of my statement.

Griz

What has happened to you Bob? You used to be a facilitator also; looked to build. Of late you seem critical and judgmental; I know you are not that way with family and friends, and I liked conversations with the old Bob who worked to form bonds and understanding when someone disagreed with a post..

Originally Posted by Mike Greathouse

I would prefer to direct some of this energy towards answering the people in the various forums who are asking questions regarding the care or taxonomy of their animals.

I think it is interesting to hear what some think of how the community is run but I think, like Mike, that some energy would be well spent helping those with questions.
I posted a question about chameleons and got 2 nice answers for which I am grateful, but there are some very experienced chameleon keepers who have not yet chimed in to help. I wish they would, my questions are genuine.

Bobby, 99% of the time I agree with you on most subjects here on fauna. I really think you are letting your past dealings with this person decide your future actions. As a moderator you shouldn't let that affect you, especially on a personal level. Maybe I am missing something, but this thread was started to see who people would chose. Sledgehammer did so in this post.

Originally Posted by Sledgehammer

Here is my short-list for those who should have "The Power".
Obviously, some of these individuals already possess the ability to moderate.
I don't feel that they should not be given their due recognition because of that fact.

They are listed in alphabetical order (by last name).

Clay Davenport (Clay Davenport)
Laura Fopiano (Laura Fopiano)
Mike Greathouse (Mike Greathouse)
Sammy Gregg (shrap)
Bill Hicok (Bill & Amy)
Casey Hulse (Casey Hulse)
Dennis Hultman (Dennis Hultman)
Art Klass (Art Klass)
John Schmitt (Suncoast Herpetological)
Harald Moore (hhmoore)
Bob Woodard (Griz)

As a sidenote, I would like to see who these people would choose.
(For those on my list who have not yet posted their choices).

Then you reply with this quote.

Originally Posted by varnyard

Well I guess you don't like me because I did not let you slide on this post: http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/foru...&postcount=164

Or was it this one? http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/foru...9&postcount=50

I bet this thread is your way to whine about the warning points, you did not deserve them, right?

Your actions speak real loud, however I would guess your opinion should mean something.

That's antagonism, plain and simple. Moderation can't be personal to be fair. You reacted just because your name wasn't on his list. I really think everyone needs to take a step back and think about these warnings etc. You even said yourself that he didn't deserve the warning points. Then let me ask you this, has anyone issued a warning point abuse to the giver?

Bobby, this doesn't change how I see you as a great participant on this site. I just think we sometimes take things too personal.

I think it is interesting to hear what some think of how the community is run but I think, like Mike, that some energy would be well spent helping those with questions.
I posted a question about chameleons and got 2 nice answers for which I am grateful, but there are some very experienced chameleon keepers who have not yet chimed in to help. I wish they would, my questions are genuine.

I believe you took Mike's thoughts for quite a run, but lets put up your "question" from the Chameleon Forum:

Veiled

Finally after many years of admiring chameleons, I am going to have one of my own. I've read a lot but I'm still apprehensive, of all the reptile critters excepting perhaps the ant eating lizards, the chameleons seem to be the most challenging.
For those who have veileds I would love hearing about them and how they live, and what they eat and don't eat for you.

Where's the question ? You "asked" for people to entertain you with their knowledge of veiled chameleon husbandry. You are disappointed that "very experienced chameleons keepers have not chimed in to help ...."

Here's some "help". "Experienced keepers" have expended enormous time and efforts putting together websites chock-full of information which is freely available to you, and which you know how to access. If you lack the initiative to research the basic husbandry needs yourself, and instead are relying on others to bring it to your doorstep in a forum, then heed your own characterization that chameleons are "challenging", and don't get one.

My issue is not with your "question" there, but rather with your above post here. Glad to "help" anytime

Originally Posted by Chameleon Company

Here's some "help". "Experienced keepers" have expended enormous time and efforts putting together websites chock-full of information which is freely available to you, and which you know how to access. If you lack the initiative to research the basic husbandry needs yourself, and instead are relying on others to bring it to your doorstep in a forum, then heed your own characterization that chameleons are "challenging", and don't get one.

My issue is not with your "question" there, but rather with your above post here. Glad to "help" anytime

I have done tons of research. I come to Fauna to get the expertise of those who have been keepers and to ask questions and talk with those who have experience.
If accessing sites were the answer to everything there would be no need for any forums here on Fauna, but I like talking to others and getting to know what works for them. I think the Fauna forums are a positive experience.