Let me explain Ritchie's role here a bit.
Ritchie is not a moderator in the sense that he will try to moderate between people that are giving way to emotion in a discussion. That is more my role, as well as Ken Harbart's.
Bear in mind what the BOI is all about. It's about finding out the truth, and sometimes that just is not obvious nor easy to ferret out. This may come as a shock to some people, but not everyone will utter the truth. Particularly if their business practices are coming under question, or if they are trying to prove something that it would be advantageous to them that people would blindly believe.
Ritchie is the ferret of the BOI. He is the one that tries to dig down to the bottom of things and get to the truth. To be honest, it is a dirty job and it is not likely to have him loved by everyone. But he has volunteered to do this. As such, I had to give him the keys to be able to do things normally reserved to moderators, and I had to give him my trust to be able to block some threads from running away when I or Ken are not around. This comes with the territory, and I stand behind my decision on this.
Yes, sometimes Ritchie is wrong, and sometimes he may push things a little further than some people think are necessary. But I am willing to accept that, because I would have to say that within the two+ years he has been associated with this site, his aim has been dead on far more times than he has missed the target.
I do not give him carte blanche here, however, and have had to remind him that I do expect him to be civil to everyone here, even if he is chasing down the stinkiest polecat in the business. But he is human, and sometimes he has to do what he has to do in order to 'get his man'. And yes, Ritchie is susceptible to becoming emotional about an issue just as everyone else here is liable to do, including myself. I do not fault anyone for being human.
So I hope this explains it a bit better. I am sure this is rather unique to any other message board out there, so I can see where it would be confusing to some people.
As for the two threads that Ritchie locked down, HE did not delete them. I did. I have not granted him the authority to remove posts from the BOI. NO one but myself has that authority. And I believe, in these cases, I did what was appropriate. Adam was using third party hearsay in an anonymous manner, and that will not be acceptable. It may have skated by in the past, but in an effort to clean this place up a bit, I am being a LOT more critical about postings following the rules.
I am willing to listen to opinions on how I do things, however, so if anyone believes I have made a mistake, just let me know. I am willing to admit when I am wrong.
Thanks.
Ritchie is not a moderator in the sense that he will try to moderate between people that are giving way to emotion in a discussion. That is more my role, as well as Ken Harbart's.
Bear in mind what the BOI is all about. It's about finding out the truth, and sometimes that just is not obvious nor easy to ferret out. This may come as a shock to some people, but not everyone will utter the truth. Particularly if their business practices are coming under question, or if they are trying to prove something that it would be advantageous to them that people would blindly believe.
Ritchie is the ferret of the BOI. He is the one that tries to dig down to the bottom of things and get to the truth. To be honest, it is a dirty job and it is not likely to have him loved by everyone. But he has volunteered to do this. As such, I had to give him the keys to be able to do things normally reserved to moderators, and I had to give him my trust to be able to block some threads from running away when I or Ken are not around. This comes with the territory, and I stand behind my decision on this.
Yes, sometimes Ritchie is wrong, and sometimes he may push things a little further than some people think are necessary. But I am willing to accept that, because I would have to say that within the two+ years he has been associated with this site, his aim has been dead on far more times than he has missed the target.
I do not give him carte blanche here, however, and have had to remind him that I do expect him to be civil to everyone here, even if he is chasing down the stinkiest polecat in the business. But he is human, and sometimes he has to do what he has to do in order to 'get his man'. And yes, Ritchie is susceptible to becoming emotional about an issue just as everyone else here is liable to do, including myself. I do not fault anyone for being human.
So I hope this explains it a bit better. I am sure this is rather unique to any other message board out there, so I can see where it would be confusing to some people.
As for the two threads that Ritchie locked down, HE did not delete them. I did. I have not granted him the authority to remove posts from the BOI. NO one but myself has that authority. And I believe, in these cases, I did what was appropriate. Adam was using third party hearsay in an anonymous manner, and that will not be acceptable. It may have skated by in the past, but in an effort to clean this place up a bit, I am being a LOT more critical about postings following the rules.
I am willing to listen to opinions on how I do things, however, so if anyone believes I have made a mistake, just let me know. I am willing to admit when I am wrong.
Thanks.
