Moderators? - Page 5

Would it be more to your liking if it were a bunch of American men?

Well, I hate to disappoint anyone but K9chess is a women, and having the site run buy women or men is not the problem, the problem is whoever is over this site seems to have a problem with not letting everyone have a say. If someone wants to have a heated discussion who cares. If there is someone out there selling bad dogs or scamming for money I think there website and address needs to be on here, what does it matter if one of us gives them a bad name. The problem is this site is getting to much control from the same very ones who use this site. I do believe in some kind of monitering but only if it comes to porn or bad language and other than that people need to have their say. Vomfelsenhof- Why do you continue to say we all need to follow the rules. I think who ever is running this site needs to realize he/she would not have this site if it was not for us, so for all the monitors don't ack like we owe you something, you would not have anything to monitor if it was not for the people on here.This site has lost a lot of people because of the way it has been run for the last few months and I am one that does not go to this site like I use to, I find it hard to put in any input if I have to watch every word I say, because of hurting someones feelings or it is something that someone wants to hear. I have another site that I like and it is nothing like this one, we are not babysat on that site and you do not have to worry about your theats being removed because you said the wrong thing. I wish everyone luck!!!! ... Sandra

k9chess, I was referring to ZVZW's statement LOL. I own a Yahoo groups dog list, another breed, and I moderate it along with my co-owner and one other person. With 3 voting on any given issue, there is never a tie vote to be dealt with. Every subscriber knows our identiy and how to contact us privately. IMO that is the main issue with this list, no one knows who is a mod or how to contact anyone in authority in the event of a question or a complaint. In the past, most knew Gina and how to contact her and I suspect she had her share of complaints. Now who knows who to contact; as far as I know, the indication of moderator has been deleted from the screen names. The TOS' are clearly stated on this list, but sometimes it's a matter of personal interpretation. It's probably a good idea for all the mods to put their heads together and vote on which posts should be removed or edited, which not instead of letting that decision up to any one mod's descretion. I have very few problems on my list since we are available to all and take any and all complaints seriously and discuss each one indivudually. The author of the offending post is seldom a factor in our decision. I left the green board due to the selective spanking by a few of their mods. It is not right to allow a mod or a friend to whoop on specific posters while not allowing them the freedom to respond in like terms.

Moderators have proven time and again, on this board as well as elsewhere, to not be able to moderate without bias. It is not about TOS. It is about what they think as well of a given topic. Sadly, sometimes moderators do abuse not only a given venue, but also shamelessly self-promote while denying others the opportunity to do so. The site is valuable. When someone posts porn etc., they should be dealt with swiftly. But people should be allowed to say what they wish, post URLS etc., post things that may or may not be true. In the real world, we all have to decide who and what to believe. I prefer to take that responsibility myself, and not abdicate this task to others who may have a personal agenda, as hard as they think they are trying to be "impartial". As a minimum, a moderator should NOT be allowed to post on any topic if they have the power to delete comments of others just because they disagree. I own a listserve and ALL people post under their real name. It works very well.

Way to go Hodie! You always say so well what I have been thinking all along, but can not put in words.

Hi, Let me reprhase this a little,lol. It wasnt directed towards women in general,but the three that are running,or moderating,or whatever you want to call it. I just wished there was a more comprehensive venue here with some proven and more quality breeders than the THREE that we have here. I was directing this at the Americans that are moderating,but wished wed see some kind of foriegn people getting involved too. Along with the bashing, and all I think they will never join into conversations. I just think there are many more qualified out there that would do such a better job then ones that hid it for so long that they were moderating,and then it turned into their persoanl venue it seems. If breeders are going to be the Moderatros I think there are a higher standard of them out there that should be involved. If Oli is going to hand out a position such as this. Sadly but true as well its more than likely us Americans that keep the Europans from taking part in this Forum. They act a little more mature than most, and have better ethics I think. Hope to see this place around for a long time! And Sandra I knew you were female, and was not directing that at you either ,lol. Hope all is well with everyone. Jerry

Laughing at my own spelling too! Sheesh, lol

I knew you knew I was a woman, just trying to have a little humor in all of this!!!!

If, indeed, there are moderators (or simply a few savy people who have learned how to delete posts), I believe that their interpretations of the TOS are overly stringent. I can see no BLATANT COMMERCIALISM in posting URL's, reference to a stud dog, the availability of a litter, mentioning names of people, offering a critique of identified dogs, referring members to sites where they may purchase specific training equipment, etc. While I realize a need for ads to help financially support the site, personally, I would rather pay membership DUES than to continue with the degree of biased, subjective moderation that has prevailed recently. Louise