---

one word for that FAIL

---

how original it's in red text this time

---

Quote: from boothy at 8:04 pm on July 27, 2008

---

No, simply no. I'm with you for taking away the regime of the moderators, but this is not the right way to achieve it.  

 I think the most vital thing for this site is a change in the rules and generally what is accepted. An open-support site is better than closed one.

---

what needs to be done is separate lw into a support forum and a social forum, and have different mods and different rules for them

---

That's already been tried, to an extent. Overspill takes over that theory.

-------
"reclaiming public spaces as a space for public imagination
and enlightenment where they have become propagandistic
barriers to thought and awareness"

---

Quote: from Praise the Lard at 4:04 am on July 28, 2008

---

Quote: from boothy at 8:04 pm on July 27, 2008

---

No, simply no. I'm with you for taking away the regime of the moderators, but this is not the right way to achieve it.  

  I think the most vital thing for this site is a change in the rules and generally what is accepted. An open-support site is better than closed one.

---

 

 what needs to be done is separate lw into a support forum and a social forum, and have different mods and different rules for them

---

That's already been tried, to an extent. Overspill takes over that theory.

---

Basically, it would be hard to ban someone without knowing anything about their prior conduct, and you couldn't just be like, 'oh, I think he was warned last week, IT'S TIME FOR A BAN!'

Also, I fail to see how banning people from the site is 'supporting' them, which ideally is what SUPPORT leaders are for.

-------
:)

---

And how do you suppose support leaders would go about banning people without having access to the mod forum, members notes, the members previous history, deleted posts by the member, etc etc etc.

Basically, it would be hard to ban someone without knowing anything about their prior conduct, and you couldn't just be like, 'oh, I think he was warned last week, IT'S TIME FOR A BAN!'

Also, I fail to see how banning people from the site is 'supporting' them, which ideally is what SUPPORT leaders are for.

---

There will be a support leader's forum, support leader's member notes, we can check IP's, see what they're deleted psots are, etc etc etc.

-------
click and please click
^use head phones

I like your democratic theory, but democracy never works as a voice of a few, nor does it work on a black or white answer.

-------
"reclaiming public spaces as a space for public imagination
and enlightenment where they have become propagandistic
barriers to thought and awareness"

---

We don't need SL's on a power trip...

---

They are already on a power trip.

-------
click and please click
^use head phones

---

Quote: from MariJani at 8:11 pm on July 27, 2008

---

And how do you suppose support leaders would go about banning people without having access to the mod forum, members notes, the members previous history, deleted posts by the member, etc etc etc.  

 Basically, it would be hard to ban someone without knowing anything about their prior conduct, and you couldn't just be like, 'oh, I think he was warned last week, IT'S TIME FOR A BAN!'  

 Also, I fail to see how banning people from the site is 'supporting' them, which ideally is what SUPPORT leaders are for.

---

There will be a support leader's forum, support leader's member notes, we can check IP's, see what they're deleted psots are, etc etc etc.

---

So there would basically just be 200 mods running around?  Wouldn't the only difference be that it would take more votes?

-------
:)

---

Quote: from Its Bearsy Bitch at 8:13 pm on July 27, 2008

---

Quote: from MariJani at 8:11 pm on July 27, 2008

---

And how do you suppose support leaders would go about banning people without having access to the mod forum, members notes, the members previous history, deleted posts by the member, etc etc etc.  

  Basically, it would be hard to ban someone without knowing anything about their prior conduct, and you couldn't just be like, 'oh, I think he was warned last week, IT'S TIME FOR A BAN!'  

  Also, I fail to see how banning people from the site is 'supporting' them, which ideally is what SUPPORT leaders are for.

---

 

 There will be a support leader's forum, support leader's member notes, we can check IP's, see what they're deleted psots are, etc etc etc.

---

So there would basically just be 200 mods running around?  Wouldn't the only difference be that it would take more votes?

---

---

Quote: from Its Bearsy Bitch at 8:13 pm on July 27, 2008

---

Quote: from MariJani at 8:11 pm on July 27, 2008

---

And how do you suppose support leaders would go about banning people without having access to the mod forum, members notes, the members previous history, deleted posts by the member, etc etc etc.

  Basically, it would be hard to ban someone without knowing anything about their prior conduct, and you couldn't just be like, 'oh, I think he was warned last week, IT'S TIME FOR A BAN!'

  Also, I fail to see how banning people from the site is 'supporting' them, which ideally is what SUPPORT leaders are for.

---

 

 There will be a support leader's forum, support leader's member notes, we can check IP's, see what they're deleted psots are, etc etc etc.

---

So there would basically just be 200 mods running around? Wouldn't the only difference be that it would take more votes?

---

Precisely. Democracy never works as a voice of a few, nor does it work on a black or white answer (just copied and pasted myself to reiterate).

Essentially what this person wants is a more democratic system rather than a heir achy, but a democratic system would involve every member to be truly democratic.

I don't think LW would fit this kind of system at the present moment, to be honest - for the same reason democracy fails in general. What the people want is not necessarily (or indeed often not at all) what is best for the people.

-------
"reclaiming public spaces as a space for public imagination
and enlightenment where they have become propagandistic
barriers to thought and awareness"

---

The two sections would spill into each other, eventually rendering the separation pointless. To stop this? Moderate. Bringing the entire idea to take power away from moderators to a failure, as this would take more power to instate this system.

I like your democratic theory, but democracy never works as a voice of a few, nor does it work on a black or white answer.

---

:(

But two is too little voices, especially to remove a post, what if someone has two different accounts and is SL on both?

-------
click and please click
^use head phones

---

Quote: from boothy at 8:13 pm on July 27, 2008

---

The two sections would spill into each other, eventually rendering the separation pointless. To stop this? Moderate. Bringing the entire idea to take power away from moderators to a failure, as this would take more power to instate this system.

I like your democratic theory, but democracy never works as a voice of a few, nor does it work on a black or white answer.

---

 

:(  

But two is too little voices, especially to remove a post, what if someone has two different accounts and is SL on both?

---

What are you on about? I was talking in response to Praise the Lord and you responding to me saying "what". Read the convo.

Post edited at 8:21 pm on July 27, 2008 by boothy

-------
"reclaiming public spaces as a space for public imagination
and enlightenment where they have become propagandistic
barriers to thought and awareness"