I just saw a reply form Chronos with “member” instead of “moderator” below his handle. I have seen moderators reply as members (making an honest reply, rather than educating someone on improper stuff), but Chronos was the first moderator I saw not identified as such.
Personally, I am cool with it. A moderator as a member can tell me "You’re an asshole, " and I would realize it is a personal opinion. A moderator doing something similar with “Moderator” under his handle I would consider out-of-line for a moderator.
If I’m doling out admonishments and things of that nature, or where I believe there may be some confusion whether my comments are made as a moderator or member, I will typically preface them with: “Moderator’s Notes:” However, if I’m moving a thread or providing help here in ATMB, or doing anything that is an obvious moderator action, I won’t usually add that preface.
We have discussed this fairly often, and we decided that it was not generally important to distinguish between “talking as a Moderator” and “talking as a member.” At one point, we discussed having a second UserName, one for member and one as Moderator, and we decided that was silly.
I think most of time, it’s pretty evident what hat we’re wearing. “I have deleted the porno link” or “I have moved this topic” or “Please do not use ad hominem arguments in this forum” are pretty much self-evident, n’est-ce pas?
And similarly, “Yes, I really like sashimi” or “I heartily endorse the death penalty for shoplifting offenses” or “fetuses are being unduly deprived of the right to vote” are also pretty clearly not the Official Word.
The presiding judge doesn’t preface every remark with, “In my capacity as judge…” or “In my capacity as staunch reporter of the Whig Party…” or “In my capacity as wife and mother…” or any of the other roles that the individual may fill. Nor need we.
Occasionally, it is important to make such a distinction, and so occasionally it is made. But generally, most of us don’t bother.
If I’m standing before the court and the judge is behind the bench- robe and all- and he says to me, “CnoteChris. You sir, are an ass.”, I’ll most likely stand there politely and say, “Yes sir, I am. Thank you.”
Why? Because he can throw my ass in jail if I tell him what I really think of that comment.
Now, if I run into said judge walking down a crowded street and says to me, “Hey! You’re an ass!”, I’ll kindly respond, “Oh yeah!?! Got a cite for that!”
Tee-Hee!
At any rate, I think you get the picture. There are definitely times when knowing what mode a moderator is in is far better than not knowing. And I’d suggest it’s not as easy as you seem to believe it is for us know for sure.
Because, for me anyways, I often have no clue. And because of that, I often take the path of least resistance and say nothing at all.
Well, that’s not always the case, tho’ as I recall Chronos had a “moderator watch” vs. a hat. I personally have on order the official “moderator accessories catalog”. They claim to have misplaced my address for the past year or so, but I’m sure it’s really on it’s way now. I really want to see those ‘moderator tiaras’ I’ve heard so much about.
Whenever I was moving a thread, or editing a post, or somesuch, I presumed that it was obvious that I was speaking as a moderator. Whenever I was acting as a moderator, and thought it might be ambiguous, I explicitly put on the watch. On the occasions when I was not acting as a moderator, and thought that might not be clear, I explicitly stated that the watch was off, although that was rare. Occasionally, I would do something like move a thread, and then add to the discussion, and I always used the watch on/watch off convention. CnoteChris, if you’re ever unsure in which capacity one of us is acting, you can just ask “Were you speaking as a moderator there?”. We really don’t mind.
By the way, it’s probably best not to think of my leave of absence as temporary. The earliest that I would be able to take up the job again is next May, which is a veritable eternity in board terms. Heck, I’ve only been a member since January 2000. After that, we’ll see.
Ironically, by the way, the watch band on the wristwatch I wear every day actually broke overnight, sometime on the night that Tuba took me off the list. And wring, don’t you know that only Divas are allowed to wear tiaras?
<< Because, for me anyways, I often have no clue. And because of that, I often take the path of least resistance and say nothing at all. >>
Almost always a sound policy, Cnote.
And to follow up on the judge example, yeah, exactly. Of course, I’m always in the same mood (balanced equilibrium with a mild edge to my humour, just like Cary Grant.) Keep 'em confused, keep 'em guessing, keep 'em off balance, that’s my motto.
I do have to say, as artificial as it is, I appreciate the “Moderator hat on/off” thing. Before ya’ll started doing that, situations arose where a mod would say in a debate “I disagree with your point, for reasons blah blah blah . . . and furthermore I hereby chastise you for a posting error [such as insulting a third party].” It came across as that extra little whack that could be administered by one side of the argument, but not by the other.
Now it seems like we more often see “[mod hat on]Don’t call someone a doodyhead in this forum[/mod hat off] Now, on to why your point is indefensible . . .” This, to me, seems less like “I’m reprimanding you just because I can.”
Minor distinction, I know, but it’s the little things in life . . . .
Hypothetically speaking what if a moderator takes someone to the pit, but does not say whether the hat is on or off. Or the moderator comes into a pit thread that is not real heated and makes a comment (again not saying “hat on” or “hat off”) that turns it into a much more heated thread.
In this case the reason for the pit thread is to be assumed to be reasonably posted, the question is about it being done by a moderator and the stigma that is attached if they don’t state which hat they are using.
THere was a recent thread about Lynn Bodoni (I have no desire to research and link it), which quoted her on reprimanding some people. In her thread she basically hinted that she would be especially hard on sports fans, because she hates organized sports and its fans. Personally, I have no objection to that statement, I find getting that involved in other people’s activity as a way to validate your own life not to my liking. But that has nothing to do with being an SDMB administrator. She was mixing her personal bias with being a moderator.
Never get to wear a tiara