Should the SDMB have an affirmative action policy for the conservative minority?

Should the SDMB have an affirmative action policy, in terms of moderator recruitment, to protect the conservative minority?

Link to the thread in question, in which Shodan and Bricker bemoan their fate as conservatives on a liberal message board.


Moderation should enforce civility, in its broadest interpretation, and stay out of guiding content or discussion in any other way. If the conservative viewpoint is a minority here, it deserves no special treatment or protection. Vague handwaving notions of free speech means you are allowed to speak - but have no right to be listened to or agreed with. This isn’t kindergarten.

Questions and comments about the board belong in ATMB. Thread relocated.

I’ll volunteer to be the crazy Trump of the mods. There will be so much winning.

I’m far to the left of liberal, so nothing applied. but I vote “ridiculous”.

Does this mean the mods are supposed to be letting their political persuasions influence their moderating? That is the only reason you would want mods of a supposedly politically different political persuasion on board to push it in another direction. If the mods are supposed to be neutral, then what purpose would these token mods serve?

I don’t know about affirmative-action but I do think any potential moderator should have to sign a pledge that they will not increase membership fees, and to make a trip to and give a speech at Liberty University.

I watched a Kirk Cameron movie in a theater that had a simulcast discussion from Liberty University. Does that count?

Only if you’re going for the token “crazy mod” position.

And the competition for that position is pretty fierce.


Wait — are you suggesting there’s only supposed to be ONE of those?

As I explained in 2009, when discussing preferentially hiring black teachers for majority-black student populations:

In my view, this is not fairly described as “affirmative action.”

I believe describing it as affirmative action elides this distinction.


Hard to choose between “No” and “Ridiculous.”

Bottom line for me is that moderators are here primarily to police the form of the discussion, not necessarily the content. If posters on all sides of an issue can have a civil disagreement that adheres to the rules of the board, there is no reason that any position should get special help from the moderators. And if a mod’s political views are strongly coloring their rulings as a moderator, then they’re not fit for the position.

No. The hypothesis behind such a thing would be that mods are subconsciously allowing their political biases to influence their moderation.

If I believed the hypothesis, I’d probably favor such a program. However, all the actual evidence points to the hypothesis being false, so there ya go.

Once a year they should all post the registration agreement together line by line.


Although with regard to active mods, I’m the token woman. I guess I’m here to make sure men don’t get preferential modding, so y’all better watch out.

Be ye hobbit, or be ye elf?
Oh. Token.


There’s a token mod? How many tokens can I get for a $1? Do these tokens fit into the DVD slot or is there a hidden slot behind a laptop’s battery? New technology is soooo passing me by. :sad: