Unreasonable standards of behavior?

In this thread TubaDiva harshed on somebody for asking for titles of books on a particular topic, pointing out that it was trivial to search for them online. TubaDiva was herself harshed on in turn, for making an “unprofessional remark.”

I’m confused. First, she did not make the remark in any professional capacity. When TubaDiva posts something in her role as an Administrator I’ve noticed she includes “Administrator” in her sig. Not as obvious as DavidB’s mod-hat-on/mod-had-off tags, admittedly. Anyway, are the mods to be held to a higher standard of behavior than the run-of-the-mill poster even when posting as a private netizen? Catty remarks not allowed? Second, uh, “professional”? Do mods and administrators get paid for this gig?

p.s. This is not a suck-up post. I think sometimes the mods act like jerks. However, they’re only human, after all, and they have a big job to do. I’m just trying to figure things out, as a relative newbie.

Wow, another oldie bumped back to life!

I think we have to consider the source a bit here. I don’t think TubaDiva’s remark was “unprofessional”. It was merely stating the facts. It IS easy to find book titles on the Internet.
The one commenting on her “unprofessional behaviour” was Contestant #3, nowadays known as Kripsy Original (and on a somewhat better behaviour himself these days). He was banned shortly thereafter, and was allowed back after a lot of sock puppeting and profuse apologising.

Some moderators are more clear than others when it comes to distinguishing between their “moderator posts” and “normal posts”. Either way: while we’re not held to a higher standard per se, we would look pretty dumb if we’d screw up all the time. Which is not to say a moderator can’t make a mistake and apologise for it.

And other than a free coffee mug (mine’s allegedly in the mail ;)), we don’t get paid for this gig.

Well, the mods are, after all, human, and I tend to give them the benefit of the doubt when something’s going down. It’s a thankless job, and thank goddess I don’t have to do it (no, not even for the free coffee cup).

First, I think the moderators should be open to constructive criticisms, remarks intended to point out occasional mistakes or suggest approaches that would have a more positive outcome.

Second, the thread you dredged up is an old one, and the two personalities - TubaDiva and Contestant #3 (now known as Krispy Original) - have been known to go at loggerheads. While I did think Tuba’s comment was . . . well, not really in the philosophy of the boards, Contestant #3 could certainly have phrased his complaint/recommendation in a more tactful and constructive way. Had it been a different poster or moderator, I would have written it up to a bad day and unusually thin skin. Because it was these two, I have a mental image of Spy vs. Spy, shrug and discount it.

Third, it’s my opinion that nearly all of the controversies/debacles involving moderators and posters could have been avoided if everyone involved took a deep breath, dissassociated their emotions from the context of the subject, and worked on finding common ground instead of whipping out their Illucidium Pew-36 Explosive Space Modulators and pulling the pins. That’s tough to do, so I’m pleasantly surprised that there have been as few controversies as we have seen.

Fourth, unless specifically stated otherwise, I assume that a moderator is speaking as a moderator when he or she posts. That’s why I really like David and Gaudere’s habit of using the [moderator hat on] and [moderator hat off]. While snarky comments are all part of the persona of the board itself - an inherited feature from the Great Cecil - I think the moderators should know the difference between a sincere poster who deserves a sincere reply and a troll/idiot who needs a good verbal ear flick.