This appears in the Silver Section: As far as I can tell, I am the only (active) moderator in the NY section. Check out the post count, and see what a job that is. I keep an eye on it, but can't do so full time. My take: My main concern is that no one violate the general posting rules which I keep as a sticky at the top of the page. I am a capitalist. If anyone can produce posts of greater quantity or quality than the EC gang, let them do so. I would think that the things people criticize would then be crowded out. Some notes: 1) One thing I dont like is anything that smacks of hostility to newcomers. That happens (rarely!), and I agree it should be toned down; 2) I also see that neither side (for want of a better word) gives the other much slack. The minute one party perceives that the other is being critical or out of line, they are all over each others case. A little more tolerance would go a long way; 3) If anyone wants to help moderate one of the busiest sections, or even take my job in its entirety, be my guest. I dont say that in bitterness, I am just trying to address problems. Sam
I thought there were like 3 other moderators for tri-state like Mike Charness? Regardless, Sam you are doing a great job. Quoting Young Frankenstein: "And Fer Dern shure" I don't want the job! say, can't you deduct Rossa membership as continuing education in the legal field? You know, moderator training?
Thanks guys. If there are other moderators, I don't see much evidence of that. Not being critical, it is just what I see. And I really have no problem with someone taking over. It has been over a year and it is no fun refereeing the fighting, especially when I know and like everyone. I'm not quitting. If no one wants it, I will stick with it.
It's funny how some people complain about Sam's moderating. I guess it's because they believe I would have been banned long ago if Sam strictly enforced all rules, especially 1.1 No flame. What they do not seem to realize is: I will by far NOT be the only one and NOT be the first one.
No 2nd person as of now. You keep thinking this is personal, and I have beef with you. I really don't. I want nothing more than you mind your own biz and I do the same.
I did not take any cheap shots. I only stated, if I were the moderator, I would ban you. Because you kept violating rule 1.2, which is trolling.
1.2 No "Trolling": Please do not post any topic that disrupts the peace and harmony of this community. Don't create meaningless threads with the sole purpose of starting a dispute. Whart hijacked numberous of threads, also started his own threads, repeatly starting dispute, disrupting the peace and harmony of the forum. Of course, this is MY opinon, you probably will not agree. But if I were the moderator, my opinion counts, yours does not, you can only dispute my decision to Rob Lay, and he will decide if Whart is trolling or not.
1st of all thank god you are not a mod. 2nd you have been disrupting the harmony of this board for quite some time before Whart even spoke up. So who is the troll.
1) so by saying that you admit that whart is a troll, but i was a troll 1st, right? 2) as i have already admited, i would have been banned already if all rules had been strictly enforced. sure, i had trolled before. how about yourself, did you ever violate rule 1.1 no flame?? how about bruce???
i don't. this is in an active discussion which was caused by YOUR post. everything is still within and related to the original problem. if you or whart never made your post, this thread would not even exsited, and your name would not have mentioned by me in this thread.
