aviel wrote:Yes, because I don't distrust your intentions. I don't think you're intending to act immorally or dishonestly, and I am sure you are trying to do the right thing. But in failing to make these guidelines public, you are failing to do so.
...
I think you may not understand the implications of the rules you've written with respect to user expectations. It's possible you do, but I can't know that until we see them.FaceTheCitizen wrote:They've been publicized for two years.
Kate told me in the CAaSS thread that there were secret moderator guidelines I would "never see".
Jack Road wrote:I know my paranoia has clashed against the Secret Moderator Forum before, and perhaps we could call it something less enticing like "Moderation Discussion Forum" but come on, we have less active members than a large English 101 Class.
DamianaRaven wrote:One of the things you'd be expected to know in such a class is that it's fewer, not less. Less refers to an amount, as in "there's less water in my glass." Fewer refers to a number of items, as in "there are fewer ice cubes in my glass."
A Combustible Lemon wrote:Death is an archaic concept for simpleminded commonfolk, not Victorian scientist whales.
Australia wrote:Where are the kidneys hidden?
A Combustible Lemon wrote:Death is an archaic concept for simpleminded commonfolk, not Victorian scientist whales.
CarrieVS wrote:Australia wrote:Where are the kidneys hidden?
A locked room with no mirrors or reflective surfaces.
Australia wrote:Oh, right, because people in glasshouses aren't allowed to throw kidney stones.
A Combustible Lemon wrote:Death is an archaic concept for simpleminded commonfolk, not Victorian scientist whales.
This is about as non-tyrannical as bulletin boards get, so I'm not really all that worried about the state of the forum, but I must wonder how on earth publishing the guidelines would cost more money than any other post.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest