Ortolan88 wrote:
Toby Bartels wrote:
I like the idea that people come from outside the discussion to impose civility in this fashion by moderating.
Larry Sanger has been doing it recently, generally to good effect (against me, as it happens). I would add that anyone doing this sort of graybeard oversight will have to forego the luxury of sarcasm, even in the comment line, and resist the temptation to chime in on every little point. Those things reduce the value of the outside intervention and make it seem less disinterested (neutral).
Right. You can't be a moderator if you're a participant.
Of course, now the word "moderator" is associated with Larry's proposal of a new class of superuser, in addition to or replacing the ordinary sysops, with powers to back up their (hoped for) moral authority, and limited to a small number at a time (say 3), but rotating randomly to everybody eventually. I'm opposed to all of that (except the random rotation, if it must happen at all).
*However*, nothing is stopping any of us, *right*now*, even those of us that are *not*sysops*, from using the respect that we have gained in the past, and the moral authority that this confers upon us, to act as Ed has been doing since he arrived, as moderators in a purely etymological sense of the term, without the need for any special powers or official appointments.
-- Toby