Compulsory periodic rotation of moderators (?)

[steve]

I know this post wasn't addressed towards me but some of the comments caught my attention and I'd like to offer my perspective as the newest moderator. I've done much of nothing to date other than pitch in an opinion here and there and maybe a PM. I'm just watching and learning.

 

 

Currently there is quite a rigid divide between the Mod Team and the general membership, though maybe the current mods can't see this thinking "but we are still just members". Whilst this remains so to will the continuance of people expressing their contempt for the "us vs them" situation. This static environment is also fertile ground for mods to get too entrenched within their roles, to get too attached to the position whether that allure be authority, prestige or whatever.

I think this "rigid divide" will always exist. The rank and file who have open minds and a reasonable level of maturity can see that the mods are simply trying to maintain some peace and harmony while trying to also encourage a meaningful level of credible participation of folks who have some experience and knowledge that they are willing to share with those who are truly here to learn and participate. There will always be bullies and blowhards who don't like it when they don't have the last say or get their way and they will be bitter and whiny.... oh well....

:yawn:

Given the nature of the web and this forum, I would not call the situation static. Mods have come and gone (and seem to be participating actively or not participating randomly and irregularly) with as much or more variation than I could imagine occurring in any organized schema involving a rotation with >6 month terms... That is the nature of the beast.

 

I know I could not honestly say that my self-importance wasn't attached to the position, and I would challenge every mod to truly inquire this of themselves. And in that attachment, to whatever degree it may be present, are you truly serving this community to the best of your ability?

This is an easy one for me. As you probably know, I was invited to join the team in the beginning but declined. It wasn't a good time for me, personally, and I really wasn't in a place where I wanted to increase my internet presence. That's when I took a bit of an extended break. Being a moderator on TaoBums does not make me feel important or privileged in any way. It is probably the least important privilege in my life. Those feelings come from my family, my work, hobbies, and my friends. I may help to judege if a certain member seems to be acting maliciously or not, I may help to delete spam, maybe even help with tech support some day. So what? This doesn't make me any better than anyone, if anything it ties my hands a bit when it comes to my own free participation. I do my best to evaluate each situation on its merits. I am human and there will undoubtedly be bias in my decisions, intentional or otherwise - all I can do is my best.

 

With all due respect to Sean and the rest of our mods and members, "TaoBums status" ain't anything special.

Anyone can join and offer their ideas and opinions. If I admire someone's ideas and how they handle themselves - they're special in my eyes. If not, they ain't. Mod status means nothing other than someone cares enough about the forum to help Sean maintain it in a way that is consistent with his, and hopefully all of our, vision. And yes, I have no attachment to this and do it genuinely because I find it a place where I can share some spiritual and martial arts ideas with some like minded individuals. I don't go to church or synagogue or mosque. I talk to a few trusted friends and come here to seek some spiritual camaraderie. Hence, I wanted to give back and offered to help. I would gladly drop out in a heartbeat and wouldn't look back.

 

Though I am not saying that this is the situation at the moment, there is, I believe, a real risk that members of the Mod Team may get too entrenched and static. It happens to the most well meaning of people who think that, by clinging to their position of authority, they are doing "the best good" for all.

 

To return to the idea in the OP (without of course fixating on its details), if we had a semi-formal way of rotating or refreshing the moderation team not only would the distinct line between Mod Team and the general membership become more and more fuzzy and indistinct, but we would safe-guard against the wreck and ruin that self-importance can play in positions of authority.

 

As I mentioned previously, gradually over time with more and more people having their spell as a moderator there literally would develop a sense amongst the wider membership that "we have done this ourselves" as per Laozi's vision of a functional community.

 

I think your idea of a rotation and open enrollment of mods is a bad idea for this, or any, private forum.

As a group of mods gets to know each other and the community they are uniquely suited to help maintain a degree of stability to foster open and equitable communication. Regular changing of the mods will cause periodic up and downswings as they try to learn the ropes and eachother. There will be inevitable clashes. Overall I think it would threaten, rather than enhance stability.

 

Drawing from the random rank and file will further destabilize this situation IMO. Let's face it, there are folks who would make good mods and others who wouldn't. There are certain specific characteristics I would look for in a person if it were my call. I think it makes much more sense to observe how people behave and interact over time and invite those people who display the qualities that make it likely they will enhance rather than sabotage the team. Folks are certainly volunteer and I imagine that Sean and the current team would invite them onboard if the need exists and they are suited to the task. Certainly this is a completely subjective judgement and that make complete sense since this is Sean's baby. It is his vision, not socialism. I hope that as the mod team continues to grow and mature as a group they will develop and foster a common vision that makes this place the best it can be.

 

Just my $.02.

 

PS In case it isn't obvious, it's me, I just dropped the f....

[Stigweard]

Thanks for your comments Steve, as always I respect your views.

 

 

This is an easy one for me. As you probably know, I was invited to join the team in the beginning but declined. It wasn't a good time for me, personally, and I really wasn't in a place where I wanted to increase my internet presence. That's when I took a bit of an extended break. Being a moderator on TaoBums does not make me feel important or privileged in any way. It is probably the least important privilege in my life. Those feelings come from my family, my work, hobbies, and my friends. I may help to judege if a certain member seems to be acting maliciously or not, I may help to delete spam, maybe even help with tech support some day. So what? This doesn't make me any better than anyone, if anything it ties my hands a bit when it comes to my own free participation. I do my best to evaluate each situation on its merits. I am human and there will undoubtedly be bias in my decisions, intentional or otherwise - all I can do is my best.

 

<snip>

 

And yes, I have no attachment to this and do it genuinely because I find it a place where I can share some spiritual and martial arts ideas with some like minded individuals. I don't go to church or synagogue or mosque. I talk to a few trusted friends and come here to seek some spiritual camaraderie. Hence, I wanted to give back and offered to help. I would gladly drop out in a heartbeat and wouldn't look back.

 

And this is why I will give a mighty big "HUZZAH!!!" that you have joined the team.

 

 

Flicking forward to this comment:

 

"...this is Sean's baby. It is his vision, not socialism."

 

Other comments like this include "this is Sean's private site," "this is not a democracy" etc etc

 

TaoBums has defaulted to a typical patriarchal, military style of leadership. Sean's at the top with his promoted 2nd tier of generals and then the regular troops underneath.

 

If we really cut to the ideological quick, then it is this structure that I am questioning and challenging.

 

Why do we have to impose this model on ourselves? Aren't we supposed to be seeking greater attunement with the principles of Laozi etc.?? Aren’t we supposed to be leading by example and actually living these Daoist ideals rather than just sitting in front of our screens talking about them?

 

Sean has said that this isn't meant to be a utopian community ... well I say "WHY THE HELL NOT?"

 

If we are truly honoring the philosophical basis of Daoism (we are trying to do that right?) then why should we just accept this outdated model of community that is in truth the antithesis of the Daoist ideal. Throughout the entire works of Laozi we see repeated criticism and warning against this top-down pyramid structure of authority.

 

Personally I think we are running the risk of being just a bunch of hypocritical and mindless fools for just defaulting to a community structure like this. We are just saying, “Well that’s what we have been conditioned to think works so that’s what we will do as well.”

 

Unquestioningly we are just being like a bunch of lemmings following convention for conventions sake.

 

And if you asked us why we thought the world is in the sorry state that it’s in then I am damn sure we would acknowledge that a major part of that mix is the rigid authority models where only a few people hold the power over the masses. And yet here we are perpetuating and in fact defending the authenticity of such a community structure.

 

Yes, yes, yes … it’s Sean’s site … blah, blah, blah. That’s an easy way to excuse yourself from not thinking creatively, from not asking yourself and those in charge the hard question of, “In this process are you truly giving your best? Are you really acting to the best or your ability? Or are you just passing responsibility back up the line to Sean because it’s his site?”

 

If Dao is in your heart, if Laozi’s message truly sings in your veins then why are you not trying to bring that into the reality of this community which I know we all have so much love for???

 

I think your idea of a rotation and open enrollment of mods is a bad idea for this, or any, private forum.

 

As a group of mods gets to know each other and the community they are uniquely suited to help maintain a degree of stability to foster open and equitable communication. Regular changing of the mods will cause periodic up and downswings as they try to learn the ropes and eachother. There will be inevitable clashes. Overall I think it would threaten, rather than enhance stability.

 

Drawing from the random rank and file will further destabilize this situation IMO. Let's face it, there are folks who would make good mods and others who wouldn't. There are certain specific characteristics I would look for in a person if it were my call. I think it makes much more sense to observe how people behave and interact over time and invite those people who display the qualities that make it likely they will enhance rather than sabotage the team. Folks are certainly volunteer and I imagine that Sean and the current team would invite them onboard if the need exists and they are suited to the task. Certainly this is a completely subjective judgement and that make complete sense since this is Sean's baby. It is his vision, not socialism. I hope that as the mod team continues to grow and mature as a group they will develop and foster a common vision that makes this place the best it can be.

“Bad idea”, “threaten stability”, “inevitable clashes,” “destabilize this situation” …

 

How do you know this Steve? Truly? You sound like the republicans warning of what would happen if Obama got reelected

 

Remember it’s only when we say something is bad that we create the good and vice versa. Why have you chosen to only see the possible downsides? Why can’t you engage a balanced view of this?

 

Don’t you trust people to have some ownership? Don’t you trust people to behave responsibly? If you treat people like children they will behave like children, if you treat them like respected mature adults then you would be amazed how they begin to act accordingly.

 

If you read the OP you would see that transitional moderators (whose term may be 12-18mths rather than 6mths – I agree that this was way too short) wouldn’t have full admin access so there would be no chance they could wreck anything. And if they did start breaking fences it’s just as easy to vote em out as it was to vote em in.

 

Also you would find that it would naturally occur that mods rotated in and out in a spread out fashion. Meaning that it wouldn’t be like all of a sudden 5 mods dropped out and 5 stepped in. So you would find natural rhythm would emerge of mods maturing toward the end of their term mixed in with newbies who are learning the ropes.

 

Also you would have noticed that 2 of the mods, the Gatekeepers, were permanent mods. These 2 would provide the ongoing stability and support for the whole process. They would provide the continuity throughout the changes.

 

And you could also find that past mods might step in for another term if it was required. Quite possibly you would find that there would develop a group of maybe 10-15 members who became the extended mod group. As I mentioned in the OP, after being in the mod team they would become sort of “unofficial moderators” who would still be actively mindful of the moderating needs of the community.

 

So to your “bad idea” I say that that is a one-sided subjective view that hasn’t sought the balance of considering all the possible benefits.

 

To your “inevitable clashes” I say that we are already having inevitable and regular clashes under the current model and I am confident that, at the very least, this idea wouldn’t create any more clashes than is already going on. Furthermore I am quite confident that, over time it would engender more of a sense of cooperative community on the forum that would work towards minimizing said clashes in the future. Meaning less work for moderators, and I am sure we all want that right ??

 

To your “destabilization” I say the only real security lies in embracing change and, if Laozi has any truth about him, then you are in fact risking greater destabilization by clinging to rigid power structures.

 

What I have presented in the OP (with the appropriate amendments that have arisen out of this discussion) rather than risking stability in fact enhances its stability by having a process that creates a stable core (aka the Gatekeepers) whilst having a an ever-evolving periphery of moderators.

 

Steve it’s like Tai Chi. Is your stability found in only rigidly holding your place? Or do you engage and actively use change and move fluidly whilst maintaining your core?

 

What would happen if you held your breath for too long Steve? Or do you make sure that your breath flows naturally and continuously?

 

That is what my proposal here is trying to emulate.

 

Edited August 19, 2011 by Stigweard

[steve]

Thanks for your comments Steve, as always I respect your views.

 

 

 

And this is why I will give a mighty big "HUZZAH!!!" that you have joined the team.

Much appreciated my friend.

 

 

Flicking forward to this comment:

 

"...this is Sean's baby. It is his vision, not socialism."

 

Other comments like this include "this is Sean's private site," "this is not a democracy" etc etc

 

TaoBums has defaulted to a typical patriarchal, military style of leadership. Sean's at the top with his promoted 2nd tier of generals and then the regular troops underneath.

 

If we really cut to the ideological quick, then it is this structure that I am questioning and challenging.

 

Why do we have to impose this model on ourselves? Aren't we supposed to be seeking greater attunement with the principles of Laozi etc.?? Aren’t we supposed to be leading by example and actually living these Daoist ideals rather than just sitting in front of our screens talking about them?

 

Sean has said that this isn't meant to be a utopian community ... well I say "WHY THE HELL NOT?"

 

If we are truly honoring the philosophical basis of Daoism (we are trying to do that right?) then why should we just accept this outdated model of community that is in truth the antithesis of the Daoist ideal. Throughout the entire works of Laozi we see repeated criticism and warning against this top-down pyramid structure of authority.

Well it is what it is. Utopian communities have yet to work anywhere at any time. I believe the idea is faulty at it's core. I think we can work within the current framework and truly honor the philosophical basis of Daoism. The current structure is more similar to the general human condition than any socialistic or utopian models have ever been. Humans are tribal. Certain individuals are better suited to particular responsibilities than others. That's the way it is.

 

Personally I think we are running the risk of being just a bunch of hypocritical and mindless fools for just defaulting to a community structure like this. We are just saying, “Well that’s what we have been conditioned to think works so that’s what we will do as well.”

 

Unquestioningly we are just being like a bunch of lemmings following convention for conventions sake.

 

And if you asked us why we thought the world is in the sorry state that it’s in then I am damn sure we would acknowledge that a major part of that mix is the rigid authority models where only a few people hold the power over the masses. And yet here we are perpetuating and in fact defending the authenticity of such a community structure.

 

Yes, yes, yes … it’s Sean’s site … blah, blah, blah. That’s an easy way to excuse yourself from not thinking creatively, from not asking yourself and those in charge the hard question of, “In this process are you truly giving your best? Are you really acting to the best or your ability? Or are you just passing responsibility back up the line to Sean because it’s his site?”

 

If Dao is in your heart, if Laozi’s message truly sings in your veins then why are you not trying to bring that into the reality of this community which I know we all have so much love for???

I think the quality of the site will be related more to the community values and the behavior of members. We could be hypocritical and mindless fools in your schema just as easily. If the mods do a good job, the framework doesn't really matter. Anthony Demello talks about a cardinal who was asked which form of government was most compassionate. His response was that if wolves are governing, they will govern as wolves. If lambs govern, they will govern as lambs. The form of government is of little significance.

 

I personally don't think the degree of change you're advocating is worth the effort or any more likely to enhance the community than continuing on the present course. To my knowledge there is no precedent in any internet forum I've encountered. The model in place here works here and elsewhere. I could certainly be wrong, and that's fine, it's just how I feel at this moment.

 

“Bad idea”, “threaten stability”, “inevitable clashes,” “destabilize this situation” …

 

How do you know this Steve? Truly? You sound like the republicans warning of what would happen if Obama got reelected

 

Remember it’s only when we say something is bad that we create the good and vice versa. Why have you chosen to only see the possible downsides? Why can’t you engage a balanced view of this?

 

Don’t you trust people to have some ownership? Don’t you trust people to behave responsibly? If you treat people like children they will behave like children, if you treat them like respected mature adults then you would be amazed how they begin to act accordingly.

I don't know any of these things - I just have some concerns. An 18-24 month rotation of a handful of members is going to be functionally no different than what is happening right now. The change would be virtually negligible it seems to me.

 

Do I trust people to have ownership? Well, it's not my forum but if it were, the answer would be no. I see more immaturity, disingenuity, manipulation, and other negative behavior on this forum than most others I am involved in. I suspect it's because there are a lot of people really looking at deep issues in themselves and others. I also think it's because the subject matter attracts some wacky folks. Finally, I think some of our topics appeal to a younger age group. The bottom line is that the overall tenor of the forum is such that I personally would not trust most of the membership to be involved in a position of authority. If anyone thinks less of me for that comment, I'm sorry but that's what I've observed. And I felt that way before agreeing to help out. I will feel that way if I give up the mod job.

 

My hope is that the more focused and serious members find a way to benefit from the site, contribute to the overall quality of interaction, and that we can slowly elevate the general culture to one that is a bit more focused on collaboration, compassion, and civility, and a little less concerned with competition, pedantry, and self absorption. As individuals prove themselves to be aligned with this sort of approach, I would personally welcome them to help with moderation - just my own approach, not endorsed by management necessarily.

 

I do not see the mods as having treated people in any particular way, certainly not like children with a specific intention. All decisions are discussed and weighed and previous behavior considered. I see the mods as treating folks in a manner consistent with their behavior and, unfortunately, it is often equivalent to treating people like children.

 

Overall, I just happen to disagree with many of your points on this. That's fine - we'll just agree to disagree. If my views expressed above insult anyone or sound arrogant, I sincerely apologize. It is what it is...

 

Cheers

[thelerner]

Could I be a mod? Oh the power!! Finally a chance to wreak my revenge on all...

 

just kidding. I'd hate the job, low pay, high criticism.

On that note my thanks to Steve F. he'll be a great addition to the mod squad

 

and on a serious note, I don't think rotating mods would work well. Its a thankless job that takes a thick skinned mature wise bum.

Edited August 20, 2011 by thelerner

[steve]

Could I be a mod? Oh the power!! Finally a chance to wreak my revenge on all...

 

just kidding. I'd hate the job, low pay, high criticism.

On that note my thanks to Steve F. he'll be a great addition to the mod squad

 

and on a serious note, I don't think rotating mods would work well. Its a thankless job that takes a thick skinned mature wise bum.

Thanks bud, I appreciate that.

[Stigweard]

 

To all who have chosen to engage me in this sincerely, I thank you

 

I have realized that the model I through up didn't actually achieve what I am intuitively looking for. So I formally will renounce my assertions in the OP and declare them "Bullshit!"

 

It has however helped me to become clearer in my mind about what I am really looking for and I have started a new conversation in that regards:

 

http://www.thetaobum...on-the-taobums/

[Marblehead]

 

To all who have chosen to engage me in this sincerely, I thank you

 

I have realized that the model I through up didn't actually achieve what I am intuitively looking for. So I formally will renounce my assertions in the OP and declare them "Bullshit!"

 

It has however helped me to become clearer in my mind about what I am really looking for and I have started a new conversation in that regards:

 

http://www.thetaobums.com/index.php?/topic/20096-self-moderation-as-a-effort-on-the-taobums/

 

Ain't it beautiful when we have a moment of "self-realization"?