Is it possible to makde someone moderator of a single thread ?I have some ideas for useful threads that I would like to keep on topic by killing off irrelevant stuff.

For sure its possible. What where you thinking of, I think for one a "Technical Software" thread would be cool.

To me there are several obvious types of thread:Useful links, where we put togther a good list, talk about them, and publish the result. This is S/W, maths, etc. The trick here will be to get the right level of focus.Reviews. Discuss the pros and cons of a model, bit of s/w etc.Moderator led discussions in off-topic. We had a promising thread on work/life balance die through messy posting. Could have been good.My ideal would be that anyone could launch a thread as a moderator.A "good" moderator is someone who achieves a healthy balance between freedom and quality. "good" is defined by the market.If you run a thread well, people join in. If you do it badly, they don't. A moderator would be able to delete posts, but not edit them. It is one thing to have your message deleted, but a far worse thing to have someone put words in your mouth.Aside from that limitation, a moderator is a despot in his own domain. He may have rules or not, but the users of the thread can leave at any time.A moderator with a good track record will attract people, one with a bad one, repel them. People can niche their moderation, to areas they care about.A good example is Credit Derivatives, which although a popular issue, is not really covered that much around here. A learned discussion on it would make us all more valuable.

QuoteOriginally posted by: DCFCTo me there are several obvious types of thread:Useful links, where we put togther a good list, talk about them, and publish the result. This is S/W, maths, etc. The trick here will be to get the right level of focus.Reviews. Discuss the pros and cons of a model, bit of s/w etc.Moderator led discussions in off-topic. We had a promising thread on work/life balance die through messy posting. Could have been good.My ideal would be that anyone could launch a thread as a moderator.A "good" moderator is someone who achieves a healthy balance between freedom and quality. "good" is defined by the market.If you run a thread well, people join in. If you do it badly, they don't. A moderator would be able to delete posts, but not edit them. It is one thing to have your message deleted, but a far worse thing to have someone put words in your mouth.Aside from that limitation, a moderator is a despot in his own domain. He may have rules or not, but the users of the thread can leave at any time.A moderator with a good track record will attract people, one with a bad one, repel them. People can niche their moderation, to areas they care about.A good example is Credit Derivatives, which although a popular issue, is not really covered that much around here. A learned discussion on it would make us all more valuable.Dominic-Good points. In my view, the Off Topic threads seem to be the ones most in need of having moderatorintervention to delete extraneous posts.The other forums seem pretty good to me.Matthew

Yes, that's true for O-THowever, it applies to the others as well. One does see some repetition of questions, and I'd hope that some learned threads actually finish, and in so doing return view on something. Rather like the FAQ project, but a bit more general and open.

QuoteOriginally posted by: DCFCI have some ideas for useful threads that I would like to keep on topic by killing off irrelevant stuff.If you want to moderate a thread, take some initiative you puss!Take ownership, let people know what you want and don't want in your thread, and confront them when they step over the line. Reprimand them publicly, send them a PM, warn in advance, point out inappropriate behavior, explain what is and isn't appropriate and why. If you have a vision, don't educate the moderator, educate the participants!You want to delete entire posts, but you are not even willing to take the intermediate step of scolding people?It's a sign of the times. No one wants to stand up for right and wrong, everything has to be done by committee. No one has any confidence in anything, conviction is a bad word. We all live in glass houses, if you don't say anything then I won't say anything when you do wrong, please, don't call me a hypocrite. What, you think it's wrong to be judgmental, but it suddenly becomes okay if the moderator gives you a big stick? Hah, I'd like to see the bold DCFC delete a post without 7 weeks of whining, consultation, and deliberation.QuoteOriginally posted by: DCFCWe had a promising thread on work/life balance die through messy posting.I faintly remember a topic something like this, but I couldn't find the thread. Did you start it?

If you want to moderate a thread, take some initiative you puss!Interesting idea, I'll think about that. However, I want others to be moderators, not just me.You want to delete entire posts, but you are not even willing to take the intermediate step of scolding people?Good point, I should have mentioned that. A good moderator will ask people to change their messages, or suggest a place their comment would be better placed.It's a sign of the times. No one wants to stand up for right and wrong, everything has to be done by committee.My plan was for local tyrranny, so I'm not sure I can be accused of this. I've used forums where the moderator could be 1 or more people, sometimes made it better, sometimes it didn't.A good moderator will poke the conversation to keep it moving on, often one person ain't got the time. Hah, I'd like to see the bold DCFC delete a post without 7 weeks of whining, consultation, and deliberation.We have exchanged any number of messages in the forums, and I'm surprised you think that of me.That being said, I'm not a fan of censorship, but think there is a boundary with editorial judgement. Sometimes that will be to let things wander a bit, sometimes it won't. My call, not a committee.What I actually want is the ability to reduce the font size of irrelevant comments, but there are technical limits of course.I faintly remember a topic something like this, but I couldn't find the thread. Did you start it? No, but I might start a new one ?

QuoteOriginally posted by: DCFCWe have exchanged any number of messages in the forums, and I'm surprised you think that of me.I stand corrected, I must have been hallucinating.QuoteOriginally posted by: DCFCThat being said, I'm not a fan of censorship... What I actually want is the ability to reduce the font size of irrelevant commentsHey, you tricked me!QuoteOriginally posted by: DCFCA moderator would be able to delete posts, but not edit them.Hold on a minute.QuoteOriginally posted by: DCFCkeep on topic by killing off irrelevant stuff.D'oh, now I'm really confused!

I'm sorry if my thoughts aren't entirely consistent.The idea is that someone may either start a thread in the current way, or as it's moderator.He may appoint others as co-moderators.The goal of the thread is entirely the decision of the moderator, and anyone who feels like joining in can do this.The moderator may delete posts he deems to be inappropriate for any reason that occurs to him.He may not alter their contents. This is to stop arguments where people think they've been misquoted.A moderator may enter into discussion with the auithor of a message, but is under no obligation to do so.One reason for this is that people often don't read their PMs, and many have them blocked. Personal Emails are controlled by the Admins, and I don't see a good case for them disclosibng addresses to moderators.Since the idea is to reduce wibble, we don't want to be sidetracked on to whether a message was valid or not. A successful or contentious thread may well spawn others which discus zapped posts.Aside from the editing limitation, the moderator is not under any other obligation like fairness, balance or sanity.The success of a thread will be determined by the market of Wilmotters, bad moderators will probably just give up.

Sounds good - I'm very surprised noone in charge here has got back to you either way in the past 3 weeks since your original message. I think a lot of the political posts would be better without Farmer taking them off topic with crazy rants.

We are working on it.But, OkName, there is a very fine line between moderation and censorship. P

QuoteOriginally posted by: OkNameI think a lot of the political posts would be better without Farmer taking them off topic with crazy rants.Name one.You have yet to make any kind of argument on anything! That is why you are a loser.

An "ignore" facility might be nice.People can only drag stuff off topic if we respond.

But, OkName, there is a very fine line between moderation and censorship. Agreed.Moderators who get it wrong will have stunted or dissolute threads. To a large extent it is self regulating.

Personally, I think DCFC's modertor idea is a really good one.I have seen posts that had all the potential to lead to very interesting discussions, that were diverted by secondary and irrelevant discussions.Sometimes these secondary discussins even lead to insults btw members...Alex