Moderators recusal from infracting members
As a Moderator myself on another forum (not firearms related) with as large a membership as you have here, I am confronted personally with the difficulties in moderation. One of the hardest things to do is to both participate in the give and take of a discussion (as an ordinary member) and interpose upon that the duties of a moderator. On the forum that I moderate, our rule is that we do not infract a member in any conversation that we are personally engaged in, and as a more abolute rule we NEVER issue an infraction if we believe that we *ourselves* are the subject of any off TOS or infractable offense. It is a conflict of interest for a Moderator to infract a member for a discussion that a Moderator is taking part in personally. Generally if we feel that a look is indicated, we ask another moderator to take a look, and then that moderator in discussion with other staff members takes action.
I find myself with an infraction given by a moderator with whom I have been having a friendly exchange, which is the point of the forum. Tit for tat, he ridiculed me, and I exchanged back a good natured and well intended bit of ridicule myself in the friendly spirit of camaraderie. His responce instead of a smile and a "OK.. ya got me" was to (1) Issue an immediate infraction, (2): delete the posting, and (3) Lock the thread to prevent retort.
I believe that this response by the staff member is a serious conflict of interest, and is not in the best keeping of the traditions that we all expect. I am agrieved, and have so indicated to the moderator in question. I asked him to privately consider the ramifications of conflict of interest and let me know his thoughts, he has not responded, and thus I put it to the staff.
Would you please take up this subject privately, and come to a concensus opinion regarding conflict of interest and moderation? The general rules of most forums are that moderators either participate in a thread, or they moderate it, but that they do not do both.
I would appreciate a private response to this so that I know that it has been addressed, and what the policy might be.
Last edited by Willie Sutton; February 28, 2013 at 02:12 PM.