CreateDebate


Debate Info

Debate Score:72
Arguments:67
Total Votes:81
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Who do you think could handle being a moderator on this site to help out Andy? (54)

Debate Creator

Saurbaby(5581) pic



Who do you think could handle being a moderator on this site to help out Andy?

A conversation Andy and I had the other day made me think of this. This doesn't mean anything, just what do you think.

 

It obviously has to be a regular, or someone willing to become one, and it has to be someone who level-headed, fair, and not going to delete anything unfairly.

 

If we get to our goal by the end of the summer of users, by the ways don't forget to spread the word about CD :), then Andy will need help moderating, so it's good to get thinking about it. 

 

:)

Add New Argument
3 points

I think there is a lot of great people. No joke, i would suggest Joe Cavalry to be a moderator. Look at his points, he seems to be dedicated. I do have to say that some things that he says needs to be toned down a bit becuase in the eyes of our society, it can be viewed disturbing. But his intentions are pure, and he is a sweet guy. Is he level headed and fair? Well, i never seen him gotten out of line. I personally don't think he will start deleting things unfairly. And Joe is a great bonus because nearly everybody likes him. And he makes Createdebate more welcoming.

I also support Chatturgha if he agrees to comes to the site more. Please mistake me if i am wrong but he hasn't came on in a long time. But he is a smart person and i don't believe he would make an unfair decision. I too don't think he will delete things unfairly.

I see you on the site alot too, Suarababy. I believe making a video on youtube shows how much passion you have for Createdebate. I don't think you are unfair. You also shown your face, and to me that is a good thing. Knowing who your moderator looks like bring a sense of a warm welcoming or plain welcoming. The brightness and simplicity of this site is welcoming. lol. I even suggest Srom. I don't know him very well, but i never seen him go out of line. He has been kind, and i personally don't think he would delete things unfairly. Is he level headed? When it comes to religion, he thinks that we are wrong, ignorant and stubborn. If im wrong, mistake me Srom. And we think some of us thing he is wrong, ignorant, and stubborn. But when it comes to the decision of knowing someone is wrong such as making uneccessary ugly comments to just hurt someone, i believe he can make the right judgment to ban that person, to warn that person, or to delete that comment made by that person.

I really don't know the four well. I can place in order of who can be the best mod based on my beliefs and opinions....

Saurbaby (made a video)

Joe (always on here)

Srom (see him on here as well)

Chatturgha (intelligent and i saw a recent comment by him)

I think mostly anybody on this can make the right decision. Hellno, Sunset, Reventon, Apollo, and i bet even the newcomers. I think the most important key aspect to me is if you have been on this site constantly. Yes, being a fair level head is also important but what is the point of being a moderator if you are not dedicated and passionate for the site? :)

And also this other guy can be a good moderator. I forgot who he was. I think he was in the marines or the army. He had black color skin, good smile, kind, etc. The guy that had the michael jackson picture. :)

BenWalters(1513) Clarified
1 point

I think he was in the marines or the army. He had black color skin, good smile, kind, etc. The guy that had the michael jackson picture.

Silas is the Michael Jackson guy, but I don't think he was in the army. I'd guess you're talking about Bohemian?

TheThinker(1697) Clarified
1 point

Ah yes, that guy Silawash. Im pretty sure he stated that he was going into the navy, marine, or army. I believe i remember a debate of him saying goodbye. I could be wrong. Thankyou for the name. :)

Srom(12206) Clarified
1 point

I even suggest Srom. I don't know him very well, but i never seen him go out of line. He has been kind, and i personally don't think he would delete things unfairly. Is he level headed? When it comes to religion, he thinks that we are wrong, ignorant and stubborn. If im wrong, mistake me Srom.

Well sometimes when it come to what I believe in and if people don't use it properly or just bash what I believe in. I correct them in a way that doesn't hurt the person and not trying to be too nice just correcting them in a orderly fashion so that they know they made a mistake.

3 points

I must have missed this debate 300+ days ago? But I'll answer now!

I would suck because I wouldn't moderate shit except porn or advert spam or point whore shit like Prodigee did/does.

2 points

I think I'd be a good mod mainly because of my libertarian tendencies.

In that as much as possible, I'll see inaction as the best action.

I'll only move or delete posts on a rare instance when I know that they're spam or unnecessary.

But 99% of the time I'll basically do nothing, which is important, because abuse of power is far worse than non-use of power.

0 points

You were actually one of the people that cane to my mind when I first thought of this.

2 points

This is a really interesting question.

First, being a moderator could allow you to:

Ban users from the site

Delete debates entirely

Remove debates from showing on the home page

Edit debates (titles, positions, tags, the body)

Delete arguments

Second, what do you do when you get someone on the site who is really creating a stir? Remember when Ismalia (think that is the right spelling) came to the site? She caused a big stir and traffic went thought the roof for about a week! I would bet many moderators would have tried to stop her. But we need people who come ans stir things up every own and then. That is a tough balance to deal with.

Third, I feel that I can't really get heated in any debate because someone might accuse me of impropriety in dealing with the situation (even if not true) so I generally won't get in the middle of a really heated debate. I am not sure if a moderator who is really active could be seen as impartial.

But, yes I am looking, the time is drawing near where the traffic will be too great for me to deal with it all.

Andy

GuitaristDog(2548) Clarified
4 points

Here is a suggestion:

The moderators can't ban users, delete debates or debate arguments, however, they can temporarily block users from the site, temporarily hide debates and temporarily remove arguments. Whenever they do any of these, you receive a notification, and then you can decide what to do with it.

Just throwing some ideas out there.

2 points

Actually I think that is a very good idea... it makes sense because these "mods" would be unpaid so to give them too much power makes no sense and Andy would get the last word.

I would also like to consider the possibility that moderators could unban users who were unfairly silenced from debate.

BenWalters(1513) Clarified
2 points

First, being a moderator could allow you to:

Is it possible to allow them to remove debates from the home page, but not give them the other powers (you rule supreme, basically, they just help it all along)? I don't have too much experience with the behind the scenes web engineering.

Second, what do you do when you get someone on the site who is really creating a stir?

I agree that this is an issue, and you'd have to monitor whoever it is closely.

Third, I feel that I can't really get heated in any debate

I would recommend not telling the general user base who you decide, simply say that you have chosen someone, and if anyone thinks something unfair is going on, they should talk to you about it. Do you feel this is a possibility, or do you think that the community should know who is it?

casper3912(1581) Disputed
2 points

Perhaps you could have multiple levels of moderators?

1st level:

Flag profiles for potential deletion by an higher level mod.

Delete arguments

Edit debates

2nd level:

Flag profiles for potential deletion by an higher level mod.

Delete arguments

Edit debates

remove debates from showing on the homepage

Demote 1st level mods, unless they were promoted by a 3rd level or higher.

Promote a first level mode to 2nd, unless previously demoted by a higher level.

3rd level:

Delete profiles

Delete arguments

Edit debates

remove debates from showing on the homepage

delete debates entirely

demote first and second level mods, unless they were promoted by Andy.

Promote a first level mod to second, unless demoted by higher level

Promote a second level mod to third, unless demoted by higher level

4th level: Keep yourself as some type of superuser, which can't be deleted by level 3s

You might want to make the promotion/demotion more democratic, by lets say requiring some level of points to have been acquired before promotion, and you can also check it by length of time, activity or another factor. Ultimately, it would be nice if the site could more or less moderate itself by promoting trusted users into mod positions. The system I proposed suggest that the initial set of mods are awesome, or else there might be some issues.

TheThinker(1697) Disputed
2 points

I personally believe that simplicity is best at times. I like how you went into details and if Andy supports it, i respect that. In my opinion, your ideas about promotion and moderator levels just gets confusing. I believe having a simple moderator who we can all trust is good enough. God bless peace.

2 points

Rarely would I ban users. I'm not sure on how you feel about those creating debates that are advertisements. Do you invite that?

Bans are strong, and there are two types of bans. Profile bans and IP bans. now, there can be a limit to how long or how much a user can be banned, and mods will probably have to make an appeal to do a perma-ban on a user that they feel is a troll.

But as a mod, I'd avoid banning users.

I'd avoid editing or deleting anything. I'd only delete multiple arguments of the same content, stuff like that. Keep the site clean. But I love controversy and wouldn't ban or delete someone just because they're as much as a racist or idiot.

I believe that mods are for keeping the place tidy. But debate invites controversy, so controversy is NOT messy.

1 point

Would you ban me? .

Banana_Slug(845) Disputed
1 point

I used to have web with forum... trust me, don't give them so much "super powers", it will end badly, freezing potential freaks is enough. Also pick them from around the world so you will cover whole day.

Oh me, definitely me...

Y'know, if you want the site to crash and burn in three seconds :P

I think Lizzie may do a good job. She appears to be gery kind and gentle to everyone.

1 point

Yeah but the problem is that she probably wouldn't do too much due to her forgiving nature.

As much as I admire Lizzie's sweet nature I have to agree unfortanutely ...

Joe? .

0 points

Could you see Joe being a moderator for real???? I love Joe, he's a great regular, and good for a laugh, and (rarely) he makes REALLY good arguments, but I feel like his trolling nature would take over. lol

ChadOnSunday(1863) Clarified
3 points

No, I'm sorry, I was just trolling in suggesting that a troll could be a mod. If you're reading, troll, just know that I'm a big fan of your work.

Of course you. .

0 points

Thank you, but I feel I am more of the face of cd than a moderator. Not that I would say no if Andy asked, just I see myself more as the type to make videos.

Yeah you actually are. But i just can't really think of anyone else who would be a good mod.

1 point

I would vote for you as moderator. You are honest and fair.

I'm not really too bothered who gets it, I'd trust Andy to make the right decision, but I do think that we badly need someone else to try and manage it. The new debates section is getting ridiculous, and if Andy's serious about massive growth in the number of users, then we need good debates.

3 points

I have been thinking about the new debates section a little. What if it were split into two sections and if someone "new" posted a new debate, it ended up in a separate "new" debates section, while veteran users (definition of veteran not yet defined), had their own section of "new debates"? Would that help?

How often would you have to be on here to perform this function? Also, would it have to be known that you were a mod?

1 point

I don't know. No one comes up to mind. However it has to be someone who always goes on like everyday to be moderator. I go on everyday on CD and debate but see I don't know if I can handle being a moderator. I think most of the people probably will say no to me being a moderator or what do you guys think should I be moderator or not?

Saurbaby(5581) Clarified
0 points

Not trying to be ruse, but no. You' re too biased. And you can ne emotional ay times. Not to mention your idea of what is inappropriate OS very different than most. I feel that would cause you to delete unnecessarily.

Srom(12206) Clarified
1 point

I understand that you are just giving your opinion out and I know you weren't being rude. You were being honest. I wanted some debaters to give their opinion on what they think of me being a moderator and you answered which I am glad you did. :)

Well I wouldn't delete unnecessary I would do what Andy wants me to do for a moderator (If he does let me be moderator).

In all honesty I think a lot of us have this problem in one way or another; most of us would delete something, or go off at someone purely because we don't like them or their view. I'm 100% for freedom of speech and expression, but I know I would end up calling someone a "fucking twat" if they pissed me off with their stupidity, which wouldn't be setting a very good example for the site. I can't actually think of many people that would make good mods, but I know for sure that I wouldn't, ever.

1 point

Me of course god you guy are so mean:( :( :( LOL

1 point

You would do a very good job and I am not ass kissing. Hellno would too.

1 point

Right now I would suck at it. Maybe in a year. Maybe not.

1 point

While this thread appears to be dead by the fact that it is almost over a year old I believe that lizzieXlaura (apologies if it is the wrong spelling) could be a good moderator.

I think that power could corrupt anyone on this site.

Zeph, and misfit alike.

Though Hellno and Joe seem to be pretty laid back, and they certainly have been here long enough to know the flow of the site, so I'd say them.

1 point

Stomach would be a awesome moderator 

1 point

Wtf u just did the same debate I did long ago what the hell is wrong with you plz delete this debate!!! 

Saurbaby(5581) Clarified
1 point

I apologize if you did the same debate, I was unaware. But I'm not going to delete it for that reason. We've repeated debates several times, it would be irrational for someone to expect to search to see if someone has already done it when they get an idea. Also it's old, why would it matter now?

On a side note, I don't appreciate you just going around and downvoting my arguments on here for no obvious reason. Unless, of course, you have a rational reason?

0 points

I don't have the time...

But.

I think I would be an excellent mod because I pride myself in my efforts to be all the things a mod needs to be. Most are the same leadership traits for being a Marine or even a Boy Scout. (I am/was both)

Scouts - Trustworthy, Loyal, Helpful, Friendly, Courteous, Kind, Obedient, Cheerful, Thrifty, Brave, Clean and Reverent. (Okay, so I'm not reverent)

Marines - Justice, Judgment, Dependability, Initiative, Decisiveness, Tact, Integrity

Enthusiasm, Bearing, Unselfishness, Courage, Knowledge, Loyalty, Endurance

Cuaroc(8829) Disputed
2 points

If you became a moderator half the people on here would be banned within a week for disagreeing with you on a debate topic.

Chuz-Life(497) Disputed
1 point

While most of the people I've banned do disagree with me, I don't ban people for disagreeing with me.

Idiots and trolls who can't stay on topic, make personal attacks, try to derail the thread, use multiple accounts, harass, stalk etc...

Those, I ban without hesitation.

You were a prime candidate.

Saurbaby(5581) Clarified
1 point

I disagree. The way you've banned people in your own debates would make me concern that you'd do the same to the site.

Chuz-Life(497) Clarified
2 points

1. You don't know why I banned people from my first debates.

2. I don't want to be a mod anyway.

3. As a mod for the site, I would have Andy's interest in mind and not my own interests in mind, like I would as a mod for one of my own debates. The two are not the same.

Sitara(11080) Disputed
0 points

You would be a horrible moderator. You are a fascist antichoice troll.

Chuz-Life(497) Disputed
1 point

You would probably be banned for calling people 'fascist antichoice trolls' just for taking a stand against pro-aborts like yourself.