New VIP II

[Matty]

Congratulations to both Rose and to Hangar!

[Paperback Writer]

Rose deserves VIP, she's a lovely gal, smart and a productive member.

...with a temper.

Why hanger was chosen over far more productive

Productive =/= polite or savvy

and smarter members like @Common and @Common Sense

will disagree

and a couple others is beyond me. @Safety is one who should be considered and @sachem .

Safety is indeed smart and polite whilst sachem posts nothing but snark.

Why @Alyosha isn't a VIP is beyond me, maybe there's more to that story.

Trounces everyone like a political MMA fighter

Why @The Wash is is also beyond me,

Affirmative Action

he's never around. And @Guerilla , rarely posts.

Smarter than most on here.

When active, productive members are passed by for schlocks who are chosen out of popularity or because of which way they tilt politically is only going to cause these active members who are thrown to the curb to become indifferent to the forum.

But, who am I to question.

Who is anyone?

[Paperback Writer]

Congratulations to both of them if this is something they desire. I've not really seen anything from the VIPs, but I'm certain they're hard at work like elves behind the scenes.

[Paperback Writer]

If I were to create a group of VIPs it would remain at 4 who post no less than 20 posts per day and they would act as moderator oversight, nothing more. If someone had issue with moderation it would go to that group, else there's no use for them.

It would consist of people who actively donate time and money to the forum, therefore they are relevant stakeholders, and they would likewise be people who are trusted by forum members.

Currently it's a coloured label affixed to a member's name, absolutely meaningless. Perhaps they vote on board issues, perhaps, but considering most of them don't post that often I cannot see how. It is in its own way a popularity contest, whilst also being smart enough to not bring in those who are actually popular.

@Captain Obvious asked why not @Alyosha? I'll tell you why. Aside from her ability to disintegrate her political opponent when she's feeling moody, she's also entirely too popular to put on a VIP staff. When that happens, and it has, were she to leave others go with her. You can look at the post counts when she's online versus those post counts when she's not. People prefer to fight with her or watch her fight with others.

Aside from that, she's better as a balancing force outside the system. How often is she able to soothe two posters who are fighting when mods are unable to do so?

[Captain Obvious]

If I were to create a group of VIPs it would remain at 4 who post no less than 20 posts per day and they would act as moderator oversight, nothing more. If someone had issue with moderation it would go to that group, else there's no use for them.

It would consist of people who actively donate time and money to the forum, therefore they are relevant stakeholders, and they would likewise be people who are trusted by forum members.

Currently it's a coloured label affixed to a member's name, absolutely meaningless. Perhaps they vote on board issues, perhaps, but considering most of them don't post that often I cannot see how. It is in its own way a popularity contest, whilst also being smart enough to not bring in those who are actually popular.

@Captain Obvious asked why not @Alyosha? I'll tell you why. Aside from her ability to disintegrate her political opponent when she's feeling moody, she's also entirely too popular to put on a VIP staff. When that happens, and it has, were she to leave others go with her. You can look at the post counts when she's online versus those post counts when she's not. People prefer to fight with her or watch her fight with others.

Aside from that, she's better as a balancing force outside the system. How often is she able to soothe two posters who are fighting when mods are unable to do so?

I figured as much but I'm not in the loop on much anymore.

I just think it's a mistake to try to impact the political affiliation of the forum by deciding who mods or VIP's based on political affiliation and/or popularity at the cost of slighting those members who are productive and active.

That's all I'm saying on the matter.

[del]

i've given this the requisite amount of thought, and i've determined that, for the foreseeable future, i don't give a flying $#@!.

i extend the appropriate expressions of approbation to all concerned

that is all

[Paperback Writer]

I figured as much but I'm not in the loop on much anymore.

This is my best guess. I don't ask these types of questions because that would imply an interest that goes beyond passing and my penchant for criticism.

I just think it's a mistake to try to impact the political affiliation of the forum by deciding who mods or VIP's based on political affiliation and/or popularity at the cost of slighting those members who are productive and active.

That's all I'm saying on the matter.

Hangar and Redrose are active and the former far more polite than some of the more popular liberal posters you, yourself produced. Sachem? Really? When has she contributed more than mild snark to any given subject? You might as well ask why del is not a VIP?

They don't come to post on politics, they come for personal amusement. Nothing wrong with that. Those that come to post on politics are more engaged and usually write a paragraph at least, albeit small, in a particular discussion.

[del]

This is my best guess. I don't ask these types of questions because that would imply an interest that goes beyond passing and my penchant for criticism.



Hangar and Redrose are active and the former far more polite than some of the more popular liberal posters you, yourself produced. Sachem? Really? When has she contributed more than mild snark to any given subject? You might as well ask why del is not a VIP?

They don't come to post on politics, they come for personal amusement. Nothing wrong with that. Those that come to post on politics are more engaged and usually write a paragraph at least, albeit small, in a particular discussion.

as marx so aptly put it, i wouldn't join a club that would have me as a member.

[Paperback Writer]

as marx so aptly put it, i wouldn't join a club that would have me as a member.

@del

but is that not the truth? You don't come here for any great discussion. You're (prolly) a retiree who has fun just jabbing at idiots. We all have our motivations.

It's a rarity that I post my actual opinion on anything here. I just like to point out where everyone's wrong.

[del]

@del

but is that not the truth? You don't come here for any great discussion. You're (prolly) a retiree who has fun just jabbing at idiots. We all have our motivations.

It's a rarity that I post my actual opinion on anything here. I just like to point out where everyone's wrong.

of course it's the truth; i've said so myself more than once.

arguing politics on the internet is unlike cleopatra; age stales and custom withers its quite finite variety.