Board Thread:Site Questions/@comment-24011918-20140213185651

So, if some of you were in chat earlier, you'd know we had a little.. scuffle over whether a certain ex-mod should be given his status back. Well, one thing led to another, and the decision fell on me.

So, thing is, I don't trust myself here. I'm biased here. So, this decision falls to you. I won't vote, and although I can't control it, I'd advise you not vote either if you think your emotions towards this would affect your vote.

So, here's the question of the day:

Should Eyeless Jack be re-instated as a moderator of chat?

I'll try to give events as accurately and un-biased as I can, but if you catch me saying something biased or false, feel free to call me out of it.

So let's start at the beginning.

I can't say too much here, he seemed to be doing his job, although I have gotten an anonymous complaint that he was enforcing existing rules. The same source also admitted that he/she did not know how long Jack was a mod before that, and as we all know, mods do not start off perfectly. We blunder and do things wrong until we really get into the job. Ask any user from 2012, when I was just starting as a mod, I was TERRIBLE. On my first ban, I accidentally banned the wrong person for the wrong time, and Nick had to fix it while I tried to keep myself from having a miniature breakdown. Funny story.

Of course, it took me a few months to settle into the job, and I'm still learning and improving as an Administrator here. And I'd say I do decently.

Second theory: He was not aware of the rule change. Now admins and mods, can you really say this never happened to you? A rule was changed, you didn't know, or forgot, and enforced it wrong. I can certainty say I did that. (Really, who's foolish idea was it to make me a mod when I was that stupid? No offense to who did.)

Of course, while there is the possibility of one of those being the reason, he could also just have done it wrong on purpose. I really never a good judge of his character.

Fast forward a while. My source says that it was about 2-3 months ago when a certain event happened that caused a lot of distress to a lot of people. I asked him about this, and apparently he was kicked out of his home, which has caused his extreme inactivity for the past few months. Recently though, it seems the state issued him a home, and he returned with the promise of being on daily... which should be provide interesting results.

Anyways, over those few months, he has been, understandably, inactive. A while ago, sometime earlier this month, he came to me in pm, figuring I was an admin, and resigned. He admitted he wasn't on nearly enough to do his job, and said he'd come back when things got a bit more under control. Well, seems that happened.

Anyways, that brings us to today. The choice was moved to me, and I think it's far more fair to everybody if this choice is chat's as a group.

So, if you think Eyeless Jack should regain his Moderator rank, type { {Support} } without the spaces. Same with if you don't think he should be re-instated. { {Oppose} } without the spaces.

Alternately, I have another suggestion. Since reactions about him are mixed, and nobody seems to know how the future will go for certain, we could also set up a period where he gets the chance to prove himself. If this happens, and he gets more support than opposition, then we could re-instate him. If needed, or heavily requested, we could do a trial period with him. He'd need to prove that he's a benefit to chat as a Moderator, and then the watch would be over. Bt, if he were to fail the trial, we would either have another chat-wide discussion on where to go from there, or just demote him, depending on the severity of the failure. Of course, you could always email an admin with questions or concerns. Many Admins have methods of contact on their profile.

There is one more note I'd like to add, I admit that I'm not fully informed here, but I feel like it needs mentioning. Jack came to me, saying Maria gave him the all-clear to be a Moderator herself, and didn't do it herself because she didn't feel like undoing what I did to be right. If any of you, or Jack yourself, have an explanation for this, I'll go right back and edit this section. 