Manji: nothing personal, just business

[Garbarsardar]

Manji was recently appointed as member of the moderating Staff. I have no reasons to believe that he will make a bad moderator; quite the opposite. Let me also state that in each and every interaction I had with him he is a polite chap, witty and intelligent and a real pleasure to have around both here and in Ana. He is also the author of my sig which I have for the past few years.

However this is not personal, it's just business.

What is bewildering is not that Manji has been made staff; it is that he has to be ratified by the Curia. And I will explain why.

Manji, in multiple instances declared that the Curia is useless. That it is a bunch of whiners. (Although because of those whiners TWC is now free of ON.) That it is obsolete antiquated and dysfunctional.

He once posted a proposal to eliminate the Curia. Nothing bad with this. But he did more than that.

Less than one hour after he was was hired by Archer to moderate the site along with the likes of H&G (because all the people who are now in Hex including the present owner of the site had been demoted)he posted a full proposal in the Staff forum detailing the complete elimination of the Curia. This proposal resides now in the Hall of Shame (a subforum in Staff); I know because I put it there.

And that is the crunch.

Tomorrow the Curia will be asked to ratify the appointment of a person that considers it unnecessary and sought its elimination.

Tomorrow a moderator will stand in front of his peers which he wished to abolish and ask for their vote.

No matter what you believe about our system this is a complete travesty even in terms of a role-playing environment.

So, please

make Manji a moderator if he is needed (I think he is needed) but make an executive decision to bypass the ratification in his case. Anything else would be a really intolerable hypocrisy and I believe that manji, of all people, would never wanted to be in the middle of this.

Sorry for any harshness you may detected in my post Manji; as I said it is not personal, just business.

Take care,
Garb.

[Aristocrat]

While I don't necessarily agree with you breaking the 'holy rule of staff non-disclosure', I did myself having a wry chuckle at the thought of Manji going through a curial process like this. Made me wonder if Omnipotent Q would be next.

Now I will leave this thread with a simple: "I agree Garb".

[deRougemont]

Water under the bridge... Looking forward to the ratification, where I will gladly post my 'yae', along with many others I assume. Then we will toast and make merry while Manji roasts the spam (mmmm-mm, can you smell it?).

[Shaun]

Well, first things first, congrats Manji!

Now, on to buisness. To be fair, I dont think that voting against Manji solely on the basis of him wanting to abolish our vote is very fair. He will be a good moderator of this site, and his job at staff is independant of the Curia. When he is ratified, he still wont actually have the power to demolish the Curia, nothing to worry about.

I certainly did not know about this proposal, and I think that most dont either, Bringing this up probably did a bit of harm to Manji's reputation.

[rez]

In this new era of site ownership, everything has changed.

The Curia might well have been described as weak under the Ogre's shadow but now we have a benevolent and enthusiastic Curial owner.

Things are different now. But of course I am pre-supposing that Manji feels the same.

[Hotspur]

Jesus, you old-timers sure do like to hold grudges, don't ya?

The only relevant issue is whether or not Manji will be a good moderator.

[Erich von Manstein]

Jesus, you old-timers sure do like to hold grudges, don't ya?

The only relevant issue is whether or not Manji will be a good moderator.

Indeed.

As Garb said, very few people have doubts as to whether Manji is a good moderator. He has had moderation powers in the foreign languages forum for some time now and I have yet to hear any complaints. His Curial politics do not matter, nor do they matter for any front-line moderator. I am not interested in appointing only like-minded moderators to Staff. His personal political views are just that - his personal views. As long as he doesn't let them have an impact on his moderating (and I am not worried), his political views are none of my business. I cannot emphasize this enough - we do not appoint moderators based on their personal views. I do not support that type of discrimination.

We lost a few experienced mods to RL last week. A substantial minority of the moderators currently on Staff were appointed in the last month. We needed a member with experience to help us out while they learned their jobs. For this reason and this reason alone a public thread wasn't opened in the Curia asking for applications; it didn't seem fair when were looking for a very specific type of applicant. We had a few members in mind and ultimately a majority of Staff decided on Manji. I assure you all that this method of selection is the exception rather than the rule, restricted to uncommon situations such as the one we found ourselves in.

Now, various members have already expressed to me their opinions that members with certain personal views should be discriminated against during the selection process. As always, I welcome any and all input on the matter. I assure you, however, that my own stance will not be swayed.

[Muizer]

His personal political views are just that - his personal views. As long as he doesn't let them have an impact on his moderating (and I am not worried), his political views are none of my business.

Your business? To say a moderator's personal views don't impact how his moderating actions are viewed by the members is naive. To say a moderator's personal views shouldn't have an impact on this perception is irrelevant when it does.

[Erich von Manstein]

Your business? To say a moderator's personal views don't impact how his moderating actions are viewed by the members is naive. To say a moderator's personal views shouldn't have an impact on this perception is irrelevant when it does.

Please don't twist my words. I said that I don't think it will be a problem, which is quite different from saying that there is no possible way it won't.

[Muizer]

Please don't twist my words.

I can't look into your head, I have to make do with what's written. Please don't blame me for your poor choice of words.

[Muizer]

Weird choice if you ask me. If you'd ask me to list people whose presence on the boards has a moderating influence you wouldn't find Manji near the top.

[Manji]

Well, let me just say that I'm completely unfamiliar with the proceedings required for making one moderator.
Let me also add that if I'm not wanted as a moderator, you can remove me from that position freely (as you already know).

The whole business was brought to me under this perspective: "Manji, your reports on spam/flame/trolls are almost always correct; why not cut the middle man and become a moderator?" to which I replied "Sure; if the position is offered to me I'll accept it".

Now, personally, my opinion about (general) internet forums has changed little; if anything I consider it more mature and less vocal and almost 7 months ago I made a public promise (for those who remember it): I'd never again get involved in forum politics. I don't consider being part of staff as a moderator politics, I consider Curial proceedings, Syntagma discussion, etc, politics. I stand firm by my promise not to involve myself in all that but one thing I must make clear: I don't care about those who have negative opinions about myself but the last thing I would want would be to be moderator against the will of you all or the majority or whatever you call.

Again, if you wish to remove me from moderator, feel free, no hard feelings whatsoever.

Just a final note: interestingly (or not), the people who are more vocal against me haven't really had many discussions with me; sure, you are entitled to make judgements based on whatever premises you want, but that doesn't mean you are right (or wrong for that matter) it just means you are assuming too much with too little information.

Cheers

[Professor420]

His personal political views are just that - his personal views. As long as he doesn't let them have an impact on his moderating (and I am not worried), his political views are none of my business.

Famous last words. I wonder if Hex thought that way about Spartan's second coming, about HG, Soren, Fab, and countless others who Hex hoped could keep their moderating as separate from personal views, and who could keep their moderator duties separate from personal ambitions.

[Søren]

Famous last words. I wonder if Hex thought that way about Spartan's second coming, about HG, Soren, Fab, and countless others who Hex hoped could keep their moderating as separate from personal views, and who could keep their moderator duties separate from personal ambitions.

I am not quite sure how I have let "my personal ambitions/views" cloud my moderating judgement, but I suppose if you have any reason to support that, perhaps you could give it?

---

As to the original post, I don't see any hypocrisy in Manji being ratified. Although he fundamentally disagrees with the process, that should not stop him from submitting to it.

Just as some of the moderators (hypothetically) might not think Manstein or I is the best for the role, but should still remember that we are (so long as they are mods) their bosses. We can't have everything perfect.

[Professor420]

I am not quite sure how I have let "my personal ambitions/views" cloud my moderating judgement, but I suppose if you have any reason to support that, perhaps you could give it?

Are you saying what you have been up to in Hex has anything to with moderating? Soren I think you are a good moderator and am a fan of your moderation policy but like many individuals, your personal views will define you as much as your moderating tenure. My grievance is not so much with the quality of moderation of this individuals (except in Fab's case), but that it was personal views that defined them. This is about the greater good, the greater issue of TWC here, and we seem to be repeating the same mistakes again and again about some arrogant view of "it won't happen to me." We've handed a political stepping stone to the "me /= politics" type, which we've seen before, and we've seen, in the end, how disinterested they actually are, just as we've seen how many times that it doesn't take a sociologist to see the link between any inclined moderator and the politics of his priviliged position.

[Søren]

Are you saying what you have been up to in Hex has anything to with moderating?

Perhaps you'ld like to elaborate on this? I really have no idea what you're reffering to.

As to the rest; naturally - personal opinions affect moderating, just as they affect everything we do. I wasn't disputing that.

But I fail to see how one's view of the Curia will meaningfully affect their moderation....

[Professor420]

Perhaps you'ld like to elaborate on this? I really have no idea what you're reffering to.

The reason I know is that I am trustworthy with both sources and where and how and when it is leaked... you know what I am talking about and that is enough for now. But please do not play that card you know I cannot publicly play.

But I fail to see how one's view of the Curia will meaningfully affect their moderation....

And as I said earlier, famous last words, for all the same reasons.

[Garbarsardar]

Water under the bridge...

Jesus, you old-timers sure do like to hold grudges, don't ya?

The only relevant issue is whether or not Manji will be a good moderator.

This is not the case of a grudge. If this was the case then I would have questioned the appointment of Manji or asked for people to vote against him. I did neither. I simply pointed out that ratifying (and being ratified) while you consider this nonsense is ridiculous if not hypocritical.

I don't consider being part of staff as a moderator politics, I consider Curial proceedings, Syntagma discussion, etc, politics. I stand firm by my promise not to involve myself in all that but one thing I must make clear: I don't care about those who have negative opinions about myself but the last thing I would want would be to be moderator against the will of you all or the majority or whatever you call.

I know your opinion Manji. Does it strike you as bizarre that the basic and only requirment for a post in Staff is to be a member of the Curia? That all staff are citizens?

Indeed.

As Garb said, very few people have doubts as to whether Manji is a good moderator. He has had moderation powers in the foreign languages forum for some time now and I have yet to hear any complaints. His Curial politics do not matter, nor do they matter for any front-line moderator. I am not interested in appointing only like-minded moderators to Staff. His personal political views are just that - his personal views. As long as he doesn't let them have an impact on his moderating (and I am not worried), his political views are none of my business. I cannot emphasize this enough - we do not appoint moderators based on their personal views. I do not support that type of discrimination.

We lost a few experienced mods to RL last week. A substantial minority of the moderators currently on Staff were appointed in the last month. We needed a member with experience to help us out while they learned their jobs. For this reason and this reason alone a public thread wasn't opened in the Curia asking for applications; it didn't seem fair when were looking for a very specific type of applicant. We had a few members in mind and ultimately a majority of Staff decided on Manji. I assure you all that this method of selection is the exception rather than the rule, restricted to uncommon situations such as the one we found ourselves in.

Now, various members have already expressed to me their opinions that members with certain personal views should be discriminated against during the selection process. As always, I welcome any and all input on the matter. I assure you, however, that my own stance will not be swayed.

All this is very correct Erich but hardly relevant. The appointment of Manji is not in question. The ratification as a process with which Manji disagrees is.

As to the original post, I don't see any hypocrisy in Manji being ratified. Although he fundamentally disagrees with the process, that should not stop him from submitting to it.

So if Manji thinks that the Curia is a ridiculous formation there is nothing hypocritical (not from the part of Manji, I repeat) in asking the Curia to ratify him?

Manji did not ask for ratification. The staff will ask the Curia to ratify a person that thinks that the Curia is useless and wishes to to abolish it.

Nothing hypocritical there, heh?

[Søren]

So if Manji thinks that the Curia is a ridiculous formation there is nothing hypocritical (not from the part of Manji, I repeat) in asking the Curia to ratify him?

Manji did not ask for ratification. The staff will ask the Curia to ratify a person that thinks that the Curia is useless and wishes to to abolish it.

Nothing hypocritical there, heh?

Ermm, yes, I don't see anything hypocritical about it.

For instance, it would not be hypocritical, for someone who did not believe in the lawcourts, to be tried by a judge.

[Fabolous]

Manji did not ask for ratification. The staff will ask the Curia to ratify a person that thinks that the Curia is useless and wishes to to abolish it.

Nothing hypocritical there, heh?

Yeah, nothing hypocritical. Seriously, that isn't hypocritical...

EDIT: I just don't see it... I'm tired though.