Who is able and willing to moderate the Politics & Society section?

[Literally_farming_merits]

I wouldn't trust somebody if he/she has no fear of God.

Oh, that will serve you well in life.

Distrusting everyone with common sense is just going to leave you with idiots.
I understand that you want others to have their hand in the sand so you are not lonely.

Such a backwards person should not be put in any position of authority...

Master Vod, please don't worry, you are the only one to have the authorities in your desired position. there is strangely no body talking about staff being representatives of the FORUM here. hypocrite much?

[actmyname]

Master Vod, please don't worry, you are the only one to have the authorities in your desired position. there is strangely no body talking about staff being representatives of the FORUM here. hypocrite much?

I've already read this post 4 times and I still don't understand what you're trying to say.

What does hypocrisy have to do with your previous statement? It seems a little bit irrelevant. And moreover, what do your first two statements even mean?

[KWH]

Master Vod, please don't worry, you are the only one to have the authorities in your desired position. there is strangely no body talking about staff being representatives of the FORUM here. hypocrite much?

I've already read this post 4 times and I still don't understand what you're trying to say.

What does hypocrisy have to do with your previous statement? It seems a little bit irrelevant. And moreover, what do your first two statements even mean?

Still scratching my head after reading that one.

[InvoKing]

Master Vod, please don't worry, you are the only one to have the authorities in your desired position. there is strangely no body talking about staff being representatives of the FORUM here. hypocrite much?

I've already read this post 4 times and I still don't understand what you're trying to say.

What does hypocrisy have to do with your previous statement? It seems a little bit irrelevant. And moreover, what do your first two statements even mean?

Still scratching my head after reading that one.

From what I understood, he means that mods/staff aren't representative of the actual users, you know like congress/parlements, and no one is saying a word because they are whether afraid or liking mods shoes to get immunity (...etc) = hypocrisy.
Well, first sentence could be understood that vod is well placed to be the chosen one (comparing the moon to a star in da sky) or that all vod demands are accepted (less probable, think the first one is more accurate).

Finally, i think that I OBVIOUSLY explained this messy message in sentences containing clear random words.

MENA LFM/digaran? (IF alt then)
(the name let me think you are from SEA?)
Little bit random words containing ambiguous text which i made a little bit clear for everybody?

[Literally_farming_merits]

I do love to clean!
But for sure newly turned Jr. Member account applications would be turned down.
I do love to read people's opinion but instead of adding or replying, I can help removed unnecessary or off topic replies,
In case I'll have chance, kindly send a copy of the job description,  rules and regulations,  scope of authority (to keep it short MQS or minimum quality standard hand out for being a mod)

Once in a while I do love to be useful , and willing to undergo briefing and trainings if necessary.. .

(Please don't look for my past posts and give a big bell of a comment and insult, just don't mind or  just delete my application- Thanks and God Bless!!)

Are you a plumber at Konami? you like to clean but we shouldn't look at your post history. even demanding job description, rules and regulation.
#farmingauthority.
Some stupid high ranking member is posting to say $1000/month 40hrs/week. done.
Comes a confidant cleaner with 27-30 posts demanding details of the job first.
Not only a stupid miserable virgin, but even no experiences applying for a job.

God bless!1i!1

[maxwelll]

is there a specific requirement for it?
if you agree, I'll be happy to do so. I will be glad if I join to build this forum.

[digaran]

I wouldn't trust somebody if he/she has no fear of God.

Oh, that will serve you well in life.

Distrusting everyone with common sense is just going to leave you with idiots.
I understand that you want others to have their hand in the sand so you are not lonely.

Such a backwards person should not be put in any position of authority...

First thing to do was to post here to say that I shouldn't be trusted. you actually earned that right years ago.
What you didn't earn the right to do, is instead of posting your application you did tried to abuse your DT status and felt privileged, you thought theymos already has your  name on the list and didn't bother to apply. now if you become a mod, it could mean 2 things:

1- theymos has already selected you and this thread was just a show (highly unlikely, he doesn't dictate the rules like that, when something is good for the community as a whole, he would act alone first and then asks for ideas for improvements a.k.a merit system. if all the leaders were like this. sigh)

2- somehow you or somebody else persuaded him to make you a mod.

Please tell me that you are not interested in this job/position. otherwise it would mean that your first impulse, was an instinct to use your position as a DT member for your own benefit and you shouldn't be put in any position of authority.

Wait, I can hear a voice. what theymos? you telling me that Vod is a veteran member and has earned this one to be slighted? well I'm disappointed. wat now? I have a potty big mouth and talk bigger than my mouth? I know. this is what my book is teaching me to be. this is not an act. if you as the admin and the leader are the last bird for me to shoot. I am admitting here and now, that I am only disappointed. I don't see the bigger picture as you do. I'm sure you have a better reason than respect and gratitude for this slight. I'm certain that I am unable to see the reason for your silence about so many injustices. note that, corruption has no place in your level of power, it's place is in the lower levels. I'm asking you, please change this system. learn from the enemy and improve their system by adding consensus voting. if DT1-2 members are not willing to compromise just because of their arrogance. put 12 randomly selected active members above Sr member rank to responsibly decide on a case of negative trust rating and vote on it's removal if DT1-2 member has avoided to handle the case after 60 days. every neg trust should give the receiver 20 days to request an appeal to the tagger and they should wait 80 days in total to have their case handled by those 12 members.

Then 6 Hero + rank members, could be randomly selected to review the votes of those 12 members and reward 5 merits to every responsible good voter. then 3 Legendary or staff members randomly selected to review those 6 members and reward them with 10 merits. if DT1-2 members could solve a case on their own after 20 days of tagging, they should be rewarded with 10 merits for each case. every 6 months or so, pay these members with money for every merit received. you would need to limit DT1-2 tagging ability to 20 accounts per month. with incentive they will all become more active.

Just don't give them absolute power over all the members.

Bye guys, if I go inactive after this post, I was banned, I promise to take it on alia if you ban me. do you want that innocent girl to suffer for my mistakes? OK then.
Please don't delete this post as off topic. I'm up all night to write this, mod or banned former source. I will use my alt a.k.a Literally_farming_merits to haunt you down masters.

[bill gator]

I am not in the list, but this certainly sounds like something I would have the skill set and available time to accomplish. I'm not applying for the position (although I am interested, just doubt I am close to the best candidate), but the free exchange of ideas, allowing non-native speakers to express their opinions/ideas and allowing radical ideas to flow is something I believe in vehemently. Free speech is one of the single most important ideals that a community can hold, and this is primarily true when dealing in Politics & Society.

I'm going to see if I can assist in reporting around that board, get a feel for if I understand the criteria and the situation. The moderator needs to (in my opinion) :

Be a proponent of free speech
Have the ability to distinguish spam from poorly expressed opinion
Be willing to accept the position

I feel that I do not know enough of the values or views on free speech of the people on this list. I would "blindly" give my endorsement towards LoyceV, even though I'm not sure that they're particularly interested in the gig. Vod has done wonders for the community, but I am unsure to what, if any, extent their strongly held views on particular issues will influence the work they would potentially be doing.  I wish that I had more to say in this situation on more of the people seriously being considered, but at this time it doesn't sound like there are many good options that fit all three criteria; it seems like we can hammer out 2/3 at best.

digaran, you're not being banned, don't worry buddy.

[InvoKing]

Things going too far and personally i should say :

to someone who has delusional disorder...
Will you accept someone who knows nothing about neutrality to moderate the worst place on earth?

[MainIbem]

LoyceV seems like a good pick. They have generally shown themselves to be both intelligent and objective.

Thanks! But I barely read Politics & Society, and I don't want to spend more time on that board than I do now. Partially because it's currently filled with trash, but also because I try to stay away from political debates.
I wouldn't mind spending a few hours on that board once in a while with a big red delete button, but that's not enough to properly moderate it.

That being said:

Who here is up to the task of moderating the section in order to remove this garbage, but without hampering the free exchange of ideas there? It'll be tough, since I do want to hear the thoughts of people who can't speak perfect English, people with extreme/offensive ideas, people who are rude while still making legitimate points, etc. So it'll be a difficult balancing act.

As an example, let me have a look at the top topic: the effects of drugs on people...
The first 6 posts:
1. It's created by a Newbie who mainly posts in bounty threads and P&S.
2. Generic post by a Newbie who mainly posts in bounty threads and P&S.
3. Generic post by a Jr. Member who mainly posts in bounty threads, Off-topic and P&S.
4. A Youtube link dump from a Hero Member.
5. Generic post by a Full Member who mainly posts in bounty threads and P&S.
6. Useless post Newbie Off-topic, Economics and P&S.

I wouldn't miss any of those people if they stop posting on the forum. It's a really thin line between freedom of speech for people who can't speak perfect English and just shitposting. In my opinion, it would be a good start if at least 80% of the threads and probably also 80% of the posts in the remaining threads would be deleted.
But, I fear the spammers will move on to other boards if that happens. I already see more and more shitposters on the technical boards, trying to earn merit. Their posts get deleted quickly after being reported, but if enough of them move there, those boards will be lost too.

It surprises me that only 15 people have reported more than one post in 3 months. That doesn't show much community involvement (although I don't know the numbers for other boards).

The reason is not far fetched.

If you listen to the complaints from forum members again merit system is because they want to rank up so they can do signature. Now, most, if not all bounty managers discourage people from that board. Your post will not count when you post in the politics & society section. Therefore people's attention is directed towards those sections you are sure to benefit maximally.

To get quality involvement of forum members,  please stop bounty campaign managers from excluding this section in their post count.

[digaran]

When I make some jokes about wanting the money and not doing the job, people use some parts of my comment against me.

[Literally_farming_merits]

I'm not applying for the position (although I am interested, just doubt I am close to the best candidate)

Master Bill Gates, it is much appreciated to elaborate more on "not applying but interested" if you are not applying, then you are interested in kissing other people's asses. how could you blindly endorse somebody else and expect to be treated equally?

I feel that I do not know enough of the values or views on free speech of the people on this list.   I wish that I had more to say in this situation on more of the people seriously being considered, but at this time it doesn't sound like there are many good options that fit all three criteria; it seems like we can hammer out 2/3 at best.

Vod has done wonders for the community, but I am unsure to what, if any, extent their strongly held views on particular issues will influence the work they would potentially be doing.

Translation: I know no other way to suck for a particular member, even though they have strong belief in common sense, yet disregarding it with their avatar and what it says in their signature. perfectly fit together.

I would "blindly" give my endorsement towards LoyceV, even though I'm not sure that they're particularly interested in the gig.

Translation: I'm below this person, he is way above my head, I'd blindly endorse for him. you don't know that by doing what you just did, you lowered yourself down with him. for example, don't be a plumber and then say you are endorsing a doctor. or don't answer somebody else's questions when 2 people are in a serious discussion. it's called sucking for others vehemently.

Note, I might apply to become the president of the united nations, freedom of speech department only.
@dig the loser: stop expressing so much of your opinions openly. DT cartels despise so much truth to be told, they already have so many excuses to tag you with. shut your potty mouth and go back in the shadows posting from the script every day and be happy. sucking to people often would be a good thing. you lonely virgin. OK I literally loled.

[eternalgloom]

I'll do my part in reporting some posts in Politics & Society, but it is pretty difficult to decide what gets reported and what not.
Sticking with the obvious spam for now, but ideally, I'd also want to report some of the more 'gray-area' posts as well.

Just one example of what I see as a gray-area:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3142740.0 (how do we move on from something?)

To some people it might be easy, and it might be hard to others. How do we exactly move on from something?

I guess this might be a legit question, but on the other hand it's clearly very low effort. Should be in off-topic perhaps or just removed? I don't know.

[hilariousetc]

I'll do my part in reporting some posts in Politics & Society, but it is pretty difficult to decide what gets reported and what not.
Sticking with the obvious spam for now, but ideally, I'd also want to report some of the more 'gray-area' posts as well.

Just one example of what I see as a gray-area:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3142740.0 (how do we move on from something?)

To some people it might be easy, and it might be hard to others. How do we exactly move on from something?

I guess this might be a legit question, but on the other hand it's clearly very low effort. Should be in off-topic perhaps or just removed? I don't know.

I'd vote for it to go in the trash. It's just another one of those lazy one-liner threads attempting to masquerade as something meaningful, but it's so vague and pointless and the replies are equally so. I really think we should just make Politics and Society and Off topic like Serious Discussion and then these sorts of threads would stop because 99% of the threads in those two boards are only made for the activity/post count. In fact, I doubt we even really need Politics now we have got Serious Discussion.

[LoyceV]

Just one example of what I see as a gray-area:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3142740.0 (how do we move on from something?)

To some people it might be easy, and it might be hard to others. How do we exactly move on from something?

I guess this might be a legit question, but on the other hand it's clearly very low effort. Should be in off-topic perhaps or just removed? I don't know.

To me, this is clearly just spam. He dropped a oneliner in a new thread, got 3 pages of replies, and hasn't posted anything anymore for almost a month.

I think it's less work to report the good threads there instead of the bad ones. Or, once the board gets an active moderator, it may need a total "reset": lock all threads, and start over from scratch. That gives the new Mod some breathing space, and if he keeps a short leash on new topics, the spammers may quickly realize all their posts get deleted.

I really think we should just make Politics and Society and Off topic like Serious Discussion and then these sorts of threads would stop because 99% of the threads in those two boards are only made for the activity/post count. In fact, I doubt we even really need Politics now we have got Serious Discussion.

If the current spam boards are gone, the spammers will spread out over the rest of the forum.

[max2607]

I really think we should just make Politics and Society and Off topic like Serious Discussion and then these sorts of threads would stop because 99% of the threads in those two boards are only made for the activity/post count. In fact, I doubt we even really need Politics now we have got Serious Discussion.

If the current spam boards are gone, the spammers will spread out over the rest of the forum.

I would agree with him if we remove these threads it would become impossible to control the amount of spam, not only that i see people posting questions about bitcoin in the meta section i don't have the link because it obviously got removed

I think it's less work to report the good threads there instead of the bad ones. Or, once the board gets an active moderator, it may need a total "reset": lock all threads, and start over from scratch. That gives the new Mod some breathing space, and if he keeps a short leash on new topics, the spammers may quickly realize all their posts get deleted.

This should be applied to all sections which have active moderators i do see that nowadays on reporting something to the mods the response rate has increased i feel it would be more easier to start moderating threads from scratch as the current system surely isn't working

[Flying Hellfish]

I'll do my part in reporting some posts in Politics & Society, but it is pretty difficult to decide what gets reported and what not.
Sticking with the obvious spam for now, but ideally, I'd also want to report some of the more 'gray-area' posts as well.

Just one example of what I see as a gray-area:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3142740.0 (how do we move on from something?)

To some people it might be easy, and it might be hard to others. How do we exactly move on from something?

I guess this might be a legit question, but on the other hand it's clearly very low effort. Should be in off-topic perhaps or just removed? I don't know.

Getting back to the task at hand I will put up my thoughts on this so that anyone interested may have a little more information to judge my ability to mod.

I personally think this thread and replies are what Theymos is talking about when he says:

Politics & Society is trash. People go there, look at a headline, and post a few sentences of their first gut reaction without reading any of the other replies.

There doesn't seem to be any actual discussion taking place.  It has the lowest amount of effort possible to start a thread, OP is extremely vague "How do we move on from something".  Its easy for some hard for others.  Ok we got all the bases covered now!

The OP has not been back to the thread, none of the other posters have returned to discuss posts etc.  Only 2 or 3 posts were actual replies to other posts (which you might consider discussion) the rest were just quoting and or answering the OP over and over.

I just don't see anyone getting anything out of a thread like that, expect post count.  I don't see how removing a thread like that could be considered censoring free speech either as the OP doesn't have a point about "something" nor an opinion since he covered all his bases already.

These kinds of threads are the spam problem IMO, so I would trash can that thread (or at least lock it not sure which is better).  Leaving this type of thread open just allows more people to try to pad their post count and increase's the mods work load.  

[Jet Cash]

This thread is nearly as bad as the Brexit situation. We've even got the argument about Fish.

Can't we just appoint Flying Hellfish and one other mod, and then we can get on with arguing about politics, instead of arguing about arguing about politics.

[bill gator]

Master Bill Gates, it is much appreciated to elaborate more on "not applying but interested" if you are not applying, then you are interested in kissing other people's asses. how could you blindly endorse somebody else and expect to be treated equally?

Always a pleasure, mister digaran; my wonderful jump buddy. If you will notice I have added quotation marks around "blindly", and this should indicate to you that it has some elasticity to it's true definition. I say blindly, because I referring directly to my ignorance of specifically LoyceV's stance on free speech. I give my endorsement because they, in my opinion formulated from my limited knowledge of only a few of those on the list, would be the best decision. theymos is looking for thoughts, so I gave my 2-cents, whether it is considered relevant or even read is up to them. I hope this gives you a clearer picture about where I'm at.

I say not applying, but interested, because there are those more qualified that should be considered and exhausted as options before I would consider applying. No sense in muddying the waters and taking up forum resources for my application/consideration when not even I think it is appropriate.

Translation: I know no other way to suck for a particular member, even though they have strong belief in common sense, yet disregarding it with their avatar and what it says in their signature. perfectly fit together.

Oh sweet digaran, are you jealous? I am unsure if you are accusing me of sucking up or not, you'll have to be more clear. I was simply referencing my extremely limited knowledge about Vod having a run-in with BADecker, which resulted in a negative rating from Vod; Vod being a DT member this would seem to be their greatest enforcement of "official" power at this moment. I am wondering how this would translate, moving forward, if Vod were extended greater power of enforcement. I honestly would like elaboration around this topic from Vod, if possible. Since, that's what this thread is about, anyways.

You'll have to clue me in about the avatar and signature, because whatever you're getting at went over my head. Are you saying Vod is contradicting their belief in common sense, because of their avatar and signature? That one has me scratching my head.

Translation: I'm below this person, he is way above my head, I'd blindly endorse for him. you don't know that by doing what you just did, you lowered yourself down with him. for example, don't be a plumber and then say you are endorsing a doctor. or don't answer somebody else's questions when 2 people are in a serious discussion. it's called sucking for others vehemently.

I don't think that's how you use "vehemently", but I've been wrong before. I'm not a plumber, and moderators aren't doctors. Your analogy skills could use some work, brother. Which two people were in a serious discussion? You go off on tangents like a mad-man and your thought-process is pretty hard to follow.

For clarification though, I do believe LoyceV is imminently more qualified for the role of moderator. so in that regard I am "below" them; if we were ranking ourselves honestly, then I cannot see myself ranking above them. Your self-evaluation skills are pretty terrible, digaran, so I understand why it is tough for you to comprehend somebody being honest about their limitations and acknowledging another's talent.

This is an open-discussion about who is going to moderate a section that heavily revolves around free speech and everyone is qualified to voice their opinion.

Note, I might apply to become the president of the united nations, freedom of speech department only.
@dig the loser: stop expressing so much of your opinions openly. DT cartels despise so much truth to be told, they already have so many excuses to tag you with. shut your potty mouth and go back in the shadows posting from the script every day and be happy. sucking to people often would be a good thing. you lonely virgin. OK I literally loled.

As long as you can laugh at yourself. That's what really matters.

It does seem like you're either on a power-trip or trolling everyone you come across. I hope you don't actually consider yourself in the running for moderator.

[ibminer]

I'll do my part in reporting some posts in Politics & Society, but it is pretty difficult to decide what gets reported and what not.
Sticking with the obvious spam for now, but ideally, I'd also want to report some of the more 'gray-area' posts as well.

Just one example of what I see as a gray-area:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3142740.0 (how do we move on from something?)

To some people it might be easy, and it might be hard to others. How do we exactly move on from something?

I guess this might be a legit question, but on the other hand it's clearly very low effort. Should be in off-topic perhaps or just removed? I don't know.

I'd vote for it to go in the trash. It's just another one of those lazy one-liner threads attempting to masquerade as something meaningful, but it's so vague and pointless and the replies are equally so. I really think we should just make Politics and Society and Off topic like Serious Discussion and then these sorts of threads would stop because 99% of the threads in those two boards are only made for the activity/post count. In fact, I doubt we even really need Politics now we have got Serious Discussion.

This example is vague because "something" isn't really defined in the topic (so this I'd probably say is worth trashing), but as a slightly revised example, if the thread title was "How do we move on from breaking up with a girlfriend/boyfriend", would this then be acceptable?  

It would be hard to distinguish whether a forum member is actually posting about this or just picking some random thing a person would need to move on from. The threads I've looked through so far appear to be started for the intent of padding post counts (which I believe merit may be slowing down) but when theymos says "without hampering the free exchange of ideas", I'm not sure there would be any choice but to leave a thread like the one I've mentioned. The replies may be easier to scrutinize, especially when there is an extreme repetition of the same idea/thought repeated by various accounts... but then do you go with the first poster who had a particular idea as sort of a first-come-first-serve basis of ideas towards the thread topic?  Or do they get left as the N^th example of "Take some time after your break-up, meet new people, and enjoy who you have in life." <- which could be seen as useful idea to the OP... but when it is repeated multiple times in various ways, it becomes painful to the reader.