What do you think it takes to be "MODERATORS" of IGT ?

i think it needs a lot of time... :

 

well you are right.. i will suggest the name of flood.. he's very much mod material...

 

flood is his user name...
https://indianguitartabs.com/member.php?u=110723

 

Sure thing mate... \m/

 

There is one major criteria for becoming a mod:

1. Being online on the forum as much as possible.

Rest of the points become insignificant in front of this.
Because unless you are online - you really cannot "moderate" any thread.
And it has to be done like riot policing - controlling it at the initial stage - or else you risk it becoming a runaway train.

 

you should wish we all get the fvcking banned users back

 

well yeah it was quite stupid then..but i didn't mean it like it's some bitter experience or something. i just mean you need more active posters at this point to attract more members, or past members probably

shallow posters make me choke -_-

 

thanks for the suggestion, here's my thing: i don't go to any other boards except the gear talk board. it's VERY rare that i check anything else.

on the gear talk board i'm not interested in attending to everyone's problems. if someone asks me "plz 2 suggest gud gtr amp n proccy in budget 15k" i tell him not happening. i try not to reply to threads where the poster is, well, wer d poster iz talking lyk dis, because i love the english language, can't stand it being skull****ed by webspeak and SMSspk - so i won't encourage it by tolerating it. i'd probably delete the post and tell the poster to type properly or suck it.

i'll be very clear: i'm always ready to help, as a lot of people will certify here, but my help is not universal or unconditional. i can tend to be a complete asshat grammar fascist too. i know how to save a buck or two, but can't recommend low budget amps or processors because i hate them down to a science. i can't address any "which guitar should i buy" threads - there's too many of them and people should search. i'm opinionated, and not sorry about it.

all in all, i'm not sure i'm the mod you're looking for.

 

Regarding the nature of mods - they have to be slightly opposite of the admin.

So if you are leaning on strict side, they should not - and vice versa.

Why this is required:
Well say there is an incident which requires moderation - say name calling, flaming, wrong info etc.

Now if the mods are strict - they will immediately curb it down. Give warning to the concerned, and be off. Incident dissolved.
However, if any of the aggrieved party feels injustice being done - they can always look up to the admin, and expect less luddite judgement.
Thus balance achieved.

Similarly - if mods are not rigid, and change with time, and be little flexible - they won't meddle till things really start looking horrid.
Again if the aggrieved party approaches the mods - they can get action.
However, if it doesn't happen - because the mods think otherwise - they can knock the doors or admin - who is a super luddite - thus assuring justice according to ancient written laws.

Of course what you wrote about power corrupts is absolutely right.
However, there is no way of judging and evaluating anyone in this world on that.
Hence, keep that out of the equation - your only hope is that if you have more mods - extreme nature of one will be balanced by the presence of large number of mods.

 

Ya man totally agreed.. We lost a lot of good people because of that... I think most of them.. that too without getting any warnings.. I also got banned once.. but those guys might not be interested now i guess...