We agreed by acclaim that you're the mods. If you do something we disapprove of in future, I imagine we'll let you know through whatever channels are within the rules (I'm not clear about the definition of the new offence of "interfering with moderation"!).
If I have a vote, it's for the following:
(1) Let Ken's post stand because - as a Welshman moved to Scotland, the exact opposite of the trajectory of Crabb's - I see nothing wrong with it. It wasn't a zinger, but then plenty of the immoderate guff I post falls flat. If it offends people for reasons I'm blind to, please explain to me what I'm missing.
(2) Reinstate Ken immediately.
(3) Ask Ironing Man to edit his post to make it comply with forum rules and set some sort of example, or just self-delete it.
(4) If he won't do that, as the moderator team, consider whether he can remain as the junior member.
(5) If you don't feel you can do (4) yourselves and decide bring it to us for a decision, I'll vote to remove him from the team. That doesn't have to happen.
I was an advocate for Ironing Man as a mod when we discussed all that. He was keen to do it, and I felt it might help balance the team as a few saw it as "lefty"-dominated. I also felt he'd conducted himself with civility in his interactions I'd seen, including with me in exchanges that could have gotten quite heated. This is one transgression that makes me regret that, but we all make mistakes. I'm not calling for a head, but I'm not best pleased at the moment.
One reason I wanted mods for this forum was to help it run smoothly and keep things civil. This isn't "running smoothly".
Let's not descend into meta over something that should have been beyond trivial - there's too much of that about at the moment! We have bigger fish to fry in our small pan here.
= new reply since forum marked as read
