Diversity among mods

[No_Mind]

While I welcome that Sam is the new moderator .. maybe DW needs some diversity in its 9th year .. an Asian mod (Sarath possibly .. he almost lives here .. might as well mod while he is here) .. maybe a female mod (unless there already is one .. I do not think so ..) .. a black mod maybe (unless there already is one)

Just a suggestion.



No_Mind

[retrofuturist]

Greetings No_Mind,

While I welcome that Sam is the new moderator .. maybe DW needs some diversity in its 9th year .. an Asian mod (Sarath possibly .. he almost lives here .. might as well mod while he is here) .. maybe a female mod (unless there already is one .. I do not think so ..) .. a black mod maybe (unless there already is one)

Just a suggestion.

We select people because we assess that they are the best person available who is willing and able to do the role.

This includes multiple factors, including but not limited to:

- Temperament and equanimity
- Consistency in participation over time
- Comprehension of the English language
- Knowledge of the Buddha's teaching
- Comprehension of different interpretations of the Buddha's teaching
- Tolerance of diverse viewpoints

The identity of that person in terms of age, gender, sexuality, nationality, skin colour etc. is entirely irrelevant to our decision making, as such factors neither enhance nor diminish their capability to moderate a Buddhist forum.

To answer your question though, there is one female ex-moderator who is welcome back to the role, whenever she wishes to become involved in such a capacity again.... and, I'd like to point out, that that's because she's a great moderator, and it has nothing to do with her gender.

To me, [current year] isn't a compelling argument to ignore and set aside whomever we assess to be the best available candidate, in favour of tokenism.

Love live meritocracy.



Metta,
Paul.

[Saengnapha]

Please use the real names and photos of the moderators. This should be non negotiable, IMO.

[retrofuturist]

Greetings,

Please use the real names and photos of the moderators. This should be non negotiable, IMO.

I've explained here why I think that's unreasonable, and should be left to the individual to decide.

Metta,
Paul.

[lyndon taylor]

You left out political persuasion of the moderator as a factor???

[retrofuturist]

Greetings Lyndon,

You left out political persuasion of the moderator as a factor???

Because it's not...

However, if certain individuals have gotten particularly bad at Items #1 and #6 in recent years on account of their political leanings, then I guess that would manifest in the decision making.

Metta,
Paul.

[Dinsdale]

Please use the real names and photos of the moderators. This should be non negotiable, IMO.

I've explained here why I think that's unreasonable, and should be left to the individual to decide.

I agree.

[BKh]

as such factors neither enhance nor diminish their capability to moderate a Buddhist forum.

Just to be clear, this is a matter of opinion, not fact. Even though it may be a very strong opinion, it is still just that.

If one believes that diversity = tokenism, then that is probably an underlying belief that would lead one to think that the quoted statement is fact.

[SDC]

Please use the real names and photos of the moderators. This should be non negotiable, IMO.

I don't use my name because the internet is full of dangerous people. It has nothing to do with avoiding accountability. Making difficult decisions day after day, having members hold unreasonable grudges against you (forever) for enforcing the rules, etc. puts enough of a stigma to my name. I can't run from that. I can't request a name change. Real name or not I'm still going to have to deal with that aspect of the role as a mod. So I have no idea what you think your suggestion would accomplish.

[binocular]

So I have no idea what you think your suggestion would accomplish.

At the sister forum, some posters have a very strong opinion about this, such as Malcolm and Grigoris, believing that everyone should post under their real name and with their real picture. I'll have to look up some posts where they explain that.

[Sam Vara]

as such factors neither enhance nor diminish their capability to moderate a Buddhist forum.

Just to be clear, this is a matter of opinion, not fact. Even though it may be a very strong opinion, it is still just that.

If one believes that diversity = tokenism, then that is probably an underlying belief that would lead one to think that the quoted statement is fact.

In this context, what statements do you think would count as facts, rather than very strong opinions? Certainly, a belief that diversity is equal to tokenism would, or could, lead the holder of that belief to think that Retro's statement was fact. But that doesn't mean that such a belief is the only support for Retro's statement.

In considering the relationship between capability and other factors, the onus is upon the person making that claim to prove that relationship. If someone thinks that age, gender, sexuality, etc. are relevant factors in deciding capability for something, then that is the case that needs to be made.

[SDC]

So I have no idea what you think your suggestion would accomplish.

At the sister forum, some posters have a very strong opinion about this, such as Malcolm and Grigoris, believing that everyone should post under their real name and with their real picture. I'll have to look up some posts where they explain that.

I'm sure their reasoning on the topic is second to none.

[binocular]

I'm sure their reasoning on the topic is second to none.

E.g.:

https://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.p ... 37#p385437

I regard the input of anonymous users who are unknown to me with only slightly more regard than the ramblings of the town drunk.
/.../
When we know who a person is, what they do, who their teachers are, there is more basis for trust in what they say.

And the rest of the thread ...


Although with their demeanor, they don't have to fear anyone ...

[SDC]

Hi b,

We should also bear in mind that Malcolm (the online one) is a force of nature, and I am quite sure his internet persona has grown to a degree that even shocks his offline self. Such prerequisites for speaking keep his own online status in borderline unattainable territory. A brilliant (and necessary) tactic for one who prefers to start with the upper hand (with all of his knowledge, why he needs that, I don't know). I hope this doesn't cause him too much grief - I'd have a nervous breakdown if my username required so much maintenance.

Though I tend agree. One should be upfront about who they are, especially if they want to build credibility. But real name or not, it is consistency above all that will accomplish that. Consistency and patience. Two things people forget about the most on the internet.

[SDC]

Although with their demeanor, they don't have to fear anyone ...

Eh, they just drive fancier cars. Some are intrigued by that. But a brick wall at 100 km doesn't care how many cylinders your engine has, so best not to take ourselves too serious.