Moderating

[Athy]

10 minutes ago, gigoguy said:

I thought we were in a discussion forum not an English lesson? And if we were it wouldn't be in a 'grammar' school because some of the 'teachers' wouldn't pass the 11+

Indeed, we are discussing English at the moment, as that is the language in which we are communicating. I could do it in French if you prefer, but not all our colleagues would keep up (though a couple of them would be better at it than I would).

Could you please explain your remarkable comment about grammar schools and their teaching staff? Did you attend one?

[gigoguy]

5 minutes ago, Athy said:

Indeed, we are discussing English at the moment, as that is the language in which we are communicating. I could do it in French if you prefer, but not all our colleagues would keep up (though a couple of them would be better at it than I would).

Could you please explain your remarkable comment about grammar schools and their teaching staff? Did you attend one?

Thankfully not the same one as yourself

[DHutch]

I feel very strongly that there is a need for moderators to operate in a professional manor, often requires them to act reasonably impartially in what is otherwise a fairly closed community. Where moderators are actively involved in lively debate it may be less practical for them to also moderate that same thread, and I would agree that in the main that should be avoided where practical.

Moderators are however by nature existing members who are active on the forum, and who have given up their own time to support the site on a volunteer basis. Therefore while each moderator is chosen carefully to ensure they are suitable for the role, for obvious reasons it is often not practical for the staff to be both 'actively engaged' with the forum and at the same time 'low volume' posters.

I agree that while there may at time be a place for controlled moderator input where a post is for instance particularly poorly formated, leading to a significant lack of clarity in the thread, moderator input to correct a post should in the main be avoided. Certainly I would not expect a moderator to be editing another members post to correct the grammar. 

Any member can edit the quoted portion of text when creating a reply, without editing the original post, and it is largely up to the member in question how they feel fit to do this be they a member of staff or not.

 

 

Daniel

[Athy]

Absolutely spot-on, thank you.

[Nightwatch]

If I were able, I would certainly be tempted to edit another posters post if I felt the need/urge.

Mike, feel free to correct any short comings in my posts. But don't change the storyline,if indeed the post has one!

If,however you changed my post and I wasn't in agreement with the changes, I certainly would make a song and dance about it.

Really,some people.

 

 

[Athy]

22 minutes ago, Nightwatch said:

 

If,however you changed my post and I wasn't in agreement with the changes, I certainly would make a song and dance about it.

 

 

 

It might be worth doing, just to see you perform the Sailors' Hornpipe.

[Dave Payne]

8 minutes ago, Athy said:

It might be worth doing, just to see you play with the Sailors' Hornpipe.

You cant say that!!

[gigoguy]

55 minutes ago, DHutch said:

I feel very strongly that there is a need for moderators to operate in a professional manor, often requires them to act reasonably impartially in what is otherwise a fairly closed community. Where moderators are actively involved in lively debate it may be less practical for them to also moderate that same thread, and I would agree that in the main that should be avoided where practical.

Moderators are however by nature existing members who are active on the forum, and who have given up their own time to support the site on a volunteer basis. Therefore while each moderator is chosen carefully to ensure they are suitable for the role, for obvious reasons it is often not practical for the staff to be both 'actively engaged' with the forum and at the same time 'low volume' posters.

I agree that while there may at time be a place for controlled moderator input where a post is for instance particularly poorly formated, leading to a significant lack of clarity in the thread, moderator input to correct a post should in the main be avoided. Certainly I would not expect a moderator to be editing another members post to correct the grammar. 

Any member can edit the quoted portion of text when creating a reply, without editing the original post, and it is largely up to the member in question how they feel fit to do this be they a member of staff or not.

 

 

Daniel

Thanks Daniel I was about to post something very similar. If we are talking in ENGLISH. Then the correct definition of the word is to mediate, be impartial, reduce the risk of violence. (OED wording not mine) It can also mean limited, as in, intelligence. But I don't think that's what was meant when the moderator was talking about himself. Possibly when he questioned mine in the 'debacle' that ensued elsewhere.

As foree correkting tiping or speeelllliinnnggg or writting errors. Again if the person doing it knows what they are talking about then perhaps they might make comment, in a supportive way. However if their own knowledge of correct grammar is limited then perhaps they aught to keep their comments, edits, corrections, the same?

[Athy]

19 minutes ago, Dave Payne said:

You cant say that!!

I didn't. Who's a cheeky boy then?

[Athy]

2 minutes ago, gigoguy said:

 It can also mean limited, as in, intelligence.

I'm afraid that, once again, you are labouring under a misapprehension. That is the  adjective "moderate"(and can be applied to many nouns, of which intelligence is one as you obviously know). The topic's title is part of the verb "to moderate", which is a slightly different thing.

[gigoguy]

2 minutes ago, Athy said:

I'm afraid that, once again, you are labouring under a misapprehension. That is the  adjective "moderate"(and can be applied to many nouns, of which intelligence is one as you obviously know). The topic's title is part of the verb "to moderate", which is a slightly different thing.

Explain? 

Edited May 16, 2017 by gigoguy

[Nightwatch]

36 minutes ago, Athy said:

It might be worth doing, just to see you perform the Sailors' Hornpipe.

Won't be the first time.

[gigoguy]

2 minutes ago, Nightwatch said:

Won't be the first time.

Well why don't you give us some examples of sentences containing the verb 'moderate'

Edited May 16, 2017 by gigoguy
moderate spelling error

[Nightwatch]

Just now, gigoguy said:

Well why don't you give us some examples of sentances containing the verb 'moderate'

Not sure what you mean.

[Athy]

10 minutes ago, gigoguy said:

Well why don't you give us some examples of sentences containing the verb 'moderate'

I would, dear fellow, but I have a deadline to meet, so I'll let you have a go at that.

[gigoguy]

9 minutes ago, Nightwatch said:

Not sure what you mean.

Sorry mate

[gigoguy]

Just now, Athy said:

I would, dear fellow, but I have a deadline to meet, so I'll let you have a go at that.

Well I did give two excellent examples of the use of the word. Both as a verb and adjective. Intelligent is also one of those words than can also be a noun as in Artificial Intelligence'

There are 11 words or phrases in the ENGLISH language that mean the opposite under different circumstances. Moderate isn't one of them. Toss pot though is

[Ray T]

4 hours ago, mrsmelly said:

Y wud u coweccct schpellin mishtaeaks? we izz alll vewy cwever on ere innit   ?

You missed out the ' on ere as it represents the missing "h", otherwise nowt wrong wiv wot you wrote.  

A bit of culture: 

“The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ,
Moves on: nor all thy Piety nor Wit
Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line,
Nor all thy Tears wash out a Word of it.”

Edited May 16, 2017 by Ray T

[Mac of Cygnet]

56 minutes ago, Ray T said:

You missed out the ' on ere as it represents the missing "h", otherwise nowt wrong wiv wot you wrote.  

A bit of culture: 

“The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ,
Moves on: nor all thy Piety nor Wit
Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line,
Nor all thy Tears wash out a Word of it.”

Ah, but Mr Khayyam didn't have the internet, did he?

[Ray T]

4 minutes ago, Mac of Cygnet said:

Ah, but Mr Khayyam didn't have the internet, did he?

No true, but was he a closet Black Country man? Yam!

[Athy]

49 minutes ago, Mac of Cygnet said:

Ah, but Mr Khayyam didn't have the internet, did he?

This has taken me back many years - not to the internet, but to my late Mother, one of whose pearls of wisdom was "The moving finger writes, and having writ/ Moves on, and writes another bit". I don't know if she had the copyright on that deathless verse.

[system 4-50]

3 hours ago, DHutch said:

I feel very strongly that there is a need for moderators to operate in a professional manor, often requires them to act reasonably impartially in what is otherwise a fairly closed community. Where moderators are actively involved in lively debate it may be less practical for them to also moderate that same thread, and I would agree that in the main that should be avoided where practical.

Moderators are however by nature existing members who are active on the forum, and who have given up their own time to support the site on a volunteer basis. Therefore while each moderator is chosen carefully to ensure they are suitable for the role, for obvious reasons it is often not practical for the staff to be both 'actively engaged' with the forum and at the same time 'low volume' posters.

I agree that while there may at time be a place for controlled moderator input where a post is for instance particularly poorly formated, leading to a significant lack of clarity in the thread, moderator input to correct a post should in the main be avoided. Certainly I would not expect a moderator to be editing another members post to correct the grammar. 

Any member can edit the quoted portion of text when creating a reply, without editing the original post, and it is largely up to the member in question how they feel fit to do this be they a member of staff or not.

 

 

Daniel

Just what I was looking for, and beautifully phrased to boot.

[gigoguy]

2 hours ago, Ray T said:

You missed out the ' on ere as it represents the missing "h", otherwise nowt wrong wiv wot you wrote.  

A bit of culture: 

“The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ,
Moves on: nor all thy Piety nor Wit
Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line,
Nor all thy Tears wash out a Word of it.”

I think Mark Twain is credited with one of those apocryphal sayings

"I often write angry letters. I just never send them" 

[Machpoint005]

7 hours ago, mross said:

If I pose a rhetorical question it won't have a question mark.  If a Mod decides that he knows better and adds one, it is no longer rhetorical!  If a Mod wishes to change someone's post, at least quote them and use strikethrough and bold to show what he/she has added or deleted.  I'm not talking about you, necessarily  .

Why not? It's still a question even if it is rhetorical. If it doesn't have a question mark, it's not a question of any sort, it's a statement.

7 hours ago, mross said:

There are a few posters on here who did not have expensive educations. 

I had a free education. It was a very good state school.

[tomsk]

3 minutes ago, Machpoint005 said:

Why not? It's still a question even if it is rhetorical. If it doesn't have a question mark, it's not a question of any sort, it's a statement.

A quick google suggests punctuating a rhetorical question with a question mark may be optional.