Webwork - 6:58 pm on May 27, 2010 (gmt 0)
As moderators, like judges, we have a degree of discretion in applying "the law" (TOS/TCU) to "the facts" (forum acts).
Unfortunately, when a judge/mod chooses to act within their perceived discretion, that election can lead to some saying that moderation, or judging, is being applied unevenly.
So, does a "good mod" strictly interpret and follow "the rules" (TOS, TCU, Charter) or does a good mod act with a degree of discretion? I'm guessing most would say "the latter" but you can all probably appreciate how such an approach will predictably lead to times when someone says something about "not following the rules".
Right or wrong: You expect a "good" moderator to act with a degree of discretion and, when that discretion doesn't go your way, you accept that so long as you can see . . . everyone dog has his day. ;)
I'm really interested in everyone's personal version of "moderation is best when . . . " . . so I'm going to totally shut-up for awhile. ;)