Originally Posted by qgil

Someone said that those people should be actively invited... mmm... perhaps, but a good moderator is expected to be active and have own initiative isn't it? Besides, becoming a moderator is not some kind of condecoration. First you want to work on a task or a role. Then you realize you need moderator permissions for that. The other way around is known not to work in forums.

Originally Posted by SD69

equally accepted even though they come into it from the itt side rather than from maemo.org

Originally Posted by Jaffa

Can you explain, please, what the "itt" and "maemo.org" sides are? I honestly, truly, don't understand.

Is your concern that someone who has an active maemo.org account would be given moderator privileges on the forum, despite having not been active here? Or is your concern that someone who is active, helpful and constructive here would be rejected as a moderator if they didn't have an active maemo.org account?

Originally Posted by SD69

Is the term "sides" not consistent with "closing the gap between two formerly autonomous sites"?

Has anyone here ever been involved in a merger? Do you not see that there is an advantage to the resulting entity having some continuing contribution from each one of the two formerly autonomous sides instead of all of the people being from one of the two previously existing entities?

Originally Posted by qgil

What about you (yes, you) going through this, this and this page, sending a private email linking to this discussion to whoever you feel like proposing to become a moderator?

This move will probably be more helpful towards our common objectives than having the usual suspects pressing the Reply button and exchanging Thanks in yet another thread.

Originally Posted by SD69

My concern is that people who have demonstrated an interest by actively contributing to the itt forum and who would be good mods are reluctant to ask to be a moderator.

Originally Posted by Jaffa

The term "sides" is what I don't understand. And no, it's not who I read "two formerly autonomous sites": just because two sites were running independently in terms of sponsorship/responsibility/theme/user accounts doesn't mean there isn't a massive overlap between the people very active on one site and very active on another.

"Sides" suggests conflict. It's an emotive word, and yet you're surprised when it provokes emotive reactions.



You're constructing strawmen. My point is, quite clearly, that the people who are moderators - the people who volunteered to be moderators - are people who are some of the most prolific, helpful and patient people on this forum. Who volunteered - even before the t.m.o move was announced - who wasn't also active on maemo.org?

The reason I don't understand "sides" is because it suggests that because someone is active "here", they can't be active "there". Or that someone active "here" is less important or involved than someone active "there".

Perhaps I'm too active on both "sides" to see a blinding obvious chasm.

Originally Posted by Jaffa

Who is this silent crowd who are now so terrified of volunteering to be a moderator, despite being active here since ITT started in mid-2005?

If your concern is that there may be people who feel like this (and, this is what you seem to be saying); wouldn't we be better letting them speak for themselves? Being too shy to stand up with their arms open is hardly a good quality in a wannabe-moderator.

Originally Posted by SD69

Also, any thoughts as to number of posts/thanks criteria?