Unless, Ihub is planning to hire a bunch of new people to police all these boards, making it so there is no head admin will I fear inevitably lead to increased disagreement and dissenssion both among assistant mods and among the mods and Ihub admin. It also makes it easier for people to better manipulate the system. While I have always gotten along with Ihub admins, and respect the work they do to maintain this online community, the limited number of them, now having to monitor and decide who all the moderators are for thousands of boards I fear is going to be unsustainable, and I believe it will make it easier for questionable mods to make it through screening. Certainly, there have been some lead mod's that have been reckless, they should be dealt with on a case by case basis. Instead, by making this decision the belief is that Ihub admin's have a better sense of what is going with each of the thousands of tickers, than the individual mods on the board do. I don't believe this is true.
The better approach IMO would be to better police lead moderators to make sure they are honoring their commitment to effective moderation and the TOS rules. My gut is this will lead to an upsurge of dissension and animosity directed towards Ihub itself. Certainly, there must have been a reason within the company that this change has been made and it needs to be addressed. But, in ways I feel like there could have been a forum for discussions with Ihub users on how to address any of the concerns that would satisfy the concerns of all involved.. Taking unilateral action in an online community is bound to lead to some problems. As some have mentioned, the last thing we want is an unstructured free for all as exists on the Yahoo stock boards.
best,
level
