Replies to post #489 on Site Suggestions

[IH Admin [Meghan] (former)]

How would that not push people to agree with each other on everything, which would essentially turn debates into echo chambers, or push people to be as wildly oppositional as they could be, which would eventually end up as virtual screaming matches? Perhaps I’m not following, but that boils down to, say, Televangelist vs Shock Jock in the simplest of comparisons.

Also, does the “rate my professor” thing ever actually accomplish anything and, if so, what?

I’m genuinely not seeing the benefits. Help me understand what you’re suggesting.

[Homebrew]

Again, what information would you base your rating on ?

[IH Admin [Shelly]]

Your model is flawed because Users have no real idea how other Users are as Moderators. They don't know how many or which messages each moderator removes or restores and/or if those are made in a biased manner (i.e. only removing people's TOS violation when they have a different opinion about the company). Unless clearly labeled they have no idea what they contribute to the iBox or don't. Users have no clue unless they scrutinize another User at the exact same times they are on the site and screenshot every post made to see how well they abide by the rules across the site. They have no idea whether the User has issues with sending vile PMs to other Users.

On this site, those are the things that are valued.

The "community" is supposed to be a common interest in the same security. It doesn't matter if your interest is positive, neutral or negative. It's simply a place to discuss the same stock that they have a common interest in.

Admin are the only ones that have the insight to the information that makes a User valued in this role.

[IH Admin [Shelly]]

The information on "Rate my professor" is to offer opinions on professors. The information on this site is to offer opinions of companies/stocks.

We ask that it be done in a civil manner and, unfortunately, the entire world seems to have difficulty remembering or even understanding civility.

[janice shell]

I envision it to work like an NPS score .

You need to forgive us old fogies. I doubt many here have any idea what an "NPS score" measures. Oh HOLY SHIT!!

It incentivized better feedback from posters, more collaborations and holistic communal approach to the board, and gamifies the role of moderation which leads to overall improvement of said tasks.

I am GOBSMACKED!! Do you realize "gamification" is generally regarded as a Bad Thing? Have you checked out what Gary Gensler has to say about it? (After all, this is a site about securities and trading.) And wtf is a "holistic communal approach" to a message board??

Should you decide to support "reduced jargonization", though, I'll support you.

[janice shell]

Have you ever heard “rate my professor” - I would envision a similar concept but less formal and more easier to rate.

Board moderators are not your teachers. You do not have to agree with them or believe what they say. Their purpose is to enforce the TOU and, by doing so, prevent the board from descending into chaos.

Top 10 moderators could be a thing! Wouldn’t that be awesome?! Where would you rate?! It also would be fun - almost like a side quest to the main board .

NO to all of that.

And I'll ask: Since you feel so strongly about mods and moderation issues, why don't you moderate any boards?