Replies to post #159382 on The Question and Answer Board (IHUB)

[Churak]

If someone is going to be a Moderator, they should at least be a shareholder.

The Moderator's role is to ensure the TOU are upheld. The rules of the site deal with conduct, not investor sentiment or shareholder status.

http://ihwiki.advfn.com/index.php?title=FAQ:Neutral_Mods

And this, specifically the MODERATOR's role:

In short, the role of the Moderator is to help foster an environment that promotes and encourages posting of ALL opinions and information about companies, regardless of the bullish or bearish sentiment of the posts, and to be the site’s first line of defense in ensuring we remain free of spam, vulgarity, and personal attacks.

http://ihwiki.advfn.com/index.php?title=Handbook#About_Message_Boards_and_the_Moderators.27_Role

[sunspotter]

"Shouldn't a Mod approve of and post positive about the stock he/she is moderating?"

No, they should enforce the iHub ToU fairly and impartially. Period.

If all the Mods were just company shills then you'd never be able to tell the truth on a MB of one of the many companies that happen to be scams, and handle all the inappropriate deletions and posts that the supporters of the stock invariably commit.

As an example, it was only after I took over as Mod at the SPPH MB after the declared IRP stepped aside in late 2010 that any of the salient facts that revealed SPPH as an obvious scam were able to be posted and remain prominent - previously they were either deleted or buried.

Under the new regime of up to six "equal" Mods, it is now possible to have a balance between those who favor a stock, and those who don't. This tends to stop the more egregious abuses in either direction.