Xenographer42
First of all, as this is a democratic community, I believe that ANY of us should have the “authority” to impeach a mod– note that impeachment is not removal, it is a process of investigation and consideration that may or may not lead up to a removal.

Well, then I would like to see you try and impeach the president…

We have elected certain people to do a job. Yes, we can go to them with our concerns about how one of the others is DOING that job, but at the end of the day, it's only the other mods that should be able to call for that person's resignation as a moderator. Just like you or I couldn't demand the impeachment of the president.

Though it may not be a bad idea to put “terms” on how long our moderators remain “in office”. Hold annual elections or something, where things can be changed up a bit. Keeps things interesting.

I believe if we truly are a Democrecy we as the members should have the right to decide if we want an impeachment or not. Of course we need evidence for it so people can'y just open a poll so that they can try to impeach a mod just cause they don't like the person. That is wrong. But if you are able to prove like vego did then it should be put up to a vote through ALL members of this community. It shouldn't be a mods decision wether we can impeach someone or not.

In a way, I guess it depends on if this is a republic or a democracy.

The US is a republic. Strong democratic leanings, but hardly a democracy.

That doesn't mean this board needs to be. I'm not making suggestions one way or another on the manner of “impeaching” a mod, but it would be good to clear up if this board is a true democracy or if it is a republic as the US is.

I had thought at first it was a democracy, with the members being asked to help write the rules, but I don't know how that ended up–not many of the forum rules have mod/admin rules as were suggested in that thread, and if the rules exist, they aren't out for everyone to see. That whole forum has gone missing as well–supporting the idea that this is a republic now…especially given that it's been said the mods will write the rules (although one certainly hopes they would base their rules on the better rules the members suggested…it's just like I said, there were several suggestions for mod rules, but I don't see them up as real rules anywhere.)

Youre right princess Artemis. You said it the way I wanted my post to sound.

Yeah lets stop saying impeach, I sortve got on that tangent from Vegos post, but it really should just be removal.

to be brutally honest with everyone here

i dont give a shit if he's impeached or not. i really hate having a newbie as a mod, beacuse i know this garbage would happen. i think he should stay, even though im totally against it, only for the soul reason to make those who voted for him's lives miserable here. you can blame them, and those of you who have not spokin out about this sooner. why friggin bother. you know he's not going to be dropped. he's not texasgb yet. he's just one really lucky newbie.

One problem is though, with so many mods, you dont know whos actually doing their job right and who isnt. So even if he stayed he could just start taking credit even if its not him.

BlueWaveGB
One problem is though, with so many mods, you dont know whos actually doing their job right and who isnt. So even if he stayed he could just start taking credit even if its not him.

I'm sure the other mods would notice that someone's taking credit for their actions. Each group is over a certain section, after all.

Only in name, though. Moderational power covers the entire site, but their names are only listed under one section. Kinda like how the Secretary of Interior does Colin Powell's job while he's in the crapper. Or something like that… Lord, I hope I'm making this up…

untrue man, we are only allowed (right now anyways) to moderate the forums we were elected for, for instance a misc mod cant moderate the general GB forum unless he was elected for that forum too. see what im saying?