I am honoured and humbled hereby and herewith to second the nomination of Mister Sidonie Chuthbourt Ghruegh for the position of Third (or possibly 'Thrid') Moderator.

Signified by His Mark: Master George Garnett (Yeoman and Smallholder)

This Eleventh Day of the Month of November in the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand and Seven.

Surely this is twenty nought seven, after all the great Norman invasion was ten sixtysix not one thousand and sixty six? I blame Arthur C Clarke.

We shall confer amongst ourselves upon these subjects.

(That's a real we this time: John, Ron and Ollie.)

As it appear people are canvassing, I'd just like to canvass for John W.

Here is a man who has tirelessly spent his time trying to keep a forum under control when at time things looked like descending into chaos.  A man who has always been here, even through high criticism and challenges.  A man who stands here today, even after the events of the past month, simply because he wants this community to evolve and thrive.

Even though some decisions may not have been popluar, now is the time to remember all of the time and effort put in, and now is the time to ask yourself if you want this man to have a thrid of the say in moderation.  Some of his views may not equal those of everyone, but with a Team of moderators, the experience of moderating this board would count for everything.

I urge you to think hard about your next vote, as it will be the final vote for some time.

Please, Michael, can canvassing be avoided ? It has been so far. I'm sure most of us who will be voting have long enough memories of those who helped solve difficulties in past times as well as those who caused those difficulties. I myself, well remember one who apparently singlehandedly and diplomatically sorted out an extreme past difficulty . . .

I don’t intend to send PMs to folks and don’t wish to ‘canvass’ widely, but as I hadn’t stood for election in previous rounds, and following Sydney’s manifesto, then I suppose I ought to pen a few thoughts on what sort of role I think a moderator here should have. (I promise this will be my only ‘canvassing’ post!)

This messageboard was set up at a time when many of us felt unable to continue posting at the BBC boards because of the restrictions placed on what we were allowed to discuss and the heavy-handed style of censorship which followed (remember ‘Chris the Host’ who appeared to be drafted in from the R2 boards as Chief Axe-wielder?) We quickly settled in here, thanks to Michael’s initiative, a happy band of refugees, to discuss whatever we wanted. I owe a huge debt of gratitude to many of the members here for their erudite, enthusiastic posts about a whole range of music, which continued from the R3 boards, as well as the fun of the ‘coffee bar waffle’ which helps to foster a welcoming spirit where all feel part of a community.

The big issue which caused the furore back in October was over whether political discussions, where tempers could become frayed, should be ‘permitted’. I made clear at the time that, although I scanned them, they were rarely of interest to me and I felt no need to respond to them. However, they did attract thoughtful and passionately argued responses from other posters. Without wishing to bang on about it, I do feel that the way that one particular thread was archived and the response to what I felt was a perfectly reasonable poll to canvas views of the members here was not the way I think moderation should be carried out. As long as members here follow the rules of avoiding personal attacks, using offensive language directed at other members and avoiding impersonation, I’m happy for them to post about a wide range of topics as they see fit – a more ‘reactive’ form of moderation, but then I think moderators should reflect the wishes of the members and the way in which they want their messageboard to develop.

One important role for the moderators is to judge when the more serious musical threads go ‘off-topic’, sometimes into waffle, but also into interesting by-ways and threads which need to be split and moved somewhere more suitable. I support the judicious moving of posts to new threads that John and now Ron have carried out.
Also, if there are contentious decisions on which the three moderators are unable to reach a consensus, then I’d be in favour of polling members on their views, abiding by the majority view.

Goodness, that’s quite a ramble, but I think it important to outline my thoughts for anyone entertaining the possibility of voting for me…

Syd,

Due to such clear and comprehensive manifesto, I shall second you.

What a jolly good stance for a moderator, by the way

Tommo

Can I have a postal vote?  I am away and offline over the entire polling period.