Glowstick Posted March 1, 2008 Share Posted March 1, 2008 I love how "power mad mods" are always brought out as the real reason the warnings are there. Haven't said that it's the only reason. However that there are indeed warnings here and there being issued due to entirely subjective things. The system doesn't work that way, if there really were some power mad mods, they wouldn't be mods for long. Which gets me to the next point. As long the administration is opaque, there's no reason to 100% trust such assertions from said administration. While I believe that Neobond et al have somewhat of a grip on the staff, that doesn't imply that everything's working out 100% correct. A mod can just lay out his justification as he wants, as long it's being made in a form that convinces the rest (if those even bother investigating that, or just accept it through the bank), if I'm to believe the implied peer reviewing system. I could cue some Stanford bull**** here, but then I'd be getting overly dramatic. My pet peeve mods are luckily all retired, except one (which I usually don't run into), so I'm mostly speaking for the others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts