OK So I stepped into a vacuum left when other moderators stepped down.
I put up my philosophy of what I would aim to do, and got 24 positive responses for it
I tried to establish a consensus on what is acceptable, but none was forthcoming.
I examine every report I receive in context, from the point of view of somebody who enjoys cycling largely because it does not demand a blind partisanship in the way that many other sports do. In looking at context, I sometimes see posts that are problematic, or that contributed to, or resulted from, the reported one, so may act on those. I still tend to stay away from those threads that don't interest me unless I am directed there by reports. I receive far more reports than those that I warn or sanction, and tend to believe that if some think I am being too strict, and others that I am not harsh enough, I am probably about as close to the right path as is possible.
I know that past moderation here has been far more lax than the forum providers would want, and I have seen the much stricter interventions that the site administrators apply. I have tried to steer a path between the two, and (apart from one totally egregious case that got an instant permaban, and one case of not my not being familiar with automated responses which was quickly fixed) nobody has had any suspension without prior warning and being advised to desist from a course of actions. I have also very rarely escalated the sanctions to the degree that the advice to moderators suggests.
I have therefore done my best to make a middle way between what the providers want and what users are used to; a balance between banter and abuse. If there is such a thing as a perfect way of doing that, I probably have not hit it every time: I doubt there is, so I can only draw that line where I see fit, bearing all things, including constructive criticism (but not accusations of bias) into account.
But I only want to do this voluntary role as a service to the community here, and if what I do is not seen as such, I shall step down. So for the next 48 hours, I shall only do approvals and stickying. If people want lawless bearpit, then as far as I am concerned they can have it for 48 hours (I will act if there is an extreme breach, but not for what is typical): if people do not trust my judgement, they can be freed from it for a couple of days.
So, at 11:30 (UK time) on Sunday,
I shall count the thumbs up or angry faces on this post: I shall consider a thumbs up to be a request that I stay (not as necessarily agreeing with everything I do: I understand that) and an angry face as a vote that I step down (again, I shall not assume that you are necessarily angry at me, just that you don't share my judgements). I shall step down immediately if the balance is that I should do so: I shall remain, still willing to receive constructive criticism (although encouragement might be nice as well), if the majority ask me to continue.
Please don't confuse the issue with other emojis.
If continuing, I would very much like to have other moderators alongside me, and if I am stepping down, I hope someone (or better, a team) can step up that can meet the expectations of both the membership and the providers.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram