MP4.2+6.0

From a dust up over on the Q5 board about TDI stuff, a thought comes to mind. How about basically the concept of two signatures for mods--the "official" one, but then also the "free speech"/just another owner one? Given the comments in the Q5 thread, it seems a common refrain is the mods should zip it with critical individual opinions that may vary from what others (not) want to hear. I say that because the feedback in the board thread seems as much or more about mod status as it is about the content or opinion.

In local government contexts as an example, I have seen many people involved in government who hold elected or appointed office who want to say something on a topic but not as a representative. They should be able to, and not somehow disadvantaged by their service. They simply get up and make clear in their opening they are speaking as a private individual expressing personal opinion rather than speaking on behalf of whatever body they might otherwise be thought of as representing.

It probably takes some programming tweaks, but seems to me all should be allowed to express their opinions within forum rules, and not be disadvantaged because of forum status. The nature of the signatures though assigns "Moderator" (or the other designations) automatically. I've seen the issue once or twice even with the "Guru" tag (both another experienced member and me), but feel less constrained than I expect a Mod might at times when expressing personal views. Thankless job often, so would hate to see someone say life's too short for putting up w/ the flak.

Kris Hansen

Actually I believe that mods are held to a somewhat higher standard at all times. With "free speech" comes "free consequences". It's not ok to act like a twit and bully or belittle people on one hand, then ban people for same on the other. Got a link to the "dust up" in question?