...but I like my own account.
In other words; you like the prestige of having the little title there. Nobody - well, at least I (can't say for Qhimm, since some monkey censored him) - didn't suggest taking your regular account away. You just don't use it for moderation.
My own view was something to the effect of not having actual dual accounts (at least not under the current account system, which would create lots of extra work for moderators), but rather to have sort of a pseudo-identity just called "Moderator". Moderators could, when posting, choose whether to post as themselves (for normal posts) or as "Moderator", in which case their identity would be hidden. This could, for example, be separated into two entirely different pages, "post reply" and "moderate" (with added moderation tools). To normal users, it appears that a magical "Moderator" user has posted. Thus we have the advantage that moderators can do their work separately from their normal posting, with the added benefit that it's harder to bitch back with personal insults since you don't know exactly who posted (unless the moderator uses a very characteristic writing style, which would show through anyway).
If they have a question about something for example they PM a moderator. If everything is weird with 2 accounts it would make this more difficult to do.
How exactly? Is it more difficult to write "Moderator #4" to the recipient field of that PM? There is nothing "weird with 2 accounts", the regular account is not moderation account, period.
This is one of the bits that would not work with my idea, as the "Moderator" user doesn't really exist. But ideally you'd want some form of "notify moderator" system instead of PMs anyway, which would be just special PMs that would show up in some special bin accessible by any moderator. Replies could be written using the same "Moderator" pseudo-user, and replying to that I guess would just send the new message into the moderator bin again. Though this system would probably not be used for lengthy discussion anyway. So essentially what I'm suggesting is a system to
mimic actually having a separate moderator account, but which moderators can use without actually having to switch back and forth.
Some people fear moderators just because of the name moderator. It's the same with an Administrator title. People watch what they say around staff members being careful or as you said not being careful to insult them. This has it's good points. Moderators are more respected generally speaking, and because of that their presence on any forum helps maintain order.
And this would create exactly what kind of problem with the system I suggested? There are moderators, there are admins - you just can't associate them with their regular usernames.
They get respect where they need it - or don't get it, if the current trend continues - but they don't enjoy any kind of unnecessary privileges.
I'm still split on the issue of actually
hiding the identities of the administrative staff. Most of the benefits can be drawn just by obscuring the precise identity of individual moderation actions. If there are enough moderators, they can be visible and it's still not trivial to associate them with moderation posts. The problem with keeping the actual "who's a moderator?" secret is that the secret will eventually get out, and then the point is lost. There's also the (admittedly optimistic) idea that a visible moderation staff sets an example for other users even when they post as normal users. Sure if you stay long enough you sort of pick up who's important and who's not, but for new users it's often a relief to be able to clearly see "proper users". This could probably be better established by using different ranks than moderators, though.
I do believe there should be some reward for being a moderator other than seeing a mildly cleaner forum though, so I think the visible titles should stay. Though perhaps one shouldn't reveal exactly who moderates what, just keep a list of "these people help moderate various parts of the forums". And perhaps the title displayed next to their posts shouldn't be so blatantly official-sounding as "moderator". A small icon would suffice, with a mouse-over text or something, then users could see that he's a higher-ranking member, but would get the immediate feeling that the post contains official forum opinions. I know some people (including me) like the added respect by having the title publically displayed, but we don't always want the room to go quiet when we enter. This would probably still continue with separate moderation posts, since the word "moderator" is to firmly connected to official posts from all the other forums on the internet. A more balanced approach would be needed, I think.
First, I've got to admit that it was me who "destroyed" Qhimm's original message. Sorry about that.
You can move the quotation marks from destroyed to sorry, it certainly seems to be gone - but at least I don't believe one letter of that sorry.
Now I'm as annoyed as anyone that my extremely well-formulated post was destroyed by a fresh moderator who couldn't tell the difference between the "quote" and the "edit" button. Not a great start on the job, Alhexx... I'm not going to bother with it further though, I've got your assurance it won't happen again, so if it does, and another
content post disappears somewhere, I won't consider it accidental. Fair deal, no?
The payoff of being an unpaid Mod. is respect; isn't it? (Or a feeling of belonging....at the very least.).
Not better forum? :-?
I'd think a moderator's primary motivation should be to preserve the community, yes. The added respect comes from him doing a good job, not automatically with the title. Unfortunately the new system would obscure this, so if some moderators do crap work, people won't know, neither will they know who to respect as a person for doing a great job. This is admittedly a small problem, because even in the current situation we've had several moderators burn out because of the small perceived rewards for dealing with idiots all day long. Hopefully this could be partly solved by having stronger-scripted forum restrictions, reducing moderation to the more intellectually stimulating parts of the job. It really shouldn't be about arguing and convincing people of their wrongdoings (as it appears today), it should be about seeing an idiot and clicking the warning/ban button. Easy as pie, like calling the maid instead of scrubbing the floor yourself.
Still quite a ways to go before I get there though... *looks at mess that is phpBB code*
.