Dropping the RP council

[Myroria]

That sounds good too.

[NFIC]

The moderators are the key point to the new system proposed, if they all are skewed towards one way of doing things, anyone who wants to try something diffrent will be run out.

[Myroria]

Yeah, but then you can call in admins that RP to take names and kick ass.

[St Oz]

I know none of you would support me but I'll throw my name into the crowd.

[Bustos]

If we are nominating already, or throwing names into the crowd, I'd like to add myself the the list of canidates as a potential moderater.

I agree with PUR, three mods would best.  Two mods leave risk of a split vote.

[St Oz]

The reason I like to mods is because if it does leave into a disagreement they fight it out and find the most rational terms. If it is a three way moderating team not only do you have too much power spread out you have the 2:1 factor where 2 gang up on the 1 and the 1s voice is never heard.

[Bustos]

I am afraid of deadlock, if neither mod will fold or no compromise can be attained.

[Zimmerwald]

If we're nominating, I'd like to throw my hat into the ring.  My attributes: I'm a Justice, and if Amy trusts me to be rational, you should too; I fulfill PUR's requirement of a "liberal socialist," should we be using her model; remember my map compromises between Myroria and Oz back in the Lex forum?

In other words, G-C = awesome mod.  At least in my opinion.

Also, I would prefer a triumvirate of moderators, precisely because of the possibility of deadlock.  I also think that we should shuffle moderators, so as to prevent Oz's situation where the two always gang up on the one.  Or just appoint moderators that, while they disagree, respect each other and value each others' opinions.

[Simple]

i agree with GC on this one, switching who moderates would be a good idea,
I'm not sure what the requirements of a mod is but if someone were to inform me of the rights and responsibilities, i believe id have a better grasp on if id like to participate on this.

[NFIC]

to bad im not active really

[Xyrael]

I am FOR three OOC: politically oriented mods. #1 if we get Bustos, Ryaz, and Myro as mods, the place will be so pro libertarian it is not funny and any "commie bullshit" would be more likely to be ignored. #2 Though a moderator can claim to be unbiased, no man is a paragon of pragmatism.

I second G-C for liberal moderator, and second bustos for conservative moderator. For "moderate" moderator, I nominate Mor'os.

[Gulliver]

Bustos is actually far from conservative. Rather, he's incredibly libertarian.

And though I still am not sure what appointing people based on politics has got to do with anything (the fact being that if we are looking for objective OOC moderating I'd think we'd want to detach it from politics) I suppose I may as well accept the nomination. All political tests to date have repeatedly confirmed me to be frighteningly moderate.

[St Oz]

I think I should just be a mod because I actually have the map... It'd be much more efficient if the mods and I didn't have to relay "oks" about certain expansions, I argue with them, then eventually making a peace where Oz is kicked out of his position because he didn't think the imperialism was right.

[Talmann]

Not sure about this, but I'll throw my name in for a conservative mod. And I second Mor'os/Prag. for moderate

[Khem]

i'll throw my name in as i am fiesty and will take no shit if appointed.