I agree Jason, we can agree to disagree. I just wish you guys would not take it to such extreme. And we never said Deidra was gonna be the only mod either.
From what I understand. Some of you who joined a long time ago got their feelings hurt because nobody mentioned anything about this position, and we filled it with someone who joined the site not a long time ago. A lot of you members are passionate with BSB and you felt like you got slapped in the face. Am I right? If so, I'm sorry. I hate having my feelings hurt too so yeah I understand. I guess we didn't think this mod position was that important for you guys so we just asked Deidra if she wanted to be. She had mentioned to us she was familiar with our program so it was a natural choice.
But anyway, what's done is done, and I'm happy to have Deidra as a mod.
Now my question is: What would make you guys feel better? Cos at this point, I have no idea.
Stephane:
I don't really know at this point.
If it isn't such a big deal then why can't Chuck do it? And if it wasn't a big deal, then why not tell us of your plans? You're not obligated to, but it would have been the politic thing to do. Why one and not two? Yes Miss D is a recent addition to the mix. Yes she represents a different point of view. Yes she has made mistakes even with her 5 years experience of moderating.
You may be more enlightened than I, I readily admit that. However, style and process are important. Expectations are also a factor. To many of us who are older and more accustomed to formal environments, "moderator" has a particular meaning. It's a neutral position that does not inject their own personality into the mix. It's sort of like a referee. You get to make calls when things are out of bounds, but you don't get to play the game.
No one is saying she will abuse her "powers". But Blu and Miss D handled that poorly. Instead of getting ahead of it all, "you" got behind it and started playing defense. Even Chuck wasnot always "listening" on the phone today..... I hope I repeated myself enough to get some things thru.
Yes, gays have been discriminated against. Yes women have been discriminated against. But when a gay run, gay owned company that serves a predominantly gay following announces (or doesn't as the case is here) that the "first" member moderator is going to be a woman who is lively (and they all like) but is a recent addition and does not pair that up with a gay man, then there is going to be a backlash. The same would be true if I were appointed to the BOD of the NAACP. Yes, we are injured, yes we are hurt. And I am speaking for more than just myself. Others are not willing to come out and be berated for even saying anything because she's a woman and there are those who start going ballistic because their defense is solely that she is a woman. It hides the true conversation. How and what, not necessarily who.
Well, many, including management can say that it's no big deal. IMHO you are quite wrong. It does matter. Distrust is engendered when people are not informed. Management decided to do what it did. That's one for distrust. Management and the Moderator could not get on the same page as to her "powers" and duties. That's two for distrust.
How the hell does Blu regain the trust of the membership? I don't have the answer, I wish I did, Stephane, I wish I did.
Thanks.
Jayce