Page 2 - Webworkshop article

Rod. I prefered not to discuss this in detail in public, and I took up your suggestion to talk via PM. You've responded via PM (I haven't read it yet but I assume the PM is from you), but you also seem to want to discuss it in public. I don't think it's a good thing to do, particularly as it has nothing to do with this forum other than the fact the you are a moderator here.

Let me say that I have no desire for you to be sacked as a moderator from any forum. The PM I sent you shows that quite clearly. Also, the fact that nobody else voiced a negative opinion about the event doesn't mean that locking threads for the reasons you gave is ok. It simply means that nobody else voiced a negative opinion - that you are aware of. I am aware of one negative opinion though - that of the Administrator who re-opened the thread.

But let's agree to differ in public, and stick to PMs.

None of those are valid reasons to close a thread.

Actually, item #1 above (the level of dicussion) is just nonsense. It's an arrogant thing to have said because it proclaims his level of understanding to be above the level of the rest of the forum users. It isn't, of course - it was just arrogance (some would say stupidity).

Item #2 was also nonsense. He had no way of knowing how many people were following the discussion or how many people would find the discussion useful in the future. Nobody can know that.

Item #3 was nonsense too. If he'd wanted to get onto other things, he could have simply stopped posting in the thread. We all have that option.

The truth is that he overstepped his authority as a moderator and locked the thread, simply because he couldn't produce any evidence or even well-reasoned arguments to support his claims. The forum's administrator corrected his misdeed ;)

It would have been good if he'd admitted it to be a mistake on his part, but he never did that either publically or privately - he just continued to be arrogant. It makes a bad moderator.

Making unfounded accusations isn't good either. He accused you of unethically linking your client sites to your site. Unfounded accusations of that nature would earn any of my moderators a quick booting.

He did, but I showed and proved that it was just an unfounded, and unjustified accusation.

Like here, I used my sig line to point to my site. If I'd done what he accused me of, I would have used some more suitable link text, such as "search engine optimization", instead of just the name of the site. That's what made his accusation so stupid and embarrassing for him - because it was so obviously wrong.

You know, in my own forum RackShack CS was posting a bunch of baloney about me a couple days ago. I didn't ban them (two RS staff) - I stickied the thread for all to see.

You can't just close a thread when somebody disagrees with you. Well, you can, but it's WRONG.

I misread your earlier post. You were talking about Fathom accusing me of leaching my clients' PageRank by linking their sites to mine. Yes, he accused me of that :smile:

What he'd done was find one, or maybe two, of my own sites and assumed them to be my clients. They, of course, do contain links to my WebWorkshop site. It was a nasty and uncalledfor false accusation which had nothing whatsoever to do with the discussion. He was just being nasty because he was losing the discussion. It's the usual technique - if you're losing the discussion, make it personal by insulting the opposition. Some moderator, huh?

It surprised me. It shocked me. I see fathom all other the place. I don't think there is a forum he doesn't post in. So I thought he'd know that closing threads for personal reasons is a no no.

As for links from client sites... I got a ton of them, but they are always had with the permission of the client.

My impression of him is that he is very helpful to people, and likes to be helpful. Lots of people are helpful, but being helpful doesn't make a good forum moderator - it just makes a good/valuable helper.

My experience of him is that he doesn't handle being shown to be mistaken very well. Some people imagine that, as a moderator, they can't be seen to be wrong or mistaken. It's a natural human failing, but it's a failing that modertaors shouldn't posses.

Moderators should moderate - they don't even need to be experts in the field they are moderating. It helps if they are experts and can join in in a helpful way, but it isn't an essential of being a good moderator.

There is absolutely no reason at all to discuss personal issues with anyone in public forums.

I am sorry. This is just not right.

Everyone who posted anything to personal attack anyone, either in defense or offense, should edit their own posts.

This is a waste of time for all 3 of you. You are all skilled and knowledgeable SEOs with great names, why do anything to make others think otherwise.

PM me if you disagree, otherwise please edit your own posts before others read this.