Perhaps the problem is that the performance standards that the moderators are acting on when taking decisions (like firing mods) are not available for all to see. If this was a real job (as opposed to a thankless one

), there would be a role description, KPIs, the whole shebang. But in the absence of even some vague guidelines that all can see, the only people who can judge if the mods are being reasonable are the mods themselves - hardly an ideal situation. Who watches the watchers? Perhaps SpankMe, but that makes for a Management Structure, which is unlikely to sit well with a
community of motorcyclists. And, as I said in my earlier post - the community health here is less good than a few days ago. Which may give cause for alarm in sensible minds, or not.
(I searched for mod responsibilities and found "to keep the site running smoothly, to protect the reputation of the site and its owner, to maintain order and ensure the site's standards of behaviour are adhered to" but that doesn't seem to be specific enough to fire someone. Not to mention the "standards" are a bit vague, judging by the posts that have gone to PD in this thread alone).
Now, as some of the proles half suspect the mods are power-mad and abusing their authority (see my earlier post for a view of why this may be so), events like firing Frosty with no scrutiny of the decision draw the ire of all or most of his friends and admirers, and reinforce the view that the mods are power-mad... etc. I believe it's called a vicious cycle (
or is that the M109R, maybe it's a circle?)...
Perhaps the mods are taking things a wee bit seriously? After all, as us proles are frequently reminded, it's just an Internet site. Do you really need all of these rules, and firing people for poor performance, and associated shit?
Well, yerssss, no-one else from "the other side" is participating in the discussion, are they?
Bookmarks