Recently a thread was opened in the Religious segment on Mullah’s statement on earhtquake victims. As discussion progressed, a viewpoint supportive of a particular side was presented by a moderator/member which evoked many responses. While discussion/debate was in its very initial stages, the same mod/member unilaterally decided to close this thread cause it was not going in any direction, according to his assessment.
Now this situation present a clear case of conflict of interest. When mods become part of a debate they should not be allowed to direct/discipline/close that particular thread for it clearly allows for manipulation and exploitation of issues and raise issues of objectivity.
GupSgup Directors must take notice of such actions to maintain GS credibility.
There is ZERO objectivity or credibility in the moderation of the religion forum. When a moderator condemns to hell those who do not follow his beliefs and tells posters that their religion and people teach hatred, it makes a mockery of the position of moderator and of those who do not share the narrow interpretation of the moderator. A moderator should not use his position to issue fatwas. It totally stifles free expression.
Impartiallity, objectivity and freedom of expression leads to credibility. When the guardians become interest parties it will lead to problems, disputes, conflict of interests for obvious reasons. Either Mods sud be dictated by a much more strict guideline or complete separation must be observed when moderating threads and being part of discussions.
*