kmno4 - 3-4-2007 at 21:53
Moderators of this forum are veeeeeery busy (but somehow I do not belive this...) and they do not have time to make their job.
And mess becomes bigger and bigger.
So, let administrator make someone a new moderator, especially for "References".
I vote for Solo.
It could be also I 
But I will show no mercy ( I used to moderate our local chemistry forum and it do not exist any more [joke 
])
Solo is more merciful 
solo - 4-4-2007 at 01:54
Gee thanks.....but I don't need the extra work, I got enough trying to assist members of several forums with material , which should rightfully be
free to all, hence my motivation to free the words to feed the heads...........solo
fescho - 4-4-2007 at 12:29
so is there anybody else to vote? but be serious...
BromicAcid - 4-4-2007 at 18:19
I see nothing wrong with the moderation capacity of this forum. Just because moderation does not occur instantaneously does not mean that it is not
sufficient, given a few hours most any problem works itself out, even late in the evening or early in the morning. Moderation is not a paying job,
moderators do their thing during their normal browsing of this board which does not have to be unrealistically frequent regardless of their increased
status. Personally my vote would go to Magpie 
Should the garnering of an
additional moderator prove necessary.
[Edited on 4/4/2007 by BromicAcid]
chemrox - 4-4-2007 at 18:53
Nominating someone for moderator is perhaps not a big favor... I'm not seeing a problem for one thing but I would not like to see someone as generous
with his time and abilities as Solo saddled with this dubious 'honor(?)' I would like it opened to volunteers and anyone volunteering should be
willing to put in the time and know what the time commitment is. I haven't a clue for example.
BromicAcid - 4-4-2007 at 19:22
No, no, it should be like the blame game, everyone nominates a moderator and they in turn can point the moderating finger at a new individual, last
one left is moderator! 
12AX7 - 4-4-2007 at 21:12
I would nominate myself, but I don't see many topics that need moderation that can't be handled as is anyway.
Tim
woelen - 5-4-2007 at 01:10
I also do not see the need for additional moderation of this board. Moderation over here is quite lax, and I think that is fine.
quicksilver - 5-4-2007 at 06:08
Who is looked at for the quintessential model of Moderator? How is the correct path to be described in print? What type of personality is needed? Does
one dare look heavenward to the heights virtually beyond grasp and with baited breath speak the name of NBK2000? Or as mortals should we dare not to
even dream for such a being's grace?
Sorry....
[Edited on 5-4-2007 by quicksilver]
Rosco Bodine - 5-4-2007 at 09:26
It would be a dull place if too much moderation were
to be imposed . Lost forever would be that sadistic pleasure enjoyed by most as an academic freedom in making frank replies to druggies , kewls ,
trolls , and crackpots .... a process which builds up gradually sometimes like a kiln being slowly brought up to firing temperature . There's always
the lock and detritus which
can be used to snuff out any exponentially expanding flareup or provide a quench tank and conduit to the holding tank when the flush lever is actuated
.
If an automatic sprinkler system was installed , then we
could no longer enjoy the warmth of the occasional campfire and weenie roast .....and that would be a tragedy