[quote=@Kangaroo] Having reread the conversation, I did misinterpret it but I guess I will address the points raised nonetheless. This may seem like an argument of semantics but sometimes definitions are important; I personally consider nepotism to be promotion/selection in spite of ability; ergo the appointment of someone right for the role does not entail nepotism. Am I perhaps arrogant by suggesting that I am a good mod? perhaps, but that is built off the commentary of multiple people from different cliques. [/quote] What constitutes a good mod and what not is, also, entirely subjective. I'm not saying you're wrong, because you're not, but as Hank has previously stated, he prefers janitor-style mods and I myself prefer a different style of mods. Neither of us is wrong, we just have different preferences. I think there are plenty of good candidates for moderator positions that, as far as I know, have never been considered, where as I do know some people that I personally think are probably one of the worst picks you could make [i]have[/i] been considered. Perhaps for that reason I'll ask [@Hank] if he could run me/us through the process that you go through when you are being considered for moderator. Or perhaps one of the other mods could. I'm interested to see what the process is from start to finish. How do you get considered for the position all the way to how is the acceptance of a new moderator announced. The idea [i]I[/i] have is that at the moment it's entirely whimsical and based on nominations from other moderators. You should be aware that you're missing out on a [i]lot[/i] of good candidates like [@Nytem4re] or others, who by now have lost either the backing or the desire to help at all. [quote=@Kangaroo]Is the fact that I have previous experience with the mod team and a history of interaction a factor in my reappointment; absolutely. It's the same as a company rehiring someone who'd previosuly done a good job, they're hired off merit and the knowledge that they can perform with the team currently assembled. The ruby reappointment I can't comment much on as it was during my period of well documented absence but my own I am happy to discuss beyond my personal issues. I'd put out an offer to resign from being a moderator around a year before my actual leaving because I recognised that i didn't have the same activity that I thought would be required from a mod. The feedback i received that there was no cap on mod numbers and I was free to continue because my opinion and perspective on issues was desired. When I resigned was because I was cutting ties to focus on some central personal issues, when I resolved them I sent a message to Hank and made the point that the issues were resolved and that I was more free in terms of time. About two months later he contacted me and asked if i was still returning because he wanted my opinion for the defence of a genre thread/event. That is the circumstances of my return. [/quote] I don't and didn't mean to pry in your personal life - when you resigned I respected it because you'd shown that you were critiquing yourself as well and I liked that. When I named you here, I critiqued you for still not being as active as others. Perhaps it was a momentary thing, I can't tell as I am not omniscient. The reasons for that are irrelevant to me if I am not aware of them - this is why the suggestion of a moderator thread where mods can post status updates or other things is a good suggestion because it makes people aware that one given mod might be away for a few days - in this case I was unaware of the reasoning for you being gone and therefore could not make a weighted judgement. You're telling me now, yes, but if I'd known this prior, perhaps I would've understood why you were gone instead of having to judge that for myself. [quote=@Ruby] Yeah, at that point, we'd had some casual conversations when he worked at a resort, but nothing Guild related. Our first Guild related chats were about an issue I had unrelated to him, and when I realized maybe it'd be good if I went back and helped site staff again. Hank didn't appoint me the second time, either; that was Mahz. [/quote] I thought it was Hank as I seemed to recall reading that somewhere, but in that case my apologies. You don't feel like your prior friendship with Mahz might've influenced the rather quick reappointment whatsoever? I do.