On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 04:25 PM, ro-esp wrote:
IMHO a moderator should have the power to appoint a successor.Well yes, and, er, no. If it is necessary to appoint a successor then that ought really to be a collaborative decision taken by all the managers of a group, not just the person who is standing down. After all a successor is a replacement, not simply an additional moderator.
However I can envisage circumstances where an additional moderator might be required to cover a sudden gap in moderation coverage, and in that case it might well be acceptable for a single moderator to appoint someone to the role, possibly (probably?) with limited permissions.; even then a concensus decision would be preferable.
I struggle to think of any way in which Mark could provide a software solution to cater for both sets of circumstances.
In many ways the best solution is the application of good manners, good practice, and good faith, but sadly the implication underlying the current "Requirement" is that all three are, in some groups, lacking. :(