By Kanelli:
"Dubai is ovveeerrr!" "Chubs" "Loon" "Infidel" - couldn't anyone take offense depending on their own sensitivities? Moderators would have to have set criteria. In the end we are all grown ups and should be able to handle a certain level of "naming" or criticism of oneself or topics of discussion. However, a while back one forumer said that Chocs should die - a direct verbal threat. Was he banned? No, when I complained by PM, a mod told me the forumer was joking. I checked the context and didn't see that it was lighthearted joke at all. If I had been a moderator and removed the post and sent a warning to the forumer, maybe people would have jumped on me for "bad moderating". Mods don't have an easy job, but this place will deteriorate if left to trolls and bad behaviour from regulars or even other Mods.[/quote]
On the example you used, a moderator has to take into consideration what a forumer thinks is offensive and not let their personal judgment interfere. Wishing someone to die is totally wrong. What if it was directed to the mod that you complained to? Would it been seen as a "joke", possibly not, depending on how it came about. I would have removed it - call it bad moderating or not, it would have been removed as there is no place for that on a forum. On a personal level what one mod doesn't find offensive, another mod might. But mods should not act on personal thoughts/feelings. If there were to be proper moderation, mods need to be more objective and less subjective in their thinking - as well as putting their likes and dislikes of people aside in order to make a formative decision. I will also add that there are some things that mods should identify as being inappropriate without it having to be pointed out to them.
Of course this is is only my opinion but, hey, what do I know?