NearDC is a Community Leader. As a CL we have a responsibility for light moderation duties in the sense that we will warn users about breaches in the Community Guidelines, remove threads/posts that clearly break these guidelines (or repeated posts etc.), and try to keep discussion on track. We are not paid moderators and do not work for eHA or eHarmony.

My point is that we are encouraged to engage in discussion and are not supposed to be the "parents" keeping the "kids" civil but otherwise stay out (like actual moderators). The majority of my time as a CL is spent giving advice and adding my opinions, not being "thought police" and spanking all the people who think hate speech is simply "the honest truth" (irony intended).

Perhaps NearDC's comments were a bit sarcastic but the numbers were way off. If I came in and said something like "well, the reality is that 95% of Americans think Obama is wrong!" and I didn't get a single "oh puleeze!" remark I'd probably think you're all crazy .

Either way the whole argument is sort of silly. Numbers of protesters are not, and never have been, a good indication of political intent. Who cares if there were two million there or two thousand? All that tells you is that there's a difference in one million, nine-hundred ninety-eight thousand people who have the free time and money to get off work, travel to Washington DC, and stand around acting like they're doing something.

Even if I agreed with them (which is one more person "protesting") I can't go. Why? I have obligations that prevent me from traveling across the country (school, the military, no money for plane tickets, etc.). All you learn from a political protest is a guess at how many people in a particular movement are able to either make their own vacation time or don't have jobs at all. In other words the middle class is virtually absent from political protests. The only thing statistics without context tell you is that someone can count.

And all of that is my opinion and has nothing to do with moderation, which is my original point. Politics are all about opinions. There's really no such thing as a "political truth." If something is "true," if it cannot be argued, then it really has no business being anywhere near politics. Liberal or conservative, I think we can agree that totalitarianism is not what we want, right? And for those wondering where that logical leap originated read Hannah Arendt's "Truth and Politics" or take my word for it .

Could Neardc perhaps have used a lighter tone? Probably. Then again this is the politics forum. Either way it's our job to prevent breaches of the community guidelines. We understand that politics is an emotional, opinionated subject and as such are lighter on moderating things like "tone" than we perhaps would be in other forums. Things get heated around here all the time and if we shut down every person who gave a sarcastic comment directed at another member or their political beliefs we probably wouldn't even have this forum at all...which, by the way, was a solution we discussed (and ultimately rejected).

Either way I'll shut up before she gets mad at me for "defending" her when she's perfectly capable of doing so herself . I mainly wanted to clarify that Community Leaders are not the same as moderators and you should expect us to engage in discussion beyond eloquent "play nice!" comments. Feel free to disagree and argue with us; unless it breaks the community guidelines we aren't going to moderate it. I personally learn more from these forums through disagreement than anything else so I encourage it.

I hope that makes sense, and actually added new information to the topic, unlike Obama's speeches!

See what I did there?

Jacquesne