With the current blog in Answerbag in terms of moderation points, do you think that we should eliminate the moderation points? What are your standings in terms of moderation? (see more below)

Moderation is no more than ADMINISTRATION. It does not reflect your membership standing in the community, only a perverse need for points. (a harmless perversion, if that's your thing) It is not a reflection of you or your thought processes. If you are busy moderating, you are working for peanuts, and that is an over statement. No animosity for those who find this entertaining. Go ahead and moderate til your heart's content. I only flag spam and offensive questions, other than that, I'd rather be matching my socks than moderating! And that is where I stand. points for the Q! That is the way to move up........

Moderation is something that is necessary, but I think the points should go down. 5 is too much for just one flag. Our askers and answerers should get more credit on that leaderboard, instead of being driven away from it by the moderators. Moderation isn't bad, it just needs to be controlled in a better way.

Well, I tried to earn moderation points for the first time, as I flagged a question which was in the wrong category. But then I noticed I didn't get any points and my percentage came down from 100% to 67%. Oh, well. Maybe they think that a question about Pakistan belongs in the art section.

As the expert in the moderation guide, I just think that the moderation points system has gone a bit too far. Answerbag is the only Q&A website that I know of that awards points for moderation on questions and answers. It looks like the 'Wrong Category' flag probably the most used flag of all flags in moderation, because there can be so many questions that can fit more than one category. With the current blog in process, this is now the hot topic and debate for Answerbag at this time. http://www.answerbag.com/blog/comments/156

I was about to ask this same question a few days ago, but was afraid I'd get flagged. It does seem to be a bit unfair and the lazy way of gaining points. It seem to me that just about anything can be flagged. It's all very subjective and what offends me may not offend someone else. I do find some language offensive, but most people reserve it for comments where it can't be flagged. No dummys there. I do have to smile a little when one writes that the points don't mater, than spend a week just looking for moderations.

I'm relatively new to the site, but I find the moderation system to be more dangerous than it's worth. I thought we were supposed to flag spam, and ran across a series of tennis shoe ads, so I flagged them all. I've never flagged anything but clear spam ads, but my moderation percentage is 53% -- which some people tell me makes me look like a troll. The spam ads were deleted, so I know my flags were acted on (they could have been duplicates of other people's flags, I guess). In any event, in my experience you run only a 50-50 shot at getting credit for an accurate flag -- and run about a 50-50 shot that you won't get credit for an accurate flag, which shows up in your statistics as a false flag. It's just not worth the risk. Sorry.

At the end of 2007, I suggested a change to the moderation point system: Wrong category should equal 1 point Duplicates, spam, offensive and nonsense should equal 2 points 5 points if far too much for flagging. There have been far too many incorrect acceptance of flags by the moderators. Why should I keep answering or asking questions when I can make tens of thousands of points a week by flagging? Why have over 8,000 of my answers not received a point? Why? Apparently the AB admins believe flagging is more helpful than answering questions.