I voted no. this place is tame and comical when anything erupts, compared to some of the things that happen on other lists. it's not like Dawes, Torvalds or De Raadt are regulars.

Just reading one of the posts in this topic (ahem, post #16) made me want to vote yes -- if only for some control to be exercised when it needs to be. And Reggie, the system you proposed sounds perfect for the needs of ITT. In fact, I think it might be more productive than adding mods. OTOH, spam _is_ an issue.

And yeah, well opinions may be like a'holes, but flame wars erupting over the silliest and most trivial of issues are unneccessary. Not to mention that they give ITT bad publicity, which we can all agree is bad. My 2c.

I repeat from another thread: I nominate convulted. I love the "if nominated i will not run" candidates.

All bs aside, regarding a certain troublemaker here with 3 or 4 accounts:

I have the guy on ignore, but I don't like what he does to the forum (I see the quotes). To that extent, I'd have banned him (and his alter egos) long ago-- and I'm not a ban-happy type (I have been a forum admin and moderator). I have tons of tolerance for all sorts of activities, but zero for people who do nothing but relentlessly harass forum members. There is nothing productive in that behavior, and it poisons an environment. Just my opinion.