Yesterday I opened a discussion about changing the moderators for this sub as I had concerns about having the same people from the reddit sub holding dominion over this one, I thought a fresh start would be best to alleviate the suspicion that had built up over reddit moderators in general. After I raised this issue, I received a lot of positive feedback and there seemed to be a consensus that there was a need for some sort of change in the way things operated in order to placate our fears about moderator meddling.

There were also legitimate concerns raised about the possibility of hostile people taking over this sub if the moderators were to be removed and it could become co-opted by the very people we were moving from reddit to avoid. The solution put forward that seems, at least in my opinion, to be best in solving all sets of concerns is a completely transparent moderator log, which users can view and debate changes made, in effect being a real democracy where the voices of the users were heard and those trusted to keep order were completely accountable for their actions.

What I did not envisage was an extremely hostile and negative reaction to my post which completely dismissed me and viewed me with suspicion, a view that anyone is welcome to take of course but the venomous nature of this particular response was completely unwarranted and counter-productive to the debate. When somebody comes on here with other suggestions and changes that might not necessarily chime with the old paradigm, even if you view their motives with suspicion it seems much better to debate them on the issues and, as in my case at least, viable solutions which appease both parties can be found after discussion and group consensus brought about by the raising of the initial question. I know I'm preaching to the choir here but any alternative view should never be dismissed outright in such a hostile and negative way as to put off the person asking the question in the first place, especially in a forum dedicated to the discussion of alternative and sometimes unpalatable ideas. We have the opportunity with this site to create something better than reddit and we are all at first stage, our suggestions can make a real difference and I hope this fact isn't lost in the mire of petty arguments over non-issues. Apologies for the essay and thanks for reading, I just needed to get that off my chest.

Tl;dr - New ideas, especially ones that promote major changes, can and should be viewed with suspicion and the motives discussed, but descending into name calling and ad hominem attacks doesn't help anything and can damage potentially positive changes.

Edited for formatting to make it an easier read.