Adding New Forum Moderators

Forum moderator, even if not forum admin, is still a position that theoretically would allow censorship of content. Therefore, it would probably be best for the position to be elected, even if not executive. Every other position is technically elected, why have this be any different?

If a forum moderator decides to censor dumb things I will remove them in a heart beat.

I agree with your judgment but the logic we're applying to this contradicts the logic we're applying to everything else. It sets a precedence question on if we want to trust the owner in power to make all of these decisions without vote. Similar logic would be, you elected the President, so why can't he hand-pick the Congresspeople?

Because the people in congress together have the power to pass bills and having the president appoint them means the president can appoint people to ensure every thing he wants is passed. That can occur because it ensures that whatever the president wanted passed will pass because they will go along with whatever he says. However in this case, the forum mods hold no power to do that, and their only power is to take appropriate action on reported posts, clear spam, and enforce the forum rules. Electing them would be trivial and unnecessary.

This seems to differ from the attitude you had prior to Seth being elected. Given the fact that you are running as an executive right now, would you rather the owner have the ability to overlook you and pick someone else and you have no chance of becoming that position unless the owner liked you enough, or have a process where people can actually pick to elect you?

I'm more curious on why you're suddenly thinking that we shouldn't have an election system for non-ownership positions. Would you say the same about admin applications? Why are you suddenly against the system that we've all been working towards for the past few months? I also see a logical error in the last part of your post. Your concern is that elected executives would result in candidates that just "will win the election", and that the owner would be able to pick better, quality candidates. However the owner would've been elected by the same people that would be electing the candidates, so with logical consistency not even the owner should be elected to ensure that we don't just get an owner that will win an election.

don't you mean you got elected to be owner and lead the community(by admins btw), not necessarily trusted but people trusted you more than other people, it doesn't even necessarily mean trust, it could mean qualification and at this point the forum is more active than the server lmao