Ok, so you're so misguided on what a moderator should be doing, that you are challenging the source of reference, instead of reflecting on the point? Wow, i suggest you do a search on your own and hopefully you can learn from other sources that which you respect on what a moderator should be doing.
Not sure how this is "moderating" this thread.
This article from Quirks.com outlines the 7 most important qualities inherent any every great moderator.
Natural curiosity. ...
Ease in interacting with people. ...
Ability to remain impartial, open, and unbiased. ...
Flexibility. ...
Strong...
That video is only part of the story. It may be enough to prove a murder, but it is not the only evidence in the case. The facts in the hearing are what need to be used for such ruling. Social media is not judge, jury, and executioner as many folks think it is.
Youve clearly already made your decision on what happened. I havent seen anything other than the video afterword. If you have, please enlighten me.
Im waiting to see what the jury says based on what evidence is presented. Thats kinda what matters, at least to civil people.
I dont consider social media a good source of information. I also expect to see any and all pertinent facts flushed out in the hearing. Thats what im looking to see to make my assessment.
Social media is the number one issue we have in this country.
Youre trying to rationalize what cops did in response to what they were dealing with prior to the video. I want to see the entire situation from beginning to end before i can say the cops were out of line.