Wolf359 wrote:smooshable wrote:Seriously though, I don't think we're fooling anyone with our team work this week.
Smoosh reply:Without wanting to sound callous - 'team work'?
This was indeed my point. Regardless of who's fault it is, the one thing we can all agree on is that clearly team work has been lacking this week.Throughout my time as a mod, supermod and Admin on this forum, I have been the one who has, probably more than anyone else, tried to ensure the mods work as a team. I have been the one, probably more than most, who has tried to get the community to understand how best to go about issues with mods. I have been the one, definately more than most, who has urged other mods to keep their arguments away from the public eye and resolve them in house - but when those problems go unanswered/glossed over/ignored, needs must! And I have definately been the one who has cleaned up mod messes more than most, and who has not batted an eyelid in telling people when they are the cause of the problems.
I don't think anyone is questioning your commitment to the team over these years. In response to you raising problems that have been unanswered I have tried to answer the questions raised in this thread. I will of course try to answer all these as well. Just try to keep in mind there are a lot of things being asked. I hope that after we talk about these, even if you have further questions you will at least accept that I am not trying to duck the discussion.And when I see posts such as that above, I can hardly believe my eyes!
The post was unlocked because it wasn't justifiably locked, as I pointed out.
As for your team work comment - isn't the majority of this recent debacle as a result of the fact that decisions have been made in isolation, rather than as a team?
The answer to that question is 'Yes'.
I feel that it is unfair to say that without doubt the majority of this recent debacle has been caused as a result of me deciding stuff by myself rather than as a group. You have listed about three examples of things I have 'decided by myself'. They are the same three examples that have been quoted to me over and over again. Even if all three of these were made in isolation I do not feel it is fair to judge me based entirely on that. Of all the decisions we've made over the last 6 months we have three examples of bad ones? This makes me a dictator? But even still, I believe two of them are far from clear cut. - Let the community vote on new rule: isolated decision seemingly on the basis of a conversation with a non-mod and in the name of a 'democratic forum' - no proper mod discussion beforehand, meaning mod opinion is bypassed. Outcome: lack of team work, loss of faith in admin, potential undermining of mods ability to carry out their responsibilities. I'm all for increased interaction - but not to the setriment of those who enforce the rules.
ALL of the rules currently on the rule list were voted by the community after community and mod consultation. It was by no means a new process I invented purely for this rule to feed some delusional idea I have to gain more power. In this case the mods had like two weeks to come up with something that would work and did not. Again I must admit that Wolf was off on duty during most of this time and while I respect your commitment to the military to keep the world safe for the rest of us, the show must go on without you during these times. After two weeks of modding that just was not working, a forum user contacted me with an idea which sounded pretty good. I then put it up for a vote along with several other ideas including one some of the mods wanted to try. Two valid ideas, only room for one. The community had a clear preference for one but by no means unanimous. The mods still wanted the other so took the issue to admin Jason. After hearing their side of the issue he still decided that out of the two options he'd prefer to see the one put forward by the forum user and I instigated.
So my question is: How is allowing two weeks for mods to get it right (and not), taking a users idea, having a public vote and getting the ok from admin Jason (along with some of the mod team) me making a decision by myself? It wasn't even my idea.
- MLH initially discounted from ombudsman vote (despite being in top 3 for nominations): isolated decision without speaking to any mods, based on the assumption that the mods would not be able to work with MLH. Furthermore, goes against the aforementioned 'democratic forum' policy instigated by this admin - i.e. give the people what they want only when it suits! Outcome: lack of team work, further loss of faith in admin - issue resolved after numerous mods complain.
Again, I feel this one is unfair as well. I clearly stated in the opening thread that the purpose of the nominations was to get a top 6 and of that 3 would be chosen for a final vote. The Ombudsperson represents both the mods/admins and the community. We both need to have input into who the person will be. Again admin Jason thought it was a 'brilliant' idea. No one on the mod team or in the community mentioned any problems with the method for the whole week it was running. During that week we did discus one candidate in the mod forum. A mod mentioned that MLH was getting a lot of support from eros and this would be problematic. I replied (4ish days before votes closed) that it didn't matter as I would simply not make her one of the final three. Not a single mod during that time said anything to make me think they disagreed with that decision. A problem was raised by a mod, I offered a solution, no one disagreed until after I actually did it. As soon as the mod team did speak up I immediately changed the vote. I'm not sure that I could have done much more in this situation to back up what the mods wanted. - Jack made a supermod: isolated decision, going against a recent supermod discussion in which it was agreed that there was no further need for any supermods. Despite this, the admin made Jack a supermod, without any consultation with the other supermods - which has taken place in every other case, on top of the fact that other mods had recently been turned down as supers for the reason that no further supers were needed. Furthermore, unlike those other mods who were turned down (at the time), Jack has no prior experience of a mod on this forum and therefore does not warrant being given supermod status (sorry Jack - you're my bud - but it's true).
This is a valid point, I did do this much in isolation. I won't do that again and I am sorry. - Firing of Teal'auc and Freespirit: again, an isolated decision with no warning - and given the prior weeks events, people can be forgiven for thinking why it occurred. I do not accept any explanation I have seen in that they were 'problem mods' - I respond to that with a direct question to the admin - 'a problem for whom?'.
No warning? I've been telling Jenny in private for a long time she needed to stop what was going on. FS has been removed before and when I allowed him back last time I told him he would have to earn it which I do not believe he has. I'm sorry that you don't accept my explinations. I don't see any point in typing them again here. Perhaps we could find time to talk on msn and I can give you more detail on your specific problems. But firing of mods cannot be discussed. Who would it be discussed with? Other mods? This is one of the few burdens I think I have to deal with on my own.