StarGateWars Forums

Jedi~Tank wrote:I disagree with the notion someone outside the game should be brought in, this should be done by people that play the game.

Please explain why Admins have to (or have in the past) play the game?

Here are the rules of the forum:


1 ) Usernames must not contain swearing or any other prohibited word or phrase. Usernames cannot be created with the intent to impersonate other users or moderators / administrators.

2 ) Spamming of the boards is prohibited on these forums.

3 ) The language that is to be spoken on these boards is English.

4 ) The use of swearing or masking is prohibited on these boards.

5 ) The abuse of other users whether through verbal attacks on their character, threats against them as a person or attacks on another’s race / gender / ethnicity or other minority status are prohibited on these boards.

6 ) The posting of pornographic or other criminal content is prohibited on these boards.

7 ) Advertising of non-‘Kingdom Games’ games is prohibited on these boards.

8 ) Signatures may not exceed 450 pixels of total height.

9 ) Respect of the Forum Staff is required.

10) Exceptional circumstances are handled on a case by case basis.



Please point out which rule that the Admins would have to uphold has anything to do with ingame?

I accept that some staff, maybe just Mods should have at least played the game to have an understanding of it. But the Admins are here to administer the forums and ensure that the forums run smoothly and that the rules are being up held. The rules have absolutely no connection to the game.

Please explain why you are against anyone outside coming in?

Clarkey wrote:

Jedi~Tank wrote:I disagree with the notion someone outside the game should be brought in, this should be done by people that play the game.

Please explain why Admins have to (or have in the past) play the game?

Here are the rules of the forum:


1 ) Usernames must not contain swearing or any other prohibited word or phrase. Usernames cannot be created with the intent to impersonate other users or moderators / administrators.

2 ) Spamming of the boards is prohibited on these forums.

3 ) The language that is to be spoken on these boards is English.

4 ) The use of swearing or masking is prohibited on these boards.

5 ) The abuse of other users whether through verbal attacks on their character, threats against them as a person or attacks on another’s race / gender / ethnicity or other minority status are prohibited on these boards.

6 ) The posting of pornographic or other criminal content is prohibited on these boards.

7 ) Advertising of non-‘Kingdom Games’ games is prohibited on these boards.

8 ) Signatures may not exceed 450 pixels of total height.

9 ) Respect of the Forum Staff is required.

10) Exceptional circumstances are handled on a case by case basis.



Please point out which rule that the Admins would have to uphold has anything to do with ingame?

I accept that some staff, maybe just Mods should have at least played the game to have an understanding of it. But the Admins are here to administer the forums and ensure that the forums run smoothly and that the rules are being up held. The rules have absolutely no connection to the game.

Please explain why you are against anyone outside coming in?

Its just my opion, why does everyone require a doctrine on simple statements part of the reason some people keep logging into this forum is the controversy, we NEED characters to hate and love.

I dont know what I can say without offending someone LOL so I will just use this as an example of a good place to start successfully recruiting potential moderators if you honestly feel you need a bigger pool of qualified applicants.

viewtopic.php?f=71&t=182333

Here we have a mod recruitment thread.

This thread is full of spam by moderators.
This thread is locked even tho recruitment is open untill the 8th of this month.
This thread has 1371 views and 44 replies.


This topic is in ANNOUNCEMENTS not general , not the temple or anywhere where chatter and spam should live.

Not only are the mods not modding themselves but the conversation is off topic, convoluted and polluted. How would any new forum-er find any info or comfort in interacting in this environment.


A locked thread ... not very welcoming and not being bumped for exposure to potential applicants.

The amount of views imply interest . The lack of replies shows that someone initially interested was deterred rather than inticed to participate.

actually, its not locked... it merely appears to be so if you access it from the announcement section...

if you access it from, say general, then you can post...

MajorLeeHurts wrote:I dont know what I can say without offending someone LOL so I will just use this as an example of a good place to start successfully recruiting potential moderators if you honestly feel you need a bigger pool of qualified applicants.

viewtopic.php?f=71&t=182333

Here we have a mod recruitment thread.

This thread is full of spam by moderators.
This thread is locked even tho recruitment is open untill the 8th of this month.
This thread has 1371 views and 44 replies.


This topic is in ANNOUNCEMENTS not general , not the temple or anywhere where chatter and spam should live.

Not only are the mods not modding themselves but the conversation is off topic, convoluted and polluted. How would any new forum-er find any info or comfort in interacting in this environment.


A locked thread ... not very welcoming and not being bumped for exposure to potential applicants.

The amount of views imply interest . The lack of replies shows that someone initially interested was deterred rather than inticed to participate.

People say mods bully the users and are hostile to new applicants, this thread shows completely otherwise, yes it's spammed, but it's "friendly", at least to me. When I saw how the application thread was, it tempted me to apply to be a mod, but afterwards, while I was pondering the pros and cons to send an application, I saw threads regarding "big bad mod team", and I remembered it requires quite a bit of patience and motivation to be a mod (I'm sure I would be motivated to do the job, but probably not as much to deal with people screaming all the time they are and never [?] will be satisfied with mods), considering how some people no matter how hard dedicated and motivated mods are, will say "OMG BIAS CORRUPT MODS ALERT". Considering the work mods have to provide by the moderation itself, getting used with the jobs...and on the other hand the never-happy-bunch of people who will always see a flaw and not miss the opportunity to make Himalaya out of a single molehill of these flaws.

Sure people provide ideas to improve the staff team, but it's often like "current bad team pre-upgrade" vs "the good, skilled and worthy team coming out of the suggestion". Therefore when you apply, you have those people reminding you in other threads they will see you as the evil corrupt establishment even before you start being fully part of the mod team and it's not really a good motivator to apply for mod team, isn't it?

renegadze wrote:Please, you're making out Moderating a forum is rocket science. Give a bunch of people a list of rules, have a review process in place to ensure they are enforcing the rules (and no more)....and voila you have a mod team.

I have modded and administered on more forums then I care to remember, I've even created well over 30/40. I have no illusion that my undertaking was pretty straight forward.

while I agree that there is some unnecessary complication in how things are done, there is a LOT more to modding here than you realise. further up the 'chain of command' (for lack of a better phrase) you get, things do get a bit complex. it isn't just about enforcing rules, it's also about knowing when to be a stubborn hardass, and when yo be subtle.

and out of curiosity, these 30/40 (or more) forums you mention, what timeframe are we looking at? what is the average weekly activity of said forums? etc etc. listing those amongst your experiences without establishing a context or timeframe can be very deceptive, which I assume isn't the case here, but more solid fact would be handy.

oh, and as far as the limited tenure of mods/admins, I'm not sure I agree. I see benefits on both sides, but eh. (I'll elaborate more later when I'm more familiar with the subject matter. I've been fairly busy lately trying to get my life back on track after a few dismal years. I need to read more. lol.)

~soul

Cole wrote:

MajorLeeHurts wrote:I dont know what I can say without offending someone LOL so I will just use this as an example of a good place to start successfully recruiting potential moderators if you honestly feel you need a bigger pool of qualified applicants.

viewtopic.php?f=71&t=182333

Here we have a mod recruitment thread.

This thread is full of spam by moderators.
This thread is locked even tho recruitment is open untill the 8th of this month.
This thread has 1371 views and 44 replies.


This topic is in ANNOUNCEMENTS not general , not the temple or anywhere where chatter and spam should live.

Not only are the mods not modding themselves but the conversation is off topic, convoluted and polluted. How would any new forum-er find any info or comfort in interacting in this environment.


A locked thread ... not very welcoming and not being bumped for exposure to potential applicants.

The amount of views imply interest . The lack of replies shows that someone initially interested was deterred rather than inticed to participate.

People say mods bully the users and are hostile to new applicants, this thread shows completely otherwise, yes it's spammed, but it's "friendly", at least to me. When I saw how the application thread was, it tempted me to apply to be a mod, but afterwards, while I was pondering the pros and cons to send an application, I saw threads regarding "big bad mod team", and I remembered it requires quite a bit of patience and motivation to be a mod (I'm sure I would be motivated to do the job, but probably not as much to deal with people screaming all the time they are and never [?] will be satisfied with mods), considering how some people no matter how hard dedicated and motivated mods are, will say "OMG BIAS CORRUPT MODS ALERT". Considering the work mods have to provide by the moderation itself, getting used with the jobs...and on the other hand the never-happy-bunch of people who will always see a flaw and not miss the opportunity to make Himalaya out of a single molehill of these flaws.

Sure people provide ideas to improve the staff team, but it's often like "current bad team pre-upgrade" vs "the good, skilled and worthy team coming out of the suggestion". Therefore when you apply, you have those people reminding you in other threads they will see you as the evil corrupt establishment even before you start being fully part of the mod team and it's not really a good motivator to apply for mod team, isn't it?

Are you suggesting that there isnt a problem ?

and if you are then how do you explain all the "evil corrupt establishment" threads ?

and ftr you are the only one to use "OMG BIAS CORRUPT MODS ALERT". in this thread.

This isnt about the individual mods as much as they like to be insulted as such, as it is about the structure of service as a mode and how to alleviate the opportunity for abuse of power and the abuse of the mods. From what I read the job is tough and full of slippery slopes and evil enemies.

As Zeratul pointed out, the thread in question is not closed and users can post in it.

Further, the thread is a Global Announcement, thus appearing on top of EVERY section on this forums in order to be seen by as many forum users as possible - Global Annoucements thus do not need to be bumped in order to be seen.

The tone in the thread is light and friendly and several applicants have interacted with the moderators there already.

The numbers of applications received so far indicates that the thread is not seen as "hostile" but on the contrary - it encourages forum users to apply for moderator positions.

I hope this answers your questions, MLH.

Are you suggesting that there isnt a problem ?

and if you are then how do you explain all the "evil corrupt establishment" threads ?

and ftr you are the only one to use "OMG BIAS CORRUPT MODS ALERT". in this thread.

This isnt about the individual mods as much as they like to be insulted as such, as it is about the structure of service as a mode and how to alleviate the opportunity for abuse of power and the abuse of the mods. From what I read the job is tough and full of slippery slopes and evil enemies.

I just say that when I read comments regarding staff team, I'm surprised I almost hear the same as I heard in past, when issues were much more numerous, but in spite of this observation of critical decrease of issues, the tone remains almost the same within the ones having a bad opinion about mods.

The "OMG BIAS CORRUPT MODS ALERT" just meant that some people don't even call particular mods biased, but the moderating role itself, like if it was faceless clones who all acted the same (and badly apparently). Yes it's not used in this thread, but my point was, the only problem isn't the mods behavior, it's also some users' (not all users, but the ones who are ideologically led to believe mods are biased, corrupted and everything).

The problem with looking for neutrality for the high ranked staff: the ones involved ingame can be skilled and efficient staff members, and although the search for neutrality can be good theoretically, we would be deprived of good staff due to the fact they might become biased (I'm *not* saying the replacing ones wouldn't be good, but more that it's rather difficult to state where the limit of neutrality lies).
It would require probably to have non ingame involved administrators to have complete neutrality, because I don't see why a leader could always be more tempted to be biased than a member of an alliance. Individuals are individuals and not the same can be applied for each. But then the risk of a "wall" of misunderstanding between active players and non playing admins could happen. Therefore I think we should look firstly for the skills of the person rather than their tag (I believed otherwise in past, but I now see the problem with "neutrality first" way to go)

And given the opportunity to reelect admins, guess who my vote would go to?

Eary, Baszy(sp), Zeratul and Deni.

People need to stop having a go at those running this forum, it is not they who cause the dwindling forum community that so many are crying about, it is the members who say they do.

Cry all you like, your post is removed, your warnings are received, all because you did something wrong, whether it bordered on wrong or went five miles over the line, how about you try to stay well away from getting yourself those warnings and act responsibly.
If you want to cry that someone else wasn't punished, get over it, some things may go the wrong way at times, but how does it affect you? does it mean they still have 100% propoganda power in your war? or does it mean they take the business in the market before you? or are you just being petty against those you dont like.

In short terms, if you are complaining about the people in charge, you are either jealous, blind, petty or one of the ones causing the hostility on the forum you 'try to fix'

MajorLeeHurts wrote:I dont know what I can say without offending someone LOL so I will just use this as an example of a good place to start successfully recruiting potential moderators if you honestly feel you need a bigger pool of qualified applicants.

viewtopic.php?f=71&t=182333

Here we have a mod recruitment thread.

This thread is full of spam by moderators.
This thread is locked even tho recruitment is open untill the 8th of this month.
This thread has 1371 views and 44 replies.


This topic is in ANNOUNCEMENTS not general , not the temple or anywhere where chatter and spam should live.

Not only are the mods not modding themselves but the conversation is off topic, convoluted and polluted. How would any new forum-er find any info or comfort in interacting in this environment.


A locked thread ... not very welcoming and not being bumped for exposure to potential applicants.

The amount of views imply interest . The lack of replies shows that someone initially interested was deterred rather than inticed to participate.

Weren't you once a mod? Surely you must know how things work. The Announcement section is a locked forum. If someone creates a thread in General for example and it gets promoted to an announcement then it will appear locked when viewing through announcements forum but it is unlocked in every other section. Thought any Mod would know that.

Also you say it is full of spam by moderators.... what about the 7 non moderators that have been posting in there?

Come on people give some logical thought before whining.

It has been months at least since we last created a topic in the announcements section. we generally pick a handy section and create it there, then change it to global. Not rarely that section is the administrator forum.
Regular (non-admin) users simply do not have any permissions for that section (not even "no access"), if we recall correctly.

Solus wrote:

renegadze wrote:Please, you're making out Moderating a forum is rocket science. Give a bunch of people a list of rules, have a review process in place to ensure they are enforcing the rules (and no more)....and voila you have a mod team.

I have modded and administered on more forums then I care to remember, I've even created well over 30/40. I have no illusion that my undertaking was pretty straight forward.

while I agree that there is some unnecessary complication in how things are done, there is a LOT more to modding here than you realise. further up the 'chain of command' (for lack of a better phrase) you get, things do get a bit complex. it isn't just about enforcing rules, it's also about knowing when to be a stubborn hardass, and when yo be subtle.

and out of curiosity, these 30/40 (or more) forums you mention, what timeframe are we looking at? what is the average weekly activity of said forums? etc etc. listing those amongst your experiences without establishing a context or timeframe can be very deceptive, which I assume isn't the case here, but more solid fact would be handy.

oh, and as far as the limited tenure of mods/admins, I'm not sure I agree. I see benefits on both sides, but eh. (I'll elaborate more later when I'm more familiar with the subject matter. I've been fairly busy lately trying to get my life back on track after a few dismal years. I need to read more. lol.)

~soul

Out of the 30/40 I setup, I only really have a day to day hand in 1 now, this is not due to lack of time, but I created for forums for others, and whilst I still hold admin access should something go awry I let the "working admins" manage them to meet their needs.

I do still actively mod one site though, it has in excess of 250k users registered, of which over 30k have posted in the last month - obviously the mod team for this is quite vast and quite clearly not just me. But we seem to have a lot less mods vs general users arguing.

There are clear differences between this site and that admittedly, there is no cause for "bias modding" complaints because it is not a game based forum, so there is no feeling of people trying to "out do" each other. In saying that, like any forum with large amounts of registered users there are issues, but a clear process is in place, and they are normally dealt with quickly and quietly. It's also a mod rule, that we have to reply to any report originator, and it is our responsibility to make sure the case reaches a conclusion

CJL wrote:And given the opportunity to reelect admins, guess who my vote would go to?

Eary, Baszy(sp), Zeratul and Deni.

People need to stop having a go at those running this forum, it is not they who cause the dwindling forum community that so many are crying about, it is the members who say they do.

Cry all you like, your post is removed, your warnings are received, all because you did something wrong, whether it bordered on wrong or went five miles over the line, how about you try to stay well away from getting yourself those warnings and act responsibly.
If you want to cry that someone else wasn't punished, get over it, some things may go the wrong way at times, but how does it affect you? does it mean they still have 100% propoganda power in your war? or does it mean they take the business in the market before you? or are you just being petty against those you dont like.

In short terms, if you are complaining about the people in charge, you are either jealous, blind, petty or one of the ones causing the hostility on the forum you 'try to fix'

I think posts like this one, which can be effectively summarized as 'suck it up', are every bit as unhelpful as those which propose burning our current crop of moderators at the stake. I sincerely hope you are not elected as ombudsman, CLJ, because someone who makes inflammatory statements such as 'cry all you like' is woefully unsuited for the job of being a mediator.

Anyway, I digress. Personally, whilst I am a fan of the concept of fixed terms for administrators, I am wary of the concept of making them fully elected. In order to manage the mod team, you need to know the mod team. I think the main requirement for any admin should be someone that started out as a blue, then became a green. The last person Jason arbitrarily placed into an administrator, who didn't meet these requirements, was Clarkey, and that didn't end too well.

may have been wrongly interpreted mordack, I did not mean it in the way of if you are warned suck it up, I mean if you are warned then post whining about biased moderators and admins... then you may well be the one in th wrong, and quite probably are viewing the situation biased and not the mod...

I can see how my four word version of that viewpoint might have been interpreted as me being narrowminded.