just curious...

[Mystake]

Also to add, when FS resigned the last time and came back, he was told that he was on a zero tolerance policy, to which he was given much lenience.

that and he's monsterously hypocritical by asking smoosh to resign.

Wes, you've done it how many times and come back on your word? You were asked by the virtually entire community to resign and you did what? Told everyone you had changed and that you were going to do good... we know where that went.

[smooshable]

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.

[Teal'auc of the Void]

Yes, you were telling me that I need to stop having my own opinion basically. But that's it. No point arguing there. I've said everything what I wanted to say here. This will be addressed only through appropriate channels now only.

You feel we 'judge' you unfairly, but then look into mirror and how you treated the team and even me and FS, one of longest serving and dedicated mods. This community expressed it pretty well that I should stay as a mod. Which is, well... after seeing all this mod bashing quite an achievement, seeing that they'd rather see me doing the job rather than seeing me out.

Anyways, I am done in this topic. As said, I'll address those whom are concerned in privacy.



Teal'auc

[Wolf359]

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.

I wasn't actually insinuating anyone was - just trying to layout how I have always acted - and as a result, hopefully impress upon people how serious I view the current situation in order to bring it into the public eye.

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.

I have listed 3 things that all occurred in the last week. I listed them because they are the most recent and most fresh in my mind (remember I have been away the majority of the last 5 or 6 weeks - however, there has been some unrest for some time. But the reason I list them is that during/after each one a significant number of mods complained about the way in which things had been conducted - yet even before the debate was ended, the next incident occurred, and the nature of it seemed to suggest that everything that had been aired during teh last one was simply ignored.

- 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.

I agree - all of them were voted after a public vote - but that vote did not occur until after the mod team had had a full and meaningful discussion on them. However, this time there is little evidence of a full and meaningful discussion. You say that after 2 weeks of modding, the mods were not getting it right - however, other reports are saying that actually the message seemed to be sinking in, and less and less people were abusing the privilege of sigs. Furthermore - it had been suggested to simply re-instigate an old rule which disallowed using or parodying another player/alliance sig. A rule that is clear in what it means, and easy to police - yet it was rejected in favour of a vote which was basically a case of 'do what you want or do it this way and we'll punish you if you don't' - I could've told you the result of that before it was published!

But it was not so much that you published the vote - it was the lack of inclusion of the other mods that got their back up - these mods who are meant to be working with you as a team. You as much as said that you decided to do it because of a convo you had with a non-mod. Since the mods are the ones who police the forum, it is only common courtesy for you to discuss your intention with them beforehand - to do otherwise is undermining them (albeit, more than likely, unintentionally).

The other point is that the opinion of the technical admin (Bazsy) was not taken into account (or given the weight it should have been).

Before I finish this bit - I'll use your own argument ref the ombudsman vote against you (kind of). You're right in that you never said you would select the top 3 from the nominees - and I did in fact point this out in your favour when the incident occurred. However - with the sig rule fiasco - you quoted 'democratic opinion' to us - i.e. you implemented what the alleged majority of the community wanted (albeit from a piddling amount of votes, and a majority of 3!). The point is this - in both the sig issue, and the ombudsman issue, you never actually said you would go witha majority (for the sig issue you said you would listen to opinion and then make a decision). However, you quoted over and over again to the mods that you implemented the rule because it was the democratic opinion of teh community - yet you chose to deny them that same democratic right with regards the ombudsman. That is inconsistent at best, and choosing to be democratic when it suits you at worst.

- 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.

Again - I was away for much of that - and for that I can only apologise. I have aleady discussed this to some degree in the previous point - but to reiterate - even if you decided not to include MLH because you thought it was what the mods wanted (and it was still only an assumption!), it is going against your 'democratic opinion' stance from the sig issue - i.e. only giving the community what they want when it suits you. Inconsistency again. To be honest, I probably would never have brought it up, had you not been so insistent regarding implementing the sig rule on the basis of 'democratic opinion'.

Furthermore, one cannot assume that simply becasue a comment goes unanswered, it is the will of those it was addressed to.

It's also a shame that I was away when the ombudsman nominations kicked off - as I would have probably ran for it myself!

- 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.

Thankyou. My personal opinion on the matter is that Jack could actually be quite good as a mod (if he learns to curb himself in certain instances - okay Jock?). I would not have objected to him being given a normal mod position - that way he could've proved himself and go on to be a good supermod. Giving him supermod status immediately is prone to all sorts of come-backs and failures - which is why, I believe, we have always discussed supermod (and previously, mod) appointments in the past.

- 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.


Private warnings are not good enough - if a mod is to be warned because of their modding ability then the supermods (at least) need to be aware of it - this is to protect you as much as much as it is to protect them. You see - communication - it is the lack of it that is the undercurrent in all of these issues!

If these warnings are visible and justified and the individual ignores it and continues doing what they were doing, then yes, eventually they should be removed from duty - and more importantly, there is no come-back on you. But you cannot expect to issue private warnings and then remove somebody, giving somewhat feeble excuses regarding 'restructuring' and 'problem mods' and expect everyone to be happy with it.

I will accept your MSN invite to discuss this further (although not tonight!), as I have yet to see a valid reason for their dismissal.

I appreciate your responses smoosh, and am glad (at last) we seem to be getting somewhere - see my responses above in red.

I want to stress, again, that my main issues are not with what has been done - but the non-communicative manner in which they have been done - and I am willing to bet that had that communication occurred, some of them would've been done differently. We all seem to want an improved mod team - but doing things without consultation and seemingly ignoring the opinions of those who actually do the work is not the way to go about it - and ultimately it leads to a breakdown in the team, and egg on our faces - which is what has happened.

[Mystake]

one of longest serving and dedicated mods.
Teal'auc

Does that entitle you to presidency of a country if you are the oldest living citizen?

No. Being longest serving mod is irrelevant.

[Wolf359]

one of longest serving and dedicated mods.
Teal'auc

Does that entitle you to presidency of a country if you are the oldest living citizen?

No. Being longest serving mod is irrelevant.

No, it is simply pointing out (when read with the rest of her post) that the nature of her modding work has been consistent and of such a nature that there has been no reason to call it into question - by friends or enemies alike.

A fair point in my opinion.

[Teal'auc of the Void]

Also, when you expect people to treat you with fairness... you must be willing to do the same. If you expect people to listen to you, you need to be wiling to do the same.

You feel you 'warned' me. I believe that you simply told me that if I continue having diff opinion than you, then there's no place for me in the team. Also, you said that in mod forum, even to other mods who showed signs of disagreement with your methods. If you think people will be happy to just do as you want, without having single say, then you are terribly mistaken.

It's important for every team member to know they are not disregarded, their issues are addressed and their opinions are valued. That gives them purpose and reason to work even with better 'spark', because they'd know they have backing up in the rest of team and admin.

As to Mystake: No, one of the longest serving mod may simply imply that I've been working with various members of team, various admins and they didn't consider me as 'problem mod' So... the problem may be as well somewhere else, and not in me... given the fact how smooshable got the position and how long he's been in the team. Not even 1/2 of what I spent in the team!

So again, if you expect to be treated fairly, you must return the same courtesy. So far, you failed in convinving me, the community AND vast majority of mod team about validity of my dismissal - and if their concerns are nothing to you, it only shows how much you care for others opinions... even when there are more people agreeing on that issue, you decided to ignore it. So.. either you are hypocrite (as you did said i am unable to accept other than my own opinion) or you simply ditched me for no reason...



Teal'auc

[Zeratul]

It's also a shame that I was away when the ombudsman nominations kicked off - as I would have probably ran for it myself![/color]

hmm... that could have been both good and bad... loss of a great mod, gain of a great ombudsperson...

[Nox]

might i suggest just a simple and total reestructure lol

make 3 forum admins:

smoosh, bazsy, wolf

then you 3, vote for the current and new mods, re-estructuring everything, simple

some ppl wouldnt be happy ofc, you cant please everyone, but they would have to take it, since they couldnt blame just 1 person (smoosh) like its happening now, cause it would have been a democratic vote between 3 ppl, that have different points of view, for what i can tell (at least wolf and smoosh, baszy hasnt said anything about this matter for what i can see)

and actually having ppl with different points of view in charge is a lot better, cause everyone is wrong sometimes

[Bazsy]

I think a 3 equal admin system would be the best, for many reasons. It gives a control and can eliminate calling dictator as 2 would always need to agree, and if they not they would be forced to come to an agreement. Which usually means they must improve their idea to be good for at least one more admin. And any improvement is good.

I told my thoughts on that to Jason as well, and he is thinking on things.

But as it looks like he believes in the Head admin system as he wants one person responsible for the forums. That's being smoosh for now.

Alternatively we could make a 3 admin system with a head admin, that system would still need 2 admin votes, but the head admin could veto or something. That could be good for Jason and for everyone else as well I think.

On the Teal'auc and Freespirit issue I didn't make any public post yet and I'm still thinking on if I should. Not because I don't have an opinion, but because all ppl involved in this knows my opinion anyway and I don't think we should discuss this type of thing publicly.

The mod team certainly needs more communication and some newer and older mods should learn the correct way of telling their opinion without damaging the reputation of the mod team, eventho their intentions are usually good.

[Nox]

well, that head admin idea with the power of veto, would be the same thing that it is now, no point on having 3 admins, since everytime the other 2 voted against the head admin, he would just veto the votes and go on his idea

unless ofc its someone that can acknowledge when he/she is wrong, but even so, there would be sometimes that he/she would use that power, so the problem would remain

the only way a head admin or something like it works is, on a voting system of 5 or above ppl, with 3, its just the same thing

talk to jason to make him see that, i cant access irc or even msn here at work lol so i cant and its not of my business anyway lol, im just giving ideas

[Nimras]

make 3 forum admins:

wolf

I read somewhere Wolf359 dont want the admin job again.

[Teal'auc of the Void]

If there are three admins, they need to be equal, otherwise nothing much will change (especially if this 'head' admin is again someone on power trip. You know who you are.)



Teal'auc

[Mystake]

(especially if this 'head' admin is again someone on power trip. You know who you are.)
Teal'auc

Pathetic jabs show immaturity. Also, my stab at you for PPT: You're not just stubborn for PPT, or irresponsible whne it comes to PPT.

Putting a game first before your RL health...
Now, if that ONLY applies to your ingame stats, fine, I stand corrected. But it is who you are, and who you are doesn't change when you log on to the forums.

[Teal'auc of the Void]

Pathetic jabs show immaturity. Also, my stab at you for PPT: You're not just stubborn for PPT, or irresponsible whne it comes to PPT.

Putting a game first before your RL health...
Now, if that ONLY applies to your ingame stats, fine, I stand corrected. But it is who you are, and who you are doesn't change when you log on to the forums.

You telling me something about being mature...

And of course... you know me the best in RL. I'd appreciate if you leave my RL alone, that's none of your concern, you know nothing about it. My RL is not problem of anyone here and I'd apreciate if was not pulled here, I find it offensive. Especially by you, Luc, when you change opinions probably even more than you change your socks. You'd not like to see me posting assumptions about your RL, right? Then keep your assumptions about mine, kthx.

As a sidenote, I am glad that these things are not important to most users here, as they see that I was doing my job quite good. Some people just feel the need to use their personal dislike about me and to throw mud at me for anything they can sweat out or dig from something completelly different, not connected to these forum, game or my modding abilities.



Teal'auc