StarGateWars Forums

History has a habit of repeating itself.

I think I know why nobody wants to be anymore... I just had to send a pm to the mod who locked this topic

geisha wrote:Subject: OE - random massing again???

E.M.P. wrote:Sorry but I'm not entirely sure what the targeted discussion of this topic is. So I'm going to lock it. If anyone (like Femme) can pm me with what the desired discussion is here then I will clean and unlock it.

~Empy

Excuse me Sir but now I am a little confused. Does it really matter what the targeted discussion is? It's a discussion about general SGW stuff posted in the SGW general forums not breaking any rules at all. Why would you wanna lock it? I haven't visited the forums for many months and I noticed that there are only very few new topics started in the general section. back in the old days this was a very busy place and people had a lot of discussions. I think I know why people just don't bother anymore...

Seriously is this China? Is it forced on people what they are allowed to discuss now???

Random, silly and useless "I hate Omega" discussions like in that locked thread were what kept the community alive. So if you wanna go ahead and kill it just go ahead...

geisha wrote:I think I know why nobody wants to be anymore... I just had to send a pm to the mod who locked this topic

geisha wrote:Subject: OE - random massing again???

E.M.P. wrote:Sorry but I'm not entirely sure what the targeted discussion of this topic is. So I'm going to lock it. If anyone (like Femme) can pm me with what the desired discussion is here then I will clean and unlock it.

~Empy

Excuse me Sir but now I am a little confused. Does it really matter what the targeted discussion is? It's a discussion about general SGW stuff posted in the SGW general forums not breaking any rules at all. Why would you wanna lock it? I haven't visited the forums for many months and I noticed that there are only very few new topics started in the general section. back in the old days this was a very busy place and people had a lot of discussions. I think I know why people just don't bother anymore...

Seriously is this China? Is it forced on people what they are allowed to discuss now???

Random, silly and useless "I hate Omega" discussions like in that locked thread were what kept the community alive. So if you wanna go ahead and kill it just go ahead...

Seems like you're having a bit of an overreaction here..... Posts do need to be on topic, obviously with leeway for lateral discussions and useless spam posts. People can talk about whatever they want, just have a topic for it. I think most people find it pretty annoying when they want to talk about ONE thing but other people keep grabbing the discussion and pulling it another direction.

This is not China, but it's also not an anarchy.

Thanks for unlocking the topic.

Discussions evolve and when someone starts a topic about Omega randomly massing people, some people might react to the Omega part and others to the random massing part and they may end up discussing the use of alliances in general, massings in general or even the existence of god.

That's not anarchy, that's not spam, that's a discussion.

If someone was to start a thread about their mom being their dad's sister and people would start discussing if incest is right or wrong, would you lock the topic because the thread starter just wanted to talk about what a big and happy family he grew up with?

geisha wrote:Thanks for unlocking the topic.

Discussions evolve and when someone starts a topic about Omega randomly massing people, some people might react to the Omega part and others to the random massing part and they may end up discussing the use of alliances in general, massings in general or even the existence of god.

That's not anarchy, that's not spam, that's a discussion.

If someone was to start a thread about their mom being their dad's sister and people would start discussing if incest is right or wrong, would you lock the topic because the thread starter just wanted to talk about what a big and happy family he grew up with?

Yup, no problem. I'm currently looking at how things are Moderated in General and maybe trying to push it a different direction, like just stepping back and letting things happen. Only stepping in when actually necessary, and when not just perceived to maybe be necessary. What I did was an example of not being necessary. Then again maybe things will stay the same, it depends what everyone thinks really. What DOES everyone think? Huh everyone? What do you think?

SSG EnterTheLion wrote:Frankly the forum is missing it's version of Bill Gates, Steve Jobs and so on. It needs dynamic leadership because currently it's team is the equivalent of the UN. lmao

If you're talking about the Forum Staff missing that, then I agree completely. Not to be insulting to anyone on the Staff... Alternatively if you're just talking about the community as a whole, then I still agree.

--

To all the people complaining about the Mod Team, and suggesting new things be done; I want to address that. Replacing the entire team with new people would have a bunch of people with colored names running around the forums like chickens with their heads cut off. It is a bad idea. You need people who have been on the team to teach new people how things are done.

That brings up a new problem though, things would then always be done the same way. Well you know how you fix that is you make suggestions in the sub-section created specifically for talking to the Mods and providing feedback. I would personally absolutely love it if someone make a topic about me, and how I mod, and run this section, and provided feedback. It would help me immensely I am sure, and would bring me joy.

As for how new Mods are brought it. We can be honest, yes it helps some people to become a Mod if they know Admins/Global Mods because then the Admin or Global Mod can vouch for them and say, "Yes, I know them, they would make a great Mod." Alternatively though you could have them saying "Yes, I know them, they would be quite terrible as a Mod..." You don't just get people on the team who are friends with the current Mods though, many people become Mods just based on their application and how they present themselves. It's great to look at an application and say, "Hey I don't know them, but that application only makes me think good things about them." Both reviews, that of a vouch for a friend, and one of glowing remarks for a stranger have the same effect when the decisions have to be made about who is hired. I assure you.

My point being, you can't blame the Forum Staff. If you have complaints then let them be heard, loudly and clearly. If you think Mods are biased and not performing their job fairly, then create a topic, name them specifically (I promise they won't be mad ...) and provide clear and specific evidence supporting your claims. Just stating over, and over, and over, and over, as everyone does that the Mods are biased literally does not help at all and only perpetuates negative feelings towards the Mods that does no good.

/long post

It's easy to fix the problems but it's going to require will.

Bring FULL transparency with the decisions and the PROCESSES that are engaged in on the forum. These processes need to be made public along with the criteria for making decisions.

Currently there is none because there are no processes. Things just happen on an ad libed basis.

Put in some tenure periods for admins, so that you can only be an Admin for 1 year. That would stop nepotism that is currently engaged in. (Currently 1 Admin and THREE of the Global Mods are all in the same alliance - there are only four global mods at the moment.) Then take the replacement Admins from the Super Mods BUT have them on a rotation of 18months.

Have the ombudsman actually have power. Currently the Admin are the highest authority. If the ombudsman does not agree with their decision, they do not have to change it, despite what the Ombudsman says. This is not representation of the people, rather representation of the authority.

Fully standarise all accesses to the forums. Do not engage in special permissions for individuals. If you are one colour then everyone of that colour should also be able to see things. Currently there are at least two cases of special permissions that I know of. Standardise all the permissions. There is very little reason for giving one permissions over another of the same group.

There's a few other things but the above would be enough for now but would require will. And I don't think there is the will do see it fixed truly.

Reply to Tekki (sorta) in the Spoiler.
[spoiler]I'm not going to really reply to all of that from Tekki, but my simple answer is definitely no for me.

The obvious reason is trust for me. You will never know who will end up as Admin, and I would not put my faith in anyone who has not been around long enough to know their ass from their elbow. Let alone the fact you wouldn't have to respect the Admins, or Globals because you can say "They'll be rotated out sooner or later, we won't have to deal with them much longer". Players like Deni, Zeratul, and Earendil do a great job to begin with.

How would you even begin to select individuals? I do not want to see players who do not deserve the title of Admin, or Global to be picked based upon who their friends are. It would do more harm than good.

Increase the power of the Ombudsman? Why would you? You have people being voted in based upon popularity, influence within their alliances, and friends in the community being asked to vote for them. You can single handedly win a vote with one alliance from OE voting for a member (just an example since you are large alliance). If you can convince this community to vote without bias in their decision, I would vote for doing it but do you really think that is possible? Very unlikely.[/spoiler]

Forum users may disagree with my posts, hate me in general, say I shouldn't be a Moderator, and things along these lines but you truly have no idea what Moderators do for you people. You take your freedom for granted here. You have absolutely no **Filtered** idea how bad it can get for you. I have been to many forums over the years, and this is the most lenient forum I have ever seen. You are allowed to post mostly whatever you please, and there will be a section for you to discuss it freely. Have any of you ever visited TeamLiquid? They close topics because you posted something that moves you. This topic? It wouldn't have even made it past page one without a sarcastic reason and a lock. You try to complain about it? They tell you to piss off in a rude manner.

This is personally the reason why I have given up on most of the community. I do not even bother to waste my time on people who refuse to use their brains to see how lucky they are to have Admins who actually care for this forum and what happens to it. It makes me sick to be a Moderator at times to see this, and this is why I have refused to be promoted over the years. I do not want anything to do with this **Filtered** and the people that come with it. I enjoy my peaceful Market Place where there are no people who think they deserve anything.

Be grateful for what is given to you, instead of demanding more and more.

Tekki wrote:
Have the ombudsman actually have power. Currently the Admin are the highest authority. If the ombudsman does not agree with their decision, they do not have to change it, despite what the Ombudsman says. This is not representation of the people, rather representation of the authority.

.

exactly what I said during last round of Ombudsman elections, but the position even got more toothless. and the whole reporting system is anti user. and quiet ineffective if your complain is against an admin.

Noobert wrote:Players like Deni, Zeratul, and Eärendil do a great job to begin with.

This is your opinion, one which many many others do not share.

Noobert wrote:
Increase the power of the Ombudsman? Why would you?

Because the Ombudsman previously had this power, in it's initial incarnation it had a route to Jason. I'd agree 99% of the time they should be working with the mods\admins to resolve issues, but they still need the ability to go directly to the top if the situation calls for it.

But I do agree about the interesting voting that can go on. This is generally why in the real world an Ombudsman isn't an official elected by the masses, in this game arena they would ideally be elected by Jason. People have argued that he's maybe too out of touch with the forum members - maybe that's what ultimately what needs to change?

How would you even begin to select individuals? I do not want to see players who do not deserve the title of Admin, or Global to be picked based upon who their friends are. It would do more harm than good.

umm isnt that how it works now? one admin drops and chooses his successor?? yea thats worked out fantastically

But you are friends with some admins? does that mean you being in the team is doing more harm than good?

Noobert, question for you: in real life if you have a position that you know you cannot be removed from, what incentive is there to do a good job and not fall prey to nepotism?

Tekki wrote:Noobert, question for you: in real life if you have a position that you know you cannot be removed from, what incentive is there to do a good job and not fall prey to nepotism?

Admins have been removed in the past by Jason. Admins have been asked to step down in the past by Jason. No job is permanent.

Why would Earendil, Deni, and Zeratul not do a good job in the first place? They care about this place as much as any of you, if not more. What incentive do they have to do a good job? It's pretty damn simple.

Iƒrit wrote:umm isnt that how it works now? one admin drops and chooses his successor?? yea thats worked out fantastically

But you are friends with some admins? does that mean you being in the team is doing more harm than good?

This is not always the case. Moderators have chosen Admins in the past at one point, or suggested them to fellow Admins. Do you criticize every Admin that has been here in the past then? That's what you are suggesting to me.

I am friends with the Admins, and everyone on the Moderator team. I doubt my being in the Moderator team is doing any harm what so ever, in fact, you mistake me for ever wanting to do anything but Moderate or to do anything but help. That's how I got my job in the first place, I was asked to help by a current Admin over four years ago back when that Admin was blue.

If you do not believe I am doing a good job, please tell me as to why. I'd love to hear it from players as to why I am doing a bad job as a Moderator as most individuals who make this criticism have absolutely zero idea as to what I do as a Moderator in the first place. I've been called bias by members of your own alliance, and yet, when I asked them to provide proof, they have never done so. What am I going to do? Move topics faster, delete topics faster? Unlikely.

renegadze wrote:This is your opinion, one which many many others do not share.

Because the Ombudsman previously had this power, in it's initial incarnation it had a route to Jason. I'd agree 99% of the time they should be working with the mods\admins to resolve issues, but they still need the ability to go directly to the top if the situation calls for it.

But I do agree about the interesting voting that can go on. This is generally why in the real world an Ombudsman isn't an official elected by the masses, in this game arena they would ideally be elected by Jason. People have argued that he's maybe too out of touch with the forum members - maybe that's what ultimately what needs to change?

I do not blame you for not sharing my opinion, but the reason not many players share this opinion is because they have zero clue as to what Admins do around here. How can you blame them though if you do not ask for what an Admin does? Ask Robe what an Admin did in the past, she should be able to enlighten you if you do not wish to ask the current ones.

The Admins on the forum are the top. The Ombudsman (as I recall) has always had power to start a big problem for Moderators if he believes something is out of hand by a Moderator, and the Admins have almost always sided with him in the past regarding anything close to abuse from a Moderator to begin with.

Even Jason is influenced from players. He gives in to mostly anything people whine to him about or did. Besides, he would have to remain active here for a great amount of time which he either does not want to spend, or has. The Moderators speak about the Ombudsman candidates in private each time it arises and we discuss which would be the best fit in our eyes. Their faults, their good qualities, etc come to light during this discussion. In the end, it matters not what we have discussed or want because players vote for whom they wish to have elected and normally more than not it has been players who are favored by friends, or alliance members.

You want to truly find out what happens when you take on the role of a Moderator? Or Ombudsman? Sign up for once, help this community, and maybe you will begin to see or understand that the people you are criticizing are not at fault. Moderators can never please anyone because nobody wishes to be warned. It's that simple. Spend a month moderating General, I dare you.

The decision is yours.

Jason asked me to write the first position descriptions for the Recruitment, Selection and Retention Criteria
for the Moderator Staff.

These have been archived and are no longer within sight of the Forum Community.

I have no issue with new standards replacing old but no others have been published.

The current forum administration staff clearly prefer to make decisions behind closed doors.

This has fostered a culture of do what I say or risk being sacked as a moderator....

Robe wrote:The previous ad hoc practices of appointing and removing moderators has been a long standing source of disgruntlement within the Forum and Game Community.

So the Forum Administrators have established the following guiding principles to recruit and retain all future moderators.

Guiding Principles: Activity, Diversity and Respect

Activity
Moderators need to be active to stay in tune with the nuisances of the game. If a moderator is not available to carry out their duties for a set period of time, they are to notify the game administrators and specify when they expect to be able to resume their duties.
Absences of over 30 days must be approved or risk automatic removal. As a matter of courtesy, mods should post in the mod section when they will be offline for more than 3 days.

Diversity
Moderators will be chosen from the widest possible cross section of teams/groups/empires so as to adequately represent the SGW Community within this Forum.

Respect
Moderators are the leaders of these forums and are therefore expected to communicate and relate with other players in a respectful manner. This extends to posts and messages on this forum and within the game concerning forum matters.

Recruiting Process
To provide open disclosure in regards to the Recruitment Process, the Administrators will call for Expressions of interest to become a forum moderator quarterly within the main forum.
A review panel consisting of at least the 2 of the 3 Administrators will form a quorum and confidentially assess each candidate's application, based on its merit against the 3 guiding principles. All potential moderators will be accepted on a 30 day trial basis, after which time a formal review of their performance by the quorum of Administrators will be undertaken to decide whether they are suitable to be appointed as a Moderator.

Performance Reviews
Confidential Performance Reviews of all moderators will be conducted quarterly by the quorum of Administrators using the Guiding Principles.
A timely review will also be conducted if Administrators receive more than 3 serious complaints against a specific moderator within a 30 day period.


Signed Robe, ~Lore~ and Buck
Updated GameTime: Oct25 - 08:25

The original standards were washed down due to moderator feedback and included:

Original version wrote:No more than 30% of the moderators (in total or within a specific sub forum) belong to the same body within the game (Alliance or Empire etc..).
This can be phased in over a period of 3 months if the balance is disproportionate at the time of implementation.

Tekki wrote:Put in some tenure periods for admins, so that you can only be an Admin for 1 year. That would stop nepotism that is currently engaged in. (Currently 1 Admin and THREE of the Global Mods are all in the same alliance - there are only four global mods at the moment.) Then take the replacement Admins from the Super Mods BUT have them on a rotation of 18months.

I don't see how 1 Admin and 3 Global Mods being in the same alliance has any effect. If you could show any of them worked on a bias based on the alliance they are in they it would be a problem. Additionally, when each of the Global Mods and the Admin came in to their position, only 2 were in the same alliance, and that was Earendil and myself being in MaYHeM (if I remember right). So it wasn't a situation of those in the same alliance helping each other out and getting each other promotions.

Tekki wrote:Have the ombudsman actually have power. Currently the Admin are the highest authority. If the ombudsman does not agree with their decision, they do not have to change it, despite what the Ombudsman says. This is not representation of the people, rather representation of the authority.

What power would you suggest the Ombudsman has, that they don't have now? I would for one find giving an elected official, a process that can be abused by a large group of people (say an empire like OE) to gain power against a Staff they don't like, a bad idea.

ƒëmmë ƒatalë wrote:

Tekki wrote:Have the ombudsman actually have power. Currently the Admin are the highest authority. If the ombudsman does not agree with their decision, they do not have to change it, despite what the Ombudsman says. This is not representation of the people, rather representation of the authority.

exactly what I said during last round of Ombudsman elections, but the position even got more toothless. and the whole reporting system is anti user. and quiet ineffective if your complain is against an admin.

How did the position become even more toothless? Now powers were removed as far as I know.

Also, how is the reporting system "anti user?" In regards to reports against Admins, I for one wouldn't have a problem enforcing the rules if an Admin broke them, if they were a good Admin they would know what they did and it wouldn't be a problem.

renegadze wrote:

Noobert wrote:Players like Deni, Zeratul, and Eärendil do a great job to begin with.

This is your opinion, one which many many others do not share.

That is your opinion, do you care to help out and give reasons why, so they can improve? Or do you wish to just criticize and not be helpful? You can do it here or in the sub-section for Mod Feedback.

renegadze wrote:

Noobert wrote:Increase the power of the Ombudsman? Why would you?

Because the Ombudsman previously had this power, in it's initial incarnation it had a route to Jason. I'd agree 99% of the time they should be working with the mods\admins to resolve issues, but they still need the ability to go directly to the top if the situation calls for it.

I think this has been brought up before, and Jack proved something to the contrary, but I can't do anything like that. It's just to my knowledge the Ombudsman never lost any powers. The problem with going to Jason though, is that he has absolutely no idea whatsoever what goes on here, and would be completely clueless, and so no help at all.

renegadze wrote:But I do agree about the interesting voting that can go on. This is generally why in the real world an Ombudsman isn't an official elected by the masses, in this game arena they would ideally be elected by Jason. People have argued that he's maybe too out of touch with the forum members - maybe that's what ultimately what needs to change?

Ya, that is what needs to change. I'm sure many people would be much happier if Jason was more involved. Maybe not if he was running the forums himself, but maybe if he was more contactable in situations that called for it.

Iƒrit wrote:

How would you even begin to select individuals? I do not want to see players who do not deserve the title of Admin, or Global to be picked based upon who their friends are. It would do more harm than good.

umm isnt that how it works now? one admin drops and chooses his successor?? yea thats worked out fantastically

Close, when an Admin resigns then the current team, including the one who resigned, talk together and choose who they think would make a good Admin. If an Admin was fired or laid off (like by Jason) then he will probably pick the new one. Especially if he lays off the whole team.

MEZZANINE wrote:Admins chosen by admins, mods chosen by admins, those in control stay in control because those that want change dont get in, and anyone who does get in that rocks the boat gets driven or kicked out.

Like most I have never seen the Mod section but from a users point of view thats how things look.



If anyone has the time to create a new alternative SGW forum I for one would go there, although human nature being what it is Im sure that would go the same way and need replacing after a couple of years too lol


As for game admin not getting involved, since the forum link is on the game site and he makes game update announcements here instead of ingame, essentially he recommends and endorses this forum, so he should make sure this forum is worthy.

I agree, not that I think the Admin isn't doing an alright job, and I think I could do any better... yeah right lol, but I dont' think Admin should control everything, yes this is a forum and they "run" it... but thats not fair either, Users pick nothing anymore and have no voice and I do think that is unfair, I don't neccissarily think it is "this" admin's teams fault or if they even have/had anything to do with it... but I do think Users deserve more say, maybe voting for mods, not just Ombudsman which really has no power anyways he is just a muppet in the Admins game too... Jason is not here, he does not know the users well enough to know, and to be honest this anti mod thing has been done a million times, I don't htink mod team is bad ANYMORE but I do agree that not even a year ago it was garbage and people had ALOT of problems thats why no one is hear, not now... it's to late damage has been done unless something changes the forums will keep going down and we will lose the game, but meh what do I know... but I'd bet RL cash on it, that if IF IF IF the users arne't started to be allowed to impact this forum more, it will die who wants to take the bet?