StarGateWars Forums

Lol, I hear ya mate.

oh god..votes by the community not presided over by the mods for the mod positions...hmmm....I couldnt think of a worse way to choose them save picking random names from the hat, or leaving it to a chicken.

We chickens are offended by your discriminatory attitude towards us.

Semper wrote: or leaving it to a chicken.

hahahahaa, brilliant. I think we should make a lot of decisions like this.

Perhaps we can borrow the old sorting hat from Hogwarts Academy?
That would add a little variety to the chickens decisions.. can't have chickens monopolise the decision making! I object! (loudly)

*dons robes of Rowena Ravenclaw*

The main point imo is that the community needs to have some say as to how we are moderated and who it is that is doing the protecting of the community here on the forums.

The way I see it is simple;
Admins given their job by the owner
SuperMods selected and voted in by the Admins
Mods choosen by the community through elections

If a Mod does not handle their position well the SuperMods should then vote on the capability of the person to remain in the job, they fail that vote and a new election is held for that job.

Give the community some say in things again, please.

Acronon wrote:Mods choosen by the community through elections

All I see that coming to is a popularity contest.

And?

They are still watched and if they cannot do the job then they get replaced.

What's the matter?
Scared you aren't popular enough?

You would think if you know how to do your job, and the right way, you wouldn't worry about it as you know you would remain a mod anyway.....

Acronon wrote:And?

They are still watched and if they cannot do the job then they get replaced.

What's the matter?
Scared you aren't popular enough?

You would think if you know how to do your job, and the right way, you wouldn't worry about it as you know you would remain a mod anyway.....

I'm not scared about losing my position, if it was the will of the admins that is there business. Anyway, a popularity contest for electing mods would mean elections could be rigged and even a straight election doesn't guarantee the person will make even a halfway decent mod. The current system has worked out and I think it should remain the same. That is my opinion, if you don't share it, thats fine, just stating mine.

The current system works?!?!?!?!?!

Are you fraking kidding me?

Never, since the start of this forum, have so many players hated the idea of coming onto this forum.

Ask around mate, get out there a bit more and talk to those that you are supposed to lead, maybe get some help in learning how to lead.

Most of the active role players and forum personalities will barely even come here anymore because there is not anything fun about being around you unqualified people.

Acronon wrote:The current system works?!?!?!?!?!

Are you fraking kidding me?

Never, since the start of this forum, have so many players hated the idea of coming onto this forum.

Ask around mate, get out there a bit more and talk to those that you are supposed to lead, maybe get some help in learning how to lead.

Most of the active role players and forum personalities will barely even come here anymore because there is not anything fun about being around you unqualified people.

Then, let that be a decision each individual makes. Oh, and if you don't like the way things are, then submit your problems to your elected "WTH" and he can bring your issues to us in a collected, civilized way.

Thanks for calling me uncivilized, appreciate that coming from a Mod.

And for your information having an open debate in a public forum where all can contribute is civilized mate, get with the times.

forums a joke

i thought id never say it

but it was miles better under the tyranical rule (:P) of ETL

at least it was fun then

Acronon wrote:Thanks for calling me uncivilized, appreciate that coming from a Mod.

Hmm.. it was somewhat un-subtle, agreed.
Somehow however, proposing to bring matters to attention in a civilized manner, doesn't suggest the individual bringing matters to the public attention prior to that remark is considered uncivilized.. although it could be constructed to be such a vile comment. Basically, it is the evil of perspective that is deciding in this situation.

*zesh* wrote:forums a joke
i thought id never say it
but it was miles better under the tyranical rule (:P) of ETL
at least it was fun then

Aye.. it was fun indeed. I do remember. For all intents and purposes, there was an evil lurking around every corner back then. It was not so for everyone, of course.

Acronon wrote:The main point imo is that the community needs to have some say as to how we are moderated and who it is that is doing the protecting of the community here on the forums.

The way I see it is simple;
Admins given their job by the owner
SuperMods selected and voted in by the Admins
Mods choosen by the community through elections

If a Mod does not handle their position well the SuperMods should then vote on the capability of the person to remain in the job, they fail that vote and a new election is held for that job.

Give the community some say in things again, please.

I understand what you are saying Acronon - and in a perfect world, I would agree with you. But the problem of voting in mods is as follows:

The forum is owned by Jason and he, in conjunction with the Admins have final say on the rules. These rules are to be enforced by the Admins/Supermods/Mods not because they are popular, but because they have been appointed to do the job because someone within the moderating team believes they have identified someone of the required temperament. You do not need to be popular in order to be a good mod - and from my experience, the best mods are generally those who aren't that popular - and, as I said before, I've seen a few past members of the mod team who are well known and/or popular (even respected in their position) who have made the most awful decisions, without consultation, based on personal opinion and against the interests of the community.

Take yourself back a couple of months or so, to the last round of ombudsman elections. The ombudsman is voted in by the community because the ombudsman IS a voice for the community, employed by the community to ensure that the moderators are going about their duties in an appropriate manner. In this respect I have no problem with the ombudsman being community appointed. However, remember what happened initially, because the original winner (winner by popularity, rather than ability) thought that they could simply walk into the role and start changing things and ordering people around at their whim? Chaos.

If we were to start voting for people to fill vacant mod positions in the same way, then undoubtedly similar things would happen. People would become mods based on their popularity, and not because they have the potential to be a good mod. We'd then end up with a few days of chaos because the voted in mod would be fired, and then his or her friends would cause an uproar on the forum. From that point on, their is no control, because no matter what the mod team (or anyone else) says about why the person was fired, there'll always be people who can not, and will not, accept it, simply because their friend has been usurped from their position.

On the other hand, if the mods are appointed by the mod team and are subsequently fired, then nobody can realistically say that they were not given a chance, as the very people who appointed them then fired them.

Like I said - in a perfect world I'd be happy with votes - but it's not perfect.

Ultimately it is Jason, as the owner, who says how the forum is to be moderated, and how those mods are to be selected - NOT ANYONE ELSE. The current system is run with his approval. If he (NOT ANYONE ELSE) wanted to change it, I would hope that he'd discuss it and listen to arguments for and against before making HIS decision. However, once that decision is made, then it is up to us to enforce it.

As for what someone else said about the forum's being a joke and better under previous rule....... Well, I've been involved in the mod team in some capacity more than most (maybe all) of the current and past teams, and can say with upmost certainty that the current team is fairer, more level headed and less prone to rash (and selfish) decisions than certain members of any other team (except maybe the original team from early-mid 05). People might not like that, or might not agree - but I tell it as I see it.