StarGateWars Forums

nope it's not the same, we need to get everything aproved by the admins, they have to vote on it. the way i propose it that admin only steps in when the ombudsman is making a realy bad descision wich is dangerous for the forum or biased.


it's a very small change but is a change that would compeltly change the vieuw on the ombudsman. that is how it's always been and thats how it should be

I honestly don't think we need two ombudsmen, and I don't think we need this absurd 'understudy' idea either. Jack managed fine alone, and so did Pianomutt. Having two people just to satisfying both sides of the server war is ridiculous, and a bad precedent. We should be voting for people based on their quality, not their in-game affiliations.

We should be voting off competence of the proposed Ombudsman but let's face it, the entire voting process in this case was a complete and utter shemozzle with the rules changing mid way through. There was NO way anything short of having two was going to settle things this time.

Can someone tell me though what exactly the thread starter does in HIS role?

This is why I wish for people to put their reasons behind voting for somebody because you can tell what is a farse, and what is not most of the time.

There is no way easy way to go about picking an Ombudsman unless you remove the TTF and FUALL candidates..

zeekomkommer wrote:it's a very small change but is a change that would compeltly change the vieuw on the ombudsman. that is how it's always been and thats how it should be

It has never been that way. Jason has posted the conduct of admins, mods and the ombudsman in the forums maybe you should just read the frakking thread before you frakking post.

I was under the impression the understudy position was created to cover and assist with the workload.. not to satisfy two ingame factions. As much as alliance is a factor in other positions of responsibilty on forum, I had... hoped this wasn't the case here.

As the argument for ; look at the numbers of times the forum was completely without an ombudsman, when pianomutt was away for extended periods. At least now, threads can be dealt with in a timely fashion. Everyone needs their breaks, and I don't fancy the trouble caused during 2-3 weeks of threads stacking up, during a single ombudsman's vacation time.


Tbh, I don't actaully see why we have two simultaneous threads dealing with the same issue, both here and in forum issues.

*speedily walks into the room*..

ten minutes on the clock. GO!

right! That's just about enough of this. I am somewhat tired of all the Ombudsman crap...

you all seem to be labouring under the delusion that the Ombudsman's role is completely useless. I thought I would jump on that bandwagon for pitty's sake and ignore the great tirade of ignorance, but I find myself unable to avoid it any longer because I have deemed this forum, once again, just too darn stupid to function properly without my omniscient like input.

So, let's do you all a favour and break this party down shall we? We'll start with a brief history lesson. A few years ago.. there were some big ass problems between the forum staff and the users. To answer this several things were done, one of them being the Ombudsmen role.

Obviously, it was no magic fix.. but by god it helped. funny thing was.. so too did changing the administration and 80% of the mods no less than twice. So it took time.

You know what the Ombudsman did? It created a status quo. You got that there kids? Good. It allowed the community members to have an 'official' voice to represent themselves. Good times. Community get's empowered with forum staff affairs = happier community. At the same time, the complaints were less, they were focused and usually presented to the mods and admins with some measure of consistency and non bias. Woo bloody hoo.

OK. So.. someone messed up - SHOCKER! for some reason.. some complete jack-ass decided that the Ombudsman's role was that of judge and juror so everyone started to get their hopes up. This created problems.. throughout the roles history to the present day which is where we're at.

Now.. people have started to click onto the Ombudsman's ACTUAL purpose they're sorta sulky and disappointed so want rid of it and are sitting in the corner having a good old sob as a group wanting rid of the latest forum let down and disappointment making sure to critically access the hell outta the role.

So let's just do that shall we. We've got the status quo thing nailed. Probably the Ombudsman's most vital role..

at the same time.. it actually DOES provide a service of keeping mod complaints and issues far more organised and controlled.

Ombudsman understudy.. was - please stop lying - made to appease the FUALLvsTTF situation and, oh yes..to make sure we would more likely always have an Ombudsman present if one went away...nearly forgot that part. Anyone with a brain cell CAN see that. Surprisingly though it's a half good idea on a short term basis. I feel it was just implemented wrong.

How to choose an Ombudsmen? Not really difficult. Community nominate three people (their say), people can't nominate their own alliance/empire. Admins choose two from the nominee's. One month trial period.

What do you know? Appears that did not work out well.

So, bottom line.. Ombudsman.. yeah you can get rid of it.. sure. But when the community comes a knocking for their say in forum things you better be ready to ride the waves of the past, cos with the O-man gone.. it becomes a lot more likely they're gonna be coming to a shore near you.

You want to know what the real problems with the Ombudsmen have been?

Mis communication of purpose. Wrong person for the job. Disrespect from both staff and community.

Ultimately though, if people could be adult for half a minute.. you'd realise that actually the O-man can be an effective system to solve more problems than it makes.

But hey.. I am content for you guys to argue until the sun blows up. I've had my rant for the day.

*looks at watch*

annnnnnd that's time.

*nods*

Kids.

*walks off with his signature clip board, shoulder bump and sarcastic ranting*

Wepwaet wrote:Frankly every single mod or higher who's posted in this thread should recieve a warning. Part of being a mod is knowing DISCRETION. None of you have shown any by posting here! Those who can't accept the position being here should resign, plain and simple. Those who can accept it but think changes should be made... make a thread in the right place and hammer out with the rest of the forum users some sensible changes that can be taken to Forum.


I'd like to call for Dadigi's resignation, you should know better and are unfit to be a mod if you think this was the right way to handle this. Just be honorable and quit.



Wep
P.S. Someone needs to move this "dirty laundry" to the mod sections, really theres plenty of air there and you won't disgrace yourselves as much since your all covered in mud anyways

Really, so you're saying that it would be better to keep this situation on the back burner? You'd rather avoid the issue of the WTH, then bring it into public discussion? Yeah, guess what... Some people have some issues with other people. That's not my concern. I care about my environment, and since I visit this forum daily, it's my environment. There has been talk and heresay about the WTH for quite some time, so I decided to make my opinion about the situation, public. Yeah, I could've kept my mouth shut, but where would that put us? Who's to say that somebody else wouldn't make a topic in a few days, hours, or weeks, trying to draw attention to the issue? I really don't care what you want me to do. Just because I have the balls to put my self into the position I did, doesn't mean I have to submit my resignation and just go "honorably". Maybe you should just shut up, and keep what little honor you have left, before you spout any more BS from your keyboard.

That being said, I do appreciate all of the work that the WTH have put in to their jobs. They're all good people who just want to help out in their own little way. As Semper (so obviously) put it, the problem is the underlying definition of the role and what limitations it has. I, for one, am for eliminating the position until we have the next round of mod (witch) huntings (but those shouldn't be for a few more years..).

I could go on, and on, and on... but I'd just be repeating what a lot of other people have said in this topic. I'm really not this horrible, evil monster that some of you think I am. I'm just a guy with an opinion. Don't threaten to chop off my balls and murder my family because of it.

Mordack wrote:All the ombudsman does is look at cases and refer them onto the admin with an opinion. That opinion doesn't have to be followed, and the admin just end up looking at the evidence themselves and making an opinion. As someone has pointed out, it's basically just a middleman.

Except its public. If the opinion of the ombudsmen (mane+zeek) isn't adhered too, then the bias of the admin will be clearly shown. Once that is identified, it can be dealt with by the other admins, or perhaps Jason himself if neccessary. Take away the Ombudsman role, and its easy for the biased mods/admins to go unnoticed and slowly edge things in their favour.

As far as the power the ombudsmen have/don't have, I don't know enough to comment. Someone said that its recently changed, in which case it should probably be changed back. Seemed to work pretty well before. The Ombudsman should not have the power to overturn what the 3 admins want, but they should listen to him and respect his decision. If they don't like what the Ombudsmen said, then they should be able to debate it in a publicly viewed (albeit not posted) section. The more the community can see, the better the eventual outcome will be, even if it does take some time for things to improve. I think the fact that we do have the Ombudsmen now has helped, you only have to look at how the forums have improved over the last six or so months as proof.

EDIT: Digi, you are nieve to think that there will not be issues between mods and players for a few years if there is no Ombudsmen. There will be, and they will arise very quickly. It only takes one dispute to cause problems, and people still get warnings on a daily basis. I doubt very much that the admins want to listen to these disputes, having the Ombudsmen in place makes it easier for the users to appeal against what they feel are unfair practises as well as allowing the admins to carry out the more important aspects of their roles without getting sidetracked by those disputes.

EDIT 2: I actually agree with semper on something

~Norbe~

How many solid, valid, real complaints have there been? No offense to anyone, but it's just a few people who think the mods have it out for them. There's always going to be somebody with a complaint. At the moment, the WTH doesn't have any power to actually do anything, other then hear your complaints. We can keep a "complaints" forum, but (IMHO) the position of a middleman is not needed!

A moderator can never please everyone. Players on this forum make accusations without proof, or even knowledge of the job a moderator does.

I mean, I've been called bias and I moderate the Market. What would I have to do to be bias? Delete FUALL threads faster than a TTF threads?

Moderators and Admins do this job because they want to help out. Some not as much anymore but that doesn't mean they have not helped out in the past, and the Ombudsman power is just being abused now. It was used for when an unfair warning was given I always thought. Now people getting unbanned, people crying about Moderators abusing powers, and people just abusing it to make problems for the Moderators handing out warnings.

Have you noticed that whenever a certain few people with attitude problems to the people giving them the warnings, get warned that they run to the Ombudsman immediatly? It has made it a joke in my eyes. Manetheran and Zeek were doing a good job sorting out these bogus cases, and I applaud them for putting up with it. I just wish this political garbage could have been sorted in private where this belongs rather than publicly because it just makes things more complicated and worse.

All I have to say is - stop crying. You think you can do a better job? Apply yourself when it comes up with some actual effort and see how tough it is for Moderators/Ombudsman after your first warning given or removed. You receive so much hatred, it's not even funny.

Noobert wrote:I just wish this political garbage could have been sorted in private where this belongs rather than publicly because it just makes things more complicated and worse.

I 100% disagree with that. The community should have the right to know what is going on at all levels, so that we can judge for ourselves. If a mod/admin/ombudsmen does a bad job, but can be publically challenged, then it will inevitably have to be addressed and resolved. If its private any incidents can just be swept under the carpet and instead of being resolved the situation gets compounded until we have a really messed up forum.

There is no need for secrecy.

~Norbe~

Norbe wrote:Except its public. If the opinion of the ombudsmen (mane+zeek) isn't adhered too, then the bias of the admin will be clearly shown. Once that is identified, it can be dealt with by the other admins, or perhaps Jason himself if neccessary. Take away the Ombudsman role, and its easy for the biased mods/admins to go unnoticed and slowly edge things in their favour.

So you're saying that the Ombudsman is flawless and perfect and that his opinion is always right and as such if an admin disagrees or dares to accuse his Perfect Holiness, Pope Manetheren of bias that it in turn is indisputable proof that said admin is biased and needs to be removed?


The value of your opinion just sank faster than the Titanic and harder than the stock market crash of 1929...

Norbe wrote:

Noobert wrote:I just wish this political garbage could have been sorted in private where this belongs rather than publicly because it just makes things more complicated and worse.

I 100% disagree with that. The community should have the right to know what is going on at all levels, so that we can judge for ourselves. If a mod/admin/ombudsmen does a bad job, but can be publically challenged, then it will inevitably have to be addressed and resolved. If its private any incidents can just be swept under the carpet and instead of being resolved the situation gets compounded until we have a really messed up forum.

There is no need for secrecy.

~Norbe~

I can agree with that up to an extent. I would not care for it all to be made public, IF and onlt IF you come up with a way to police it and control it. problem now is every person for miles want to comment or feels they have something to add, and people tend to get the mob mentality and defend their friends even knowing they are wrong. It also causes deep seeded hatred and ingame troubles.

Example. DDE man get a warning. I back the warning, but Robe disagrees with it. Mordack then backs the warning. 2/3 admin rule and warning stands, now the person warned has hard feeling at the me as I am an alliance mate, and Robe is his enemy, hes thinking "why would he do that?"

I still say it best to say the split, 2/3 or unanimous and let it be. This way you can't hold grudges when you dont know who voted how.

BUT the Oms know exactly how the vote went, and can back it in public veiw. This way he know who voted, how was voted, and no 1 single admin can act in a rougue fashion, it takes 2/3 and no less.


*Edit*
Oh, and there has been no change in Oms power, rights, or athority.

DaDigi wrote:How many solid, valid, real complaints have there been? No offense to anyone, but it's just a few people who think the mods have it out for them. There's always going to be somebody with a complaint. At the moment, the WTH doesn't have any power to actually do anything, other then hear your complaints. We can keep a "complaints" forum, but (IMHO) the position of a middleman is not needed!

How many solid, valid, real FORUM LIAISONS have there been? No offence to anyone, but it’s just a few people who think that the forum liaison does anything. There’s always going to be someone wondering what they do. At the moment, the forum liaison doesn’t have any power to actually do anything other than have the title. We can keep a liaison forum but (IMO) the position of a forum liaison is not needed!