The "I have an idea to change the staff" thread.

[jedi~tank]

Fisrt of all can you tell us the motivation and or purpose for such?

Admin- fixed and permanent until they decide to step down. One doesnt get that high unless they know what they are doing .
Each admin position and or function should be fully disclosed.

Mods- rotational but in long increments say 6 month minimum, Mods that have no funtion or purpose to be mods meaning constructive for the overall community should not be mods. Each Mod position should be made known and their functions fully disclosed and when the positions are filled there is no need for any rogue mod to be on the staff. Keep it simple.

[RoKeT]

Agreed don't you feel like the other topics in this section covered this and more... Why bring up a topic thats just gonna be flamed and not accomplish a thing...

[Empy]

ATM I think the team needs a standardized set of goals/rules. Each mod should mod the same. When you do this, it makes being a user and having your posts edited much easier to deal with. Try this on, a user is modded by a mod who chooses to do it in a more structured manner, edits post, explains why, and moves on. Then say another mod edits post in a sarcastic way, this leaving the user in a bind where they become confused as to why they are being treated in such a way.

It's the job of the Global Mod of a Section to make sure all their Mods are modding in a consistent manner. If they are not, then the Global Mod needs to rectify that.

Lastly, Mods need to be changed out. Its a sad fact, but then, it needs to happen. Fresh faces always help to ease tension. When you have a set of people that have been modding for years, people tend to hold preconceptions about them, and they don't just go away.

The fact is, there simply is not enough qualified and willing people for Moderators to be switched out all the time. They would need to be trained, gain experience, etc ... it simply isn't feasible. Experience is one of the most valuable assets a Moderator has.

[Empy]

ATM I think the team needs a standardized set of goals/rules. Each mod should mod the same. When you do this, it makes being a user and having your posts edited much easier to deal with. Try this on, a user is modded by a mod who chooses to do it in a more structured manner, edits post, explains why, and moves on. Then say another mod edits post in a sarcastic way, this leaving the user in a bind where they become confused as to why they are being treated in such a way.

It's the job of the Global Mod of a Section to make sure all their Mods are modding in a consistent manner. If they are not, then the Global Mod needs to rectify that.

Ah, but that only spans sections, what about a set of procedures and goals that span the entire forum. Same way, for everyone. Yes, I understand its the GM's job to make sure there section mods are modding up to par, but are the GMs all trained and on the same page?

Well Global Mods tend to stay out of each others section (not as a rule or anything .. they just do) unless it's a clear cut case. Like masking for example, or a topic needing to be locked or moved (those being cases when any Mod could do it the same). If not then there are few enough of us, and we know each other well enough that we can have a chat about Modding Philosophies as it were.

Lastly, Mods need to be changed out. Its a sad fact, but then, it needs to happen. Fresh faces always help to ease tension. When you have a set of people that have been modding for years, people tend to hold preconceptions about them, and they don't just go away.

The fact is, there simply is not enough qualified and willing people for Moderators to be switched out all the time. They would need to be trained, gain experience, etc ... it simply isn't feasible. Experience is one of the most valuable assets a Moderator has.

Understandable. However, im sure there are enough people applying for mod positions to have the numbers. As for qualified, thats more or less a matter of trial and error. You really can't judge someones modding ability soly on an application. Granted, certain personality traits people may have could disqualify them, but other than that, its a trial and error process, imo of course.

For one or two rounds of replacements there might be enough, but fairly quickly you're going to be scratching the bottom of the barrel. Unless you want to start bringing back in old Mods, but that would probably defeat the purpose of the idea. That's just my opinion, I obviously don't have statistics or anything.

[ƒëmmë ƒatalë]

I'm sure there are plenty of forum users that have admin/ mod experience on other forums .. after all there are heaps on sgw alliance forums alone.

I know I for one have admin'd and modded on quiet a few of them over the years.

Not scrapping bottom of the barrel, letting human resources go to waste in a lot of cases.

[Empy]

I'm sure there are plenty of forum users that have admin/ mod experience on other forums .. after all there are heaps on sgw alliance forums alone.

I know I for one have admin'd and modded on quiet a few of them over the years.

Not scrapping bottom of the barrel, letting human resources go to waste in a lot of cases.

Well not all forums are the same. Controls might be similar, but the rules and how things are done I would not expect to be consistent.

I may well be underestimating the amount of people capable to do the job though. Just doesn't seem like I am, based on who sends in an application to be a Mod. Who knows!

[stuff of legends]

I'm sure there are plenty of forum users that have admin/ mod experience on other forums .. after all there are heaps on sgw alliance forums alone.

I know I for one have admin'd and modded on quiet a few of them over the years.

I can match that as well. I have been an admin, mod, super mod, junior admin, on a few websites with active user-groups of 3k+ (log on at least once every 24 hrs and post).

I was with 2 other admins, 1 J admin, 1 super mod and 10 mods, clearing crap all the time, in fact each mod would on average execute 100 mod actions within their first day, that being a ban, infraction, moving of a thread etc.
So in one day here there are about 90 active topics, give or take 10. So for the benefit of the doubt lets say 100 active topics, and lets say each topic is a heated argument so within the bickering I could safely say there are 7 DIFFERENT posters. So that leaves 700 'active' users on this forum, too many for reality imo but ok I'll roll with that for now ( take note there are 295 active topics within the past 7 days, so that's an average of 42 a day).
Now lets look at the user-groups, you have 24 MODS (mod infused power), 4 forum ADMINS , 4 GLOBAL MODS, all running an active user-base of 700 people
So how about you trim some fat firstly before you say there wouldn't be enough 'experienced people' to be mods. It would be much better if you just let mods mod across the whole board, accept a few sections such as feedback.

Nonetheless, interchanging admins/GM's every year, or periodically, isn't a large problem, the game has been alive for 6 years so that would have been 28 admins so far, if they were doing a somewhat decent job i don't see why they could perform another term either.
I have no doubt there are quite a few people with enough experience to be a mod, not that it takes a lot of skill to be one. Which some of you act like it does. You follow governed rules, if you shine above others you will be later promoted, you slip up, you're removed. Is that not what GM's are for anyway among other things? You might as well do your job, slightly more often.

Perhaps if the game ever does get back on its feet there would be more users to choose from. Maybe there is quite a few new people still coming in and they just don't want to come on the forum, no doubt most alliance HC's have encountered members like that.
Anyway I assume this thread sprouted from the other which sprouted from another which eventually was set off from the global announcement, and how the admins were accused of heavy bias? Pretty sure no one cared about the mods or GM's, even though it skewed and eventually took that path. Kill the puppeteer and his puppets die to.

Mods- rotational but in long increments say 6 month minimum, Mods that have no funtion or purpose to be mods meaning constructive for the overall community should not be mods. Each Mod position should be made known and their functions fully disclosed and when the positions are filled there is no need for any rogue mod to be on the staff. Keep it simple.

+1. Accept mods shouldn't have a time limit, if they're done they're done, if they still perform solid after a year then props to them. Perhaps a review after 6 months instead.

I may well be underestimating the amount of people capable to do the job though.

quite, although you're not to blame for why you thought that.

[renegadze]

I'm sure there are plenty of forum users that have admin/ mod experience on other forums .. after all there are heaps on sgw alliance forums alone.

I know I for one have admin'd and modded on quiet a few of them over the years.

Not scrapping bottom of the barrel, letting human resources go to waste in a lot of cases.

Well not all forums are the same. Controls might be similar, but the rules and how things are done I would not expect to be consistent.

I may well be underestimating the amount of people capable to do the job though. Just doesn't seem like I am, based on who sends in an application to be a Mod. Who knows!

I think more often then not, people now don't apply because they don't want to be associated with the current crop. As you said the controls are probably fairly similar across the board and only rules differ. Well the rules are the easy part, if you had to teach someone all the commands then that would be a pain.

In keeping with the discussion.

Admins - Yes these positions should be rotated, It's all well and fine to say "they are doing a good job" but if this were truely the case you wouldn't have so many people complaining about them. Yes you could put this down to people "whining" but this is a large number of people from a variety of different alliances within the game.

Mods - Equally so, this almost definately should be reviewed.

1) It would be nice not to have mods blindly changing my posts (without letting me know)
2) It would be even better if they didn't simply delete my posts without letting me know (yes if I was swearing at people or something then I would expect auto deletion).
3) It would be nice if reports actually had some feedback - even just acknowledgement
4) If a mod wishes to lock a thread, Admins should be able to just reopen to meet their own ends (a request for unlock should come from the community)
5) Stop mods reopening threads just so they can get the final word in and lock the thread again (this is both childish and annoying)

6) and this is just a personal one not really a complaint - make Zeratul stop posting in 3rd person...annoying as hell (maybe he should keep this for the roleplaying sections)

[Clarkey]

1) It would be nice not to have mods blindly changing my posts (without letting me know)

In what way do they change posts?

2) It would be even better if they didn't simply delete my posts without letting me know (yes if I was swearing at people or something then I would expect auto deletion).

They don't delete posts. Can people get this through their heads that unless you are talking about Market posts are never deleted. The Private Dump is used for offensive posts that should not be on the forums but are kept in case a complaint is made and the Admins or Oms needs to see it. The Public Dump is there for things that aren't offensive but discussion (usually off topic) can continue if it is deemed ok to. So please stop claiming deletion when it is simply not true.

3) It would be nice if reports actually had some feedback - even just acknowledgement

This I agree with. In fact I know of at least 1 maybe 2 that do this on a regular basis.

4) If a mod wishes to lock a thread, Admins should be able to just reopen to meet their own ends (a request for unlock should come from the community)

I got confused by this point. Are you saying Admins shouldn't be able to just reopen?

5) Stop mods reopening threads just so they can get the final word in and lock the thread again (this is both childish and annoying)

Your lack of knowledge of Mod abilities shows here. Mods (in their sections) can post in a locked thread without unlocking the thread. Therefore I'm sure Mods are not unlocking threads to just get the last word in and locking it again.

6) and this is just a personal one not really a complaint - make Zeratul stop posting in 3rd person...annoying as hell (maybe he should keep this for the roleplaying sections)

You are trying to tell someone to change their personality? Zeratul would not be Zeratul if he didn't speak in 3rd person. No-one on this forum would seriously tell him to stop.

[The Doctor]

3) It would be nice if reports actually had some feedback - even just acknowledgement

This I agree with. In fact I know of at least 1 maybe 2 that do this on a regular basis.

When reporting a post, there is an option to have the forum notify you when the report is closed. From memory, the email tells you the moderator who closed the report. Then, if you wish to contact said moderator on the actions of the report, you can.

[Clarkey]

3) It would be nice if reports actually had some feedback - even just acknowledgement

This I agree with. In fact I know of at least 1 maybe 2 that do this on a regular basis.

When reporting a post, there is an option to have the forum notify you when the report is closed. From memory, the email tells you the moderator who closed the report. Then, if you wish to contact said moderator on the actions of the report, you can.

Yes but it's courteous of the Mod to feedback saying the post in question has been handled, or to say why they felt that the post/report didn't warrant any action. I know it's probably not expected of Mods to do that, but the fact several Mods do it shows it can be done and it makes me respect them even more for it.

[The Doctor]

3) It would be nice if reports actually had some feedback - even just acknowledgement

This I agree with. In fact I know of at least 1 maybe 2 that do this on a regular basis.

When reporting a post, there is an option to have the forum notify you when the report is closed. From memory, the email tells you the moderator who closed the report. Then, if you wish to contact said moderator on the actions of the report, you can.

Yes but it's courteous of the Mod to feedback saying the post in question has been handled, or to say why they felt that the post/report didn't warrant any action. I know it's probably not expected of Mods to do that, but the fact several Mods do it shows it can be done and it makes me respect them even more for it.

Was just noting that there is that option for those mods who don't provide feedback so a user can find a way to contact the mod who dealt with the report.

I haven't done that yet, but in the future, I might start leaving feedback on reports that I follow up on.

[Noobert]

Admins - Yes these positions should be rotated, It's all well and fine to say "they are doing a good job" but if this were truely the case you wouldn't have so many people complaining about them. Yes you could put this down to people "whining" but this is a large number of people from a variety of different alliances within the game.

This right here made me gigglesnort.

I've been watching the individual's "whining" for the past week, as you say, and most of it is from the Legion. A few from Forgotten Serenity, and then a few from OE/DDE which are based upon past grievances rather than if the Moderator's or Admins are doing a proper job. What about the players who believe things are run properly, can see past grievances and realize it was done correctly, and want nothing to do with this type of stuff? There are plenty of those lurking about as well.

Large number of people from a different variety of alliances? I cannot help but laugh at this comment. You have complaints from the most active, and grudge holding alliances in this game. Do not forget the fact that these individuals who are posting are the most aggressive players of this game to begin with. You complain, but do not suggest on how to make it better. You just want the removal of Moderators, or Admins without any real grounds to do so. You state we are so many negative things, and yet have to provide proof of this being true.

Just because you do not like somebody, or how they do things, doesn't mean they are doing a bad job.

[Cole]

[spoiler]

I think more often then not, people now don't apply because they don't want to be associated with the current crop. As you said the controls are probably fairly similar across the board and only rules differ. Well the rules are the easy part, if you had to teach someone all the commands then that would be a pain.

Out Of Character:
I wanted to apply for moderatorship, but as I told few people already, I was hesitating (and finally decided not to) because I thought I might not have the patience required to do the job. The patience precisely to deal with the few very vocal individuals whose main goal on this forum seem to be to have mods getting angry/doing a mistake (because they would have had a bad day or something) to point out afterwards the mod did cross its line and bam! you are screwed up as a mod because, the last "provocation" was the excess one getting the total beyond the line, but you will be blamed because you had to stay calm despite the provocation/quest for any mistakes done by the moderator(s) "targeted" by those who are clear in their mods dislike. (whether it's personal or just for the role in general)[/spoiler]

I think that the main problem is, mutual view of users (some of them at least) and mods/admins. Stereotypes and long history of issues leading to non-ending opinion issues living beyond the rotation of staff. Maybe changing completely the staff couldn't even change that, because people think about what was done in past, what is done in game, what could be done here and there (even people with a "clear" past could be blamed in future for future actions not pleasing for this or that reason), a big mix that in the end, cause all these troubles. But I suppose it's bound to happen in game communities. It can be reduced though, or so I hope.

Also, I would say that "sarcastic" moderating, "rudeness" in moderating, arrogance towards the users have been real issues in the past, if mods don't use it (not saying they do currently) then there's less ground for users to criticize the staff team. BUT that requires also the users to avoid doing "provocations" (not talking about making suggestions to improve the forums, but more about the proof-less accusations) or posting borderline the rules. If both parts can do this, I'm sure there will be even less issues happening. And it would be, maybe, more efficient than a complete change of the structure. Who knows.

Never all people will be satisfied, that's why I think best staff can do, no matter what the changes are in the structure, is to remain objective in their work, and thus only subjective criticism could come, but subjective criticism cannot be received as objective can. Yes, I'm aware it's not so easy to draw the line between both...but it can be done.

[renegadze]

1) It would be nice not to have mods blindly changing my posts (without letting me know)

In what way do they change posts?

2) It would be even better if they didn't simply delete my posts without letting me know (yes if I was swearing at people or something then I would expect auto deletion).

They don't delete posts. Can people get this through their heads that unless you are talking about Market posts are never deleted. The Private Dump is used for offensive posts that should not be on the forums but are kept in case a complaint is made and the Admins or Oms needs to see it. The Public Dump is there for things that aren't offensive but discussion (usually off topic) can continue if it is deemed ok to. So please stop claiming deletion when it is simply not true.

3) It would be nice if reports actually had some feedback - even just acknowledgement

This I agree with. In fact I know of at least 1 maybe 2 that do this on a regular basis.

4) If a mod wishes to lock a thread, Admins should be able to just reopen to meet their own ends (a request for unlock should come from the community)

I got confused by this point. Are you saying Admins shouldn't be able to just reopen?

5) Stop mods reopening threads just so they can get the final word in and lock the thread again (this is both childish and annoying)

Your lack of knowledge of Mod abilities shows here. Mods (in their sections) can post in a locked thread without unlocking the thread. Therefore I'm sure Mods are not unlocking threads to just get the last word in and locking it again.

6) and this is just a personal one not really a complaint - make Zeratul stop posting in 3rd person...annoying as hell (maybe he should keep this for the roleplaying sections)

You are trying to tell someone to change their personality? Zeratul would not be Zeratul if he didn't speak in 3rd person. No-one on this forum would seriously tell him to stop.

1) posts have simply been edited, and no swear words or masking...just plain changing what was typed....this has been reported on a number of occasions - and nothing done.

2) when something is removed outside of a "normal" users view, then this to them is sa good as deleting, just because others have more rights and can still see it doesn't help

4) Of course an admin should be allowed, but there was a clear case when the mod wanted to lock the topic, and a certain admin wanted to leave it open just to further their own needs. There was no reason to leave it open except to cause more irate off topic posting. This was a case of the Admin in question actually being involved in the thread as a user, and they abused their admin rights to keep a dead thread open.

5) Well i've never been a mod here, but forums I manage have better posting security preventing anyone posting in a locked thread. But the point is still valid...they make a final post just to get the last word in....there is clearly no need for this, except to get one over on everyone else.

6) Again you take your personal view and apply it broadly to every user of this forum...did you poll everyone?