91 replies to this topic

[Alias]

I was told to create a seperate thread for this, so here it is. Before I start - "staff", "administration" and "leadership" are all interchangeable. In this context they all mean the same thing - any member with moderating powers over a large sector of this forum. Also in b4 huge slabs of text.

While the majority of the staff perform their job fine, there is a select few who I feel are lacking.
Some of them think their position somehow grants them immunity to the rules, some others don't even know what the rules are, and even some of them don't do a thing for the public sector (in my eyes, the staff serving the community should be their first and foremost priority). This has been an issue for a while now, but recent events have made me take this more seriously.

I do understand the staff have lives outside of this place, but seriously... if you haven't actually used those powers you have at least once a fortnight minimum, then in my eyes, I really don't see any point in you having them. I currently think the leadership sector of this forum is far too large. Yes, there are timezone holes, however - this situation is like a kitchen. You do not add fresh meat on top of the pile of decomposing meat. You chuck away the rotten meat and replace it, not add to it. There was a gargantuan amount of European staff, and a tiny amount of staff east or west of Europe. However, you've done a good job with the Global Mod idea to combat this. It's a good idea, but I feel it has been executed incorrectly. If I were running the place, moderators should only be promoted if they are active in a good 80% at least of the public sector, and at least have had some role in the private sector. Too many staff just leads to a power struggle, which then leads to the forum becoming more and more of a "police state", so to say.

Now onto the my pet peeve - the rules. The rules should:

• Apply to everyone, regarless of status (otherwise you'll soon be having "person x did, so why can't I?"). I have spotted a few "higher ups" who have broken rules.
  
• All apply. A rule is a rule. Enforce one of them, enforce them all.
  
• If you aren't going to enforce them, remove them or modify them so they are right. If you aren't going to remove signatures wider than 500px, change it to the actual cut-off you WILL remove them at, for example if you're not going to remove it until it's greater than 600px wide, change the rule! (I have noted a few staff who have broken the width limit, and some who have even broken the height limit and others who have broken other rules). Cue point #1 in this case.
  
• Be known by all. ESPECIALLY in the case of staff - if the staff member doesn't know what they are actually enforcing, why are they doing the job? This is like having a whole bunch of cops on the street not knowing what is legal and what is illegal.

On a closing note, yes I like my metaphors. The staff of this place will be looked at in a much higher tone if you are less hypocritical and actually know what you are doing. Also - everything in this thread is entirely going by the rules (free speech, constructive criticism), so no locking this just yet. And to end this post with a cliché - "too many cooks spoil the broth".

[Dutchygamer]

How many admins/mods/staff members are there actually? I won't give my opinion about this untill I know this...

[Alias]

Dutchygamer, on 29 Aug 2008, 19:42, said:

How many admins/mods/staff members are there actually? I won't give my opinion about this untill I know this...

http://forum.cncreneclips.com/index.php?ac...mp;CODE=leaders

[Wizard]

Alias, on 29 Aug 2008, 10:38, said:

• Be known by all. ESPECIALLY in the case of staff - if the staff member doesn't know what they are actually enforcing, why are they doing the job? This is like having a whole bunch of cops on the street not knowing what is legal and what is illegal.

On a closing note, yes I like my metaphors. The staff of this place will be looked at in a much higher tone if you are less hypocritical and actually know what you are doing.

I am interested to know what you mean by this Alias? I am not asking you to name names but this appears ellusive? For the sake of clarity would you mind elaborating with an example?

[Dauth]

Without starting a war with the members or staff, this is actually a very sensible post, and I agree with nearly all of the points in it.

With regard to the sig issue, I feel that height is indeed fine at 350px, but the 500px width rule was created back when people used still the 800*600 resolution, this is no longer the case and the minimum I see is generally 1024*768, which would allow a 600px wide sig without distorting the forum.

I have to counter the point on Global mods needing a role in the private area, since private areas are the responsibility of the mod leader and not the forum moderating team (there is a large overlap yes). To save confusion E-Studios has.
5 Admins: Prophet, CodeCat, Hunter, Comrade & EVE
4 Staff: Overdose, Bob, Wizard, Dauth
4 Global Mods: Stinger, Chyros, The Dr, CommanderJB
0 Forum mods: Currently we are not using anyone as a forum mod, this post was initially created for people who have moderating rights over one part of the community forum (Such as Jordan in Games Modding).

There are also a number of project leaders with moderation rights but they are restricted to certain forums.

[Alias]

Wizard, on 29 Aug 2008, 19:58, said:

Alias, on 29 Aug 2008, 10:38, said:

• Be known by all. ESPECIALLY in the case of staff - if the staff member doesn't know what they are actually enforcing, why are they doing the job? This is like having a whole bunch of cops on the street not knowing what is legal and what is illegal.

On a closing note, yes I like my metaphors. The staff of this place will be looked at in a much higher tone if you are less hypocritical and actually know what you are doing.

I am interested to know what you mean by this Alias? I am not asking you to name names but this appears ellusive? For the sake of clarity would you mind elaborating with an example?

I cannot give you an example without naming names, which is something I do not want to do. They know who they are.

Dauth, on 29 Aug 2008, 19:59, said:

With regard to the sig issue, I feel that height is indeed fine at 350px, but the 500px width rule was created back when people used still the 800*600 resolution, this is no longer the case and the minimum I see is generally 1024*768, which would allow a 600px wide sig without distorting the forum.

Then change the damn thing already.

Dauth, on 29 Aug 2008, 19:59, said:

I have to counter the point on Global mods needing a role in the private area, since private areas are the responsibility of the mod leader and not the forum moderating team (there is a large overlap yes). To save confusion E-Studios has.

You would hope they at least had some previous experience? This is like a millionaire hiring a 1st year law student to be their barrister. It would also be a benefit if they have knowledge of the inner workings of the place too, correct? (i.e. in the case of the previous example, you'd hope they'd know how court works)

Edited by Alias, 29 August 2008 - 10:10.

[Wizard]

Quote

Quote

I have to counter the point on Global mods needing a role in the private area, since private areas are the responsibility of the mod leader and not the forum moderating team (there is a large overlap yes). To save confusion E-Studios has.

You would hope they at least had some previous experience? This is like a millionaire hiring a 1st year law student to be their barrister. It would also be a benefit if they have knowledge of the inner workings of the place too, correct? (i.e. in the case of the previous example, you'd hope they'd know how court works)

Knowing the inner workings of the forum is not a prerequisite to becoming a member of the moderating team and I don't see that it should be. There are lots of other issues that are far more important. Two I can think of straight off the bat are maturity and activity. Although they are not the exclusive things we look for.

[Alias]

I never said it was required, it said it would be beneficial. Going straight into a new world is a tough task (again, another example - if you were moving to a foreign country, it would be incredibly useful if you could speak their language).

Edited by Alias, 29 August 2008 - 10:14.

[Dutchygamer]

Now I've seen this, I don't think it are that much staff/mods/whatever. But as Alias said, if they are here to make ppl follow the rules, they should follow them too...

[Wizard]

Alias, on 29 Aug 2008, 11:13, said:

I never said it was required, it said it would be beneficial. Going straight into a new world is a tough task (again, another example - if you were moving to a foreign country, it would be incredibly useful if you could speak their language).

Although I see your point here Alias I don't agree. Global mods have powers in public areas only, Staff and Admins are global, including team forums (I know you know this, it's for those who might not). Therefore if you have experience here you can be a Gmod. We take great care to make sure that the people we promote have the right levels of experience and involvement in as many levels as required and believe me when I say we take great care. There is never a way to be sure anyone will deal with their responsibilities in the right manner so you have to make a judgement call. I for one believe we have made a very good choice.

[Alias]

Wizard, on 29 Aug 2008, 20:24, said:

Although I see your point here Alias I don't agree. Global mods have powers in public areas only, Staff and Admins are global, including team forums (I know you know this, it's for those who might not).

Wizard, on 29 Aug 2008, 20:24, said:

Therefore if you have experience here you can be a Gmod.

Contradictory a bit?
So if you have experience in a global area (staffwise - behind the scenes), then you are suited for Global Mod? That's agreeing to my point...

[Dauth]

Alias, on 29 Aug 2008, 11:41, said:

Wizard, on 29 Aug 2008, 20:24, said:

Although I see your point here Alias I don't agree. Global mods have powers in public areas only, Staff and Admins are global, including team forums (I know you know this, it's for those who might not).

Wizard, on 29 Aug 2008, 20:24, said:

Therefore if you have experience here you can be a Gmod.

Contradictory a bit?
So if you have experience in a global area (staffwise - behind the scenes), then you are suited for Global Mod? That's agreeing to my point...

I think Wizard wasn't 100% clear, his point is that if you have experience in the public areas of the forum then you are suitable for Gmod.

[Wizard]

Exactly. Thank you Dauth. My point is if you are a member, and you have a valid, genuine and decent contributitions to discussions under your belt, then you have the experience. Sorry it wasn't particularly clear.

[E.V.E.]

Add to that, that we need People who would like to serve the Community, and are not doing it only for the Power.
It's also very positive if the Member has shown that he can behave civilized in a Flame War / Argue or that he tried to stop / prevent the Flame War.

- E.V.E.

[Hobbesy]

I'm very much with Alias on this. It seems you're just electing random people to be mods now instead of choosing better members. Or is it favoritism? It seems you're steering away from people better suited to being mods, people who you really don't like in the first place.

You guys really do a bad job at keeping ES the way it was. Dauth is to one sided, Wizard locks every fourth thread he sees, and some of you can't stand criticism.

[Alias]

E.V.E., on 29 Aug 2008, 20:56, said:

Add to that, that we need People who would like to serve the Community, and are not doing it only for the Power.
It's also very positive if the Member has shown that he can behave civilized in a Flame War / Argue or that he tried to stop / prevent the Flame War.

- E.V.E.

Serving comes from acting. I don't see a lot of the current staff doing much for the public.
Cue paragraph:

Alias, on 29 Aug 2008, 19:38, said:

While the majority of the staff perform their job fine, there is a select few who I feel are lacking.
Some of them think their position somehow grants them immunity to the rules, some others don't even know what the rules are, and even some of them don't do a thing for the public sector (in my eyes, the staff serving the community should be their first and foremost priority). This has been an issue for a while now, but recent events have made me take this more seriously.

Edited by Alias, 29 August 2008 - 11:01.

[E.V.E.]

I don't think that you can name one Staff Member or Admin who hasn't done atleast 1 Thing for this Community.

- E.V.E.

[Alias]

One thing... that's a huge contribution. Only a handful of you still participate regularly.

Edited by Alias, 29 August 2008 - 11:21.

[CommanderJB]

If I might ask, why are you unwilling to name names? As unpleasant as the experience may be, as I see it, the only way you're truly going to bring about meaningful change to the staff is if you outline unequivocally what's wrong, and with whom, in order for the staff to be able to fix it. While such a course of action isn't what you'd do on the rest of the forum, people who have been elected to be moderators have presumably displayed considerable maturity, level-headedness and experience in order to be awarded with such a title, and so ought to be able to deal sensibly with any perceived faults.
Also, this being a possibly more contentious topic, why is having moderating powers and not using them an issue? If a person has had to lower their activity on the forum, then it's hardly fair to say that they're no longer worthy of their title; so long as the forum is still being kept a pleasant place for members to discuss, share and talk, I can't see any problem with having a few 'retired' mods. IMHO the only real reason for a staff member to be removed from their post is if they have abused their power, something which we will hopefully never see and as far as I can remember on this forum have not seen.

[Alias]

CommanderJB, on 29 Aug 2008, 21:32, said:

If I might ask, why are you unwilling to name names? As unpleasant as the experience may be, as I see it, the only way you're truly going to bring about meaningful change to the staff is if you outline unequivocally what's wrong, and with whom, in order for the staff to be able to fix it. While such a course of action isn't what you'd do on the rest of the forum, people who have been elected to be moderators have presumably displayed considerable maturity, level-headedness and experience in order to be awarded with such a title, and so ought to be able to deal sensibly with any perceived faults.
Also, this being a possibly more contentious topic, why is having moderating powers and not using them an issue? If a person has had to lower their activity on the forum, then it's hardly fair to say that they're no longer worthy of their title; so long as the forum is still being kept a pleasant place for members to discuss, share and talk, I can't see any problem with having a few 'retired' mods. IMHO the only real reason for a staff member to be removed from their post is if they have abused their power, something which we will hopefully never see and as far as I can remember on this forum have not seen.

The public doesn't need to know. I don't want anyone's reputation damaged by something the reader misunderstands and the members at question know who they are. Maturity and experience are worth zilch without the corresponding need of ongoing activity and contribution.
The Gold Member class was created for a reason. To me, inactive staff should be honourable retired. There is no point in keeping old brass when there is plenty of shining silver lying around.

[Shirou]

I reside with Alias' viewpoint.

CommanderJB said:

If a person has had to lower their activity on the forum, then it's hardly fair to say that they're no longer worthy of their title; so long as the forum is still being kept a pleasant place for members to discuss, share and talk, I can't see any problem with having a few 'retired' mods.

This is where I strongly disagree. If you are retired, there is the Gold Member badge, but even that one shouldn't be used carelessly for sake of keeping the very last exalted forum status on high-esteem. What's the use of a mod if he/she only moderates regularly. The Staff has stated themselves that they appoint moderators to have more coverage on certain times of the day. If we are talking about such micro levels of moderator activity then how is it useful that some moderators are not reliably active?

I received word from the Staff that there are so many Staff members to create some space for all of the mods, to actually allow them to take breaks. While essentially this is a reason I can cope with, it has enough logic to appoint help if you are going to be less moderating yourself, I don't believe that it is good for the quality of moderation itself.

The way I see it, without a way of large activity a moderator is not as involved into the forum as he/she should be and this might be detrimental to his/her performance. The performance Alias spoke his doubts upon with regard to certain unnamed Staff members. I have not monitored any staff members or something so I won't speak anything on that subject (only took a few notices but hey nobody is perfect, and I know that when being on the look out for mistakes you will find them). However I did state my general opinion on the subject.

[Nem]

E.V.E., on 29 Aug 2008, 6:56, said:

Add to that, that we need People who would like to serve the Community

This is where I have my problem. I find that the staff are well.. lazy. When your community is built apon a dieing game you need to do a little extra to keep things moving. The relaxed state that people with the power to do something reside in wont cut it.

A few examples include:

1. Lack of Project leader support. On Aug 13 2008, 18:56 I requested an FTP for my mod. After a few thread bumps and several other Project leaders requesting the same thing I finally got served on
Aug 28 8:00. The same goes for requesting project teams. With a flick of the wrist you can make us happy, why does it take a week or more?

2. Missing in action. This community has dozens and dozens of talented artist, Most willing to help update the forum. One year? ok they will get around to it. Two is unacceptable. We expect to be served.

3. Attitude. Disturbing how the staff act like there on a whole other level then us mere peasants. There was a point when I was repeating asking Admin for help setting up my mod. Only when another staffer noticed and contacted them did I get any attention. This is not right, we are the guys keeping the community running, you could at least flick your wrist twice and take care of whatever is required.

I understand that sometimes you don't want to do something. I have felt that way myself. But when your in a position in which hundreds of people count on you, you don't have a choice. Be productive, or step down.

Edited by Nem, 29 August 2008 - 21:15.

[Alias]

I never expected this amount of support. Thankyou, all.

[Nem]

Any idea how many people would come forward if they did not fear staffer backlash? There are many that feel the same way.

Edited by Nem, 29 August 2008 - 21:02.

[Whitey]

I can only support the points brought up by Alias. Really, I have nothing more to say.

-Boidy