January 2015 Mod Vote For Everyone

[Magnyus]

 

Yeah, no. That's why it took so long for the staff to comprehend why they needed to split the 'No' vote into 'No' and 'I don't know this person well enough' when voting for moderators. I complained to a moderator about it more than a year and a half ago, back while I was being nominated for moderator, but nothing was done about it until recently. After I was voted in, I declined the moderator position, because (among other reasons) a lot of the people who voted 'Yes' for me hadn't even met me, and I was told by the same moderator that they were likely basing their decision on anecdotal evidence they had received from others, instead of making an informed decision based on first-hand experiences.

 

 

In other words, the mod nominations thread... Yes, it is extremely difficult to keep track of all the different nominees especially when you don't play on the same server, let alone the same time as them, and it's a bit silly to expect every mod to go out of their way to keep track of who all the nominees are and getting to know them, so you would expect the community's input to be a big factor to the process, but the way we go about doing so is completely wrong. The head admins expect anyone with any concerns over certain players to go straight to them, and while that can be very useful if someone truly doesn't feel that a certain player shouldn't be a staff member, not every player is willing to go through the effort of contacting a head admin just to voice their concern. And it helps even less when the heads aren't online to respond swiftly, or are too occupied with more pressing concerns (whatever the fuck they may be). The vote is also extremely vague and it doesn't really help players understand why they aren't being supported, and it would be even worse if anyone explained why they don't support said player.

 

An idea that I had was to use the /applyformod page and elaborate on it. Let players nominate whomever they want, but make any entry require reasons as to why they're nominating and why they would support them. It would help in organising opinions, as well as providing solid evidence as to why they would be a good choice. Something like that.

[tobylane]

I'm still of the belief that the /applyformod page goes nowhere, and I send immature people to it because of that belief.

[TornadoHorse]

I'm still of the belief that the /applyformod page goes nowhere, and I send immature people to it because of that belief.

 

I agree. Anyone can put down a name and you have no way of knowing whether they are serious or not. If we had proper staff applications with a way to verify who wrote what application i.e. linking the applications to the forums, then we could take every application seriously. At the moment, we don't do that on the /applyformod page, we just select the few names we like from it that would likely be brought up by staff anyway. We either need to properly utilise a staff application section or not do it at all, where we are at now is a total waste.

[SpiderMan]

I'm still of the belief that the /applyformod page goes nowhere, and I send immature people to it because of that belief.

 

It's been an obvious joke since its inception. Have people actually taken it seriously? Jesus Christ haahahah

 

-gsand

[Natdog]

Thank you for voteing folks.

[jchance]

Locked by Natdog's request.