SwitchViewz Posted July 23, 2015 Report Share Posted July 23, 2015 I have been talking to Barlimore in IRC and he brought to my attention that I sounded a little harsh and unrealistic. That was not my intention and I apologize if I have come off that way. The purpose of my post is I want to see consistency amoung the head admins. It is great that Mrloud and Barlimore are playing Civ and interacting with the community, but other head admins are not. Cyotie has been inactive a long time and scherer was out of town for awhile. I am simply wanting something to be introduced to the policy that can add consistency amoung the head admins, and other admins activity levels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
schererererer Posted July 23, 2015 Report Share Posted July 23, 2015 I've played civ with community members more than a few times (including a couple of games in FNG), and the only reason I didn't join in the most recent civ game was because I didn't hear about it until after it was over. I hang out and share music in plug.dj channels sometimes. I don't own CS:GO, but will be grabbing it to play as soon as it goes on sale (my videogame budget is pretty low). I only really knew that it's played by nerd.nu people together because I've seen the mumble channel for it. Which brings up the other issue with using mumble as representative of "the community" when it is in reality a tiny subset of the nerd.nu playerbase even at its peak - at times it's very cliquish. This is something we could work on improving, but it's how things are and have been for a long time. If by 'community' you mean a particular subset of powerusers, then okay, but right now being ingame in minecraft makes us very visible to 90% of the whole community. Interacting personably in mumble, ingame, etc, is great, but it has to take a backseat to getting policy out the door, addressing complaints and concerns, and other such responsibilities. Same goes for tech admins writing plugins, adjusting permissions, or fixing it; or server admins prepping a new revision on a dev server - these are tasks that are prioritized over an public ingame presence. Being in mumble frequently is definitely something to encourage, but I would not kick someone to the curb if they couldn't do so. Regarding keeping consistency among the admins, the written policy is the same for all - fulfilling their responsibilities. The subjectivity resting in the hands of the heads will exist in any case (since staff management is one of the clearest responsibilities of the head admins). And once again, we could use clear descriptions of every staff member's duties, but that is best brought to a new thread (which I have a mind to get to work on asap). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwitchViewz Posted July 23, 2015 Report Share Posted July 23, 2015 I've played civ with community members more than a few times (including a couple of games in FNG), and the only reason I didn't join in the most recent civ game was because I didn't hear about it until after it was over. I hang out and share music in plug.dj channels sometimes. I don't own CS:GO, but will be grabbing it to play as soon as it goes on sale (my videogame budget is pretty low). I only really knew that it's played by nerd.nu people together because I've seen the mumble channel for it. Which brings up the other issue with using mumble as representative of "the community" when it is in reality a tiny subset of the nerd.nu playerbase even at its peak - at times it's very cliquish. This is something we could work on improving, but it's how things are and have been for a long time. If by 'community' you mean a particular subset of powerusers, then okay, but right now being ingame in minecraft makes us very visible to 90% of the whole community. Good points, I wasn't trying to just single out mumble as the entire community as that is by no means true. I was simply trying to point out that more activity there would be good. Interacting personably in mumble, ingame, etc, is great, but it has to take a backseat to getting policy out the door, addressing complaints and concerns, and other such responsibilities. Same goes for tech admins writing plugins, adjusting permissions, or fixing it; or server admins prepping a new revision on a dev server - these are tasks that are prioritized over an public ingame presence. Being in mumble frequently is definitely something to encourage, but I would not kick someone to the curb if they couldn't do so. I don't agree with it taking a backseat to the other things you listed. To me, interacting personably is just as important as those other things. You guys are the leaders of the community, it wouldn't be fair for you to not communicate personably and then go and write policy for the community your not interacting with. Part of your job as a community leader is to interact with the community and gather feedback. I would think that that would actually take priority over the other things you mentioned because you can't do the other things without interacting with the community first. I wouldn't want to kick someone to the curb for not coming in mumble all the time. I just think it would be a good idea to enourage some usage of mumble/other-services for all the heads and have more consistent use. ...And once again, we could use clear descriptions of every staff member's duties, but that is best brought to a new thread (which I have a mind to get to work on asap). My original post was trying to lead somewhat to this. If we have descriptions of staff members duties then we know how to better view and address activity. Glad to hear you plan to start working on a thread for it! :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c45y Posted July 23, 2015 Report Share Posted July 23, 2015 (edited) I feel like maybe we're getting sidetracked. Is this a problem with the original post or are we starting to move in to other, more specific, issues? I would argue it's best to get something in place so we can see if it holds water and then meet again in a few weeks time to consider if changes are needed. Are we comfortable giving it a try? Edited July 23, 2015 by c45y Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
schererererer Posted July 23, 2015 Report Share Posted July 23, 2015 I think we were delving into specifics and definitions of "activity" and "responsibilities" which need to be clarified sooner or later. We're waiting for the policy to be wrapped up before doing the next staff cleanup, so getting something in place soon is better than debating all the finer details. We'll try to have another draft incorporating your feedback by the admin meeting tonight. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silversunset01 Posted July 23, 2015 Report Share Posted July 23, 2015 I know you're working hard on this policy, I just want to throw my $0.02 in. It's quick don't worry. I would think you'd want to have a "job description" (for lack of a better word) in place before you would be able to determine if someone was or was not doing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
schererererer Posted July 28, 2015 Report Share Posted July 28, 2015 Hi everyone, please look over this revised draft and let us know about any lingering concerns. We've also added descriptions of responsibilities - if anything is dubious or missing from these, please reply as well. ===Second Draft=== With this Staff Inactivity Policy, we aim to address the activity issues experienced across staff for years by having a clear process documented for updating permissions of people deemed inactive. Members of staff are active if they are fulfilling their responsibilities and investing an appropriate amount of time in doing so (on the same order of magnitude as their compatriots). While some may go above and beyond, taking the time to assist in areas not expected of them, we primarily expect each person on staff to tend to the tasks underlined in their current role. We will implement quarterly staff cleanups (every three months), in which moderators who have not met the standard of activity across the preceding quarter will be moved to the inactive category on our website, and those who have been categorized as inactive across the preceding quarter will be moved to the past moderators category. People whose status is changed will be notified via forum message at minimum. Staff members who experience planned or unplanned inactivity should inform us of it as early as possible to avoid being unduly caught in a staff cleanup. Since admins often have more time-sensitive responsibilities and are integral to the operation of their spheres of interest, we will keep in close contact with each admin team to make sure that inactivity does not become an issue. Much of admin activity is invisible to the public (e.g. new revision planning, or plugin development) and as such, the best window on their holistic activity is through the admin teams themselves. We expect members of each admin team to come to us if they have concerns about activity, and we will also reach out to them if we perceive any issues with a member of their team, conferring with them before making a decision. Those staff who are active in the community but are not engaging with their responsibilities to a level similar to their counterparts will be contacted privately to discuss options such as their stepping down to take a break or determining ways in which we can support them. ===Staff Responsibilities=== Head Admins: Guide the overarching direction of NerdNu Approve expenditures and all other financial matters Facilitate communication between staff members, such as coordinating server resets and events, or moderating disagreements between staff Approve or veto rule changes, both broad and server-specific Lead the creation and refinement of policy Conduct staff management and address “human resources” concerns Facilitate moderator nominations and provide final approval on new moderators and admins Conduct periodic staff cleanups, and remove staff members as necessary Provide assistance with admin tasks on any server to reduce the workload of the server admins, as needed and when comfortable Interact with the community at large to have an ear to the pulse of the times, through media such as our hosted games and servers, forums, subreddit, mumble, and irc Tech Admins Maintain the operation of the servers Are responsible for server integrity - as such, techs have the final word on matters of server security and stability Keep the servers running Ensure plugins are up to date Implement new features via plugin creation, etc. as desired Advise other staff on technical matters such as server hardware, plugin selection, etc Interview and approve candidates for additional tech admins Address technical issues brought to their attention through avenues such as modreq, forums, or irc reporting Server Admins Guide the fundamental direction and logistics of their respective servers, taking precedence in internal server-specific matters Propose and lead discussion on rule changes for their respective servers Make server-specific decisions ideally as a server admin consensus, otherwise as a supermajority (⅔) vote Address admin-requests on their servers Plan and develop new revisions/maps as desired and necessary Select and approve candidates for respective server admins Interact with the community at large on their respective servers, and additional media such as our other hosted games and servers, forums, subreddit, mumble and irc Moderators Moderate chat content on our servers, forums, subreddit, mumble, and irc Attend to modreqs as needed Assist players in general Help out with the production of special events or projects as needed by admin teams Nominate and vote on candidates for additional moderators as needed 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Former Staff Posted July 30, 2015 Report Share Posted July 30, 2015 We will be aiming to move this policy to Private Mod Chat on 2nd August to give moderators the opportunity to share feedback, before we proceed to enabling this dual-policy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silversunset01 Posted July 30, 2015 Report Share Posted July 30, 2015 I do like the revised policy a bit better, it creates more opportunities for communication amongst staff and allows for real life to happen. To sir_didymus point in the mod forum we have to be careful about not just counting modreqs as some members are quite quick to scoop them up, or are just on at the right time. And some help out with grief that isn't always clear in reqs. As long as all of that is taken into consideration I don't see anything out of place with the reworded policy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Former Staff Posted July 30, 2015 Report Share Posted July 30, 2015 To sir_didymus point in the mod forum we have to be careful about not just counting modreqs as some members are quite quick to scoop them up, or are just on at the right time. And some help out with grief that isn't always clear in reqs. As long as all of that is taken into consideration I don't see anything out of place with the reworded policy. There are so many factors with just counting modreqs that comes into play. I feel like I have a good idea for how to define moderator activity based on our own discussions here but I am hoping that a few more moderators will become involved in the conversation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Former Staff Posted August 3, 2015 Report Share Posted August 3, 2015 Moving to Private Mod Chat. For anyone new to the discussion, we have only created one draft of the Returning Staff Policy - Available here. The final version of the Staff Inactivity Policy is available to view here. We'll aim to gather any additional feedback and act upon it in time for this dual-policy to go live by this coming weekend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 3, 2015 Report Share Posted August 3, 2015 My two cents to this is that you're going through an awful lot of trouble to make this seem like work and not a hobby we're doing for our own free will without any pay. I understand the need to clean up inactive mods, but those requirements and times people are allowed to be inactive do not seem to mesh with the idea of a volunteer job. The three weeks inactivity rule is just way too tight, but the mentioned 4 times in a year seems reasonable enough. (That said, I'm not reflecting to my own activity this rev, tbh from my activity for P rev 15, I would totally understand if I would have been moved to inactive staff.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Former Staff Posted August 3, 2015 Report Share Posted August 3, 2015 My two cents to this is that you're going through an awful lot of trouble to make this seem like work and not a hobby we're doing for our own free will without any pay. I understand the need to clean up inactive mods, but those requirements and times people are allowed to be inactive do not seem to mesh with the idea of a volunteer job. The three weeks inactivity rule is just way too tight, but the mentioned 4 times in a year seems reasonable enough. (That said, I'm not reflecting to my own activity this rev, tbh from my activity for P rev 15, I would totally understand if I would have been moved to inactive staff.) A lot of the feedback so far helped us reach the quarterly clean-ups instead of the alternatives we looked at. That is how we would like to proceed, with the next clean-up to follow shortly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
schererererer Posted August 4, 2015 Report Share Posted August 4, 2015 Zomise, I think you're reading the initial draft - the final one prescribes simply a cleanup every 3 months (taking into account the critiques of the first draft). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MasterCommaThe Posted August 4, 2015 Report Share Posted August 4, 2015 We should probably add the inactivity expectations to the new mod training if it hasn't been already. Including how to properly keep admins appraised of planned absences. (Wasn't in my original training 2.5 years ago.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Former Staff Posted August 7, 2015 Report Share Posted August 7, 2015 I'll be closing this discussion and moving it to Closed Private Mod Chat for now. The policies will be posted shortly and a staff clean-up will be publicly documented today too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts