JohnAdams1735 Posted September 22, 2013 Report Share Posted September 22, 2013 Rough percentage has been around 65-70% of votes or higher gets modded, but there was no real hard and fast number. I always paid attention to who was voting what as well. Ex. if a primarily C player has a few nos from C mods, I'd follow up and ask those about their vote. And, of course, I was always open to hearing serious reservations and would factor them in to final decisions. Statistically speaking, most mods get 70-85%. I don't think anyone has gotten 90% or more, perhaps one sine I've been a head. I'd be willing to type up a google doc with stats if you'd like. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tompreuss Posted September 23, 2013 Report Share Posted September 23, 2013 Requesting an update on this, as my inquiry still hasn't been answered. Sorry this question wasn't answered sooner. From what I've seen in the previous nomination round there were a number of factors for people being chosen / not chosen after the voting thread ended. People who received an overwhelming majority were a natural choice for the moderating team, I'm not aware of a set percentage that is enforced for people to meet as a criteria though it has been based on the majority of the votes and looking further into how people voted for each nominee, such as people who clearly have never interacted with the person being voted upon, as opposed to others who have. There are instances where a detrimental piece of information comes to light from one of the nominees which raises a discussion before confronting the person in question for clarity before making a decision. I imagine the other head admins who have been involved with more nominee threads may be able to provide more of an insight. It might behoove us if you disseminated to the mods here some of the information Ludeman posted about back in this thread in the admin-chat archives. It's about a year old, but I think the goal of this thread and his original head-admin-chat thread are the same. There's some stuff there that he says should be shared at the next mumble meeting, but I don't believe it was ever written down anywhere mod-accessible afterward. The notes I took (and note that I wasn't even a mod yet) just say "mod nomination process changes". I couldn't find anything in the mod-chat or mod-chat-private archives, though another thing to remember is that we aren't adding new mods to the archives forum anymore anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Former Staff Posted September 28, 2013 Report Share Posted September 28, 2013 In the interests of bringing forward this discussion, I've gone through each post and have culminated the feedback and suggestions into a few pieces of information which will in turn, reinforce how we handle the mod nomination process, introduce new changes and clarify further what we're aiming for. Reinforce We're seeking constructive feedback from the nomination discussions threads so that we can identify people suited to the responsibilities of a moderator, serving the community. While it is important to raise concerns and have them addressed, any derogatory comments will not be welcome. This doesn't mean we will be censoring any comments, in order to preserve the discussions. Voting will remain within the (public) Mod Chat Forum to ensure we deliver transparency upon the final stages of adding new moderators to help the servers and more importantly, the people who play them. In doing so, we are extending the opportunity for anyone within the community to contact the head admins with any concerns that may not have been known about any particular nominee. Change Before we proceed with a list of nominees for voting, a head admin will contact each person to ask permission to put their name forward for the voting thread. It will be made clear to each and every person that we are not approaching to guarantee an outcome on the vote, instead, as a formality, to ensure that the nominee is interested and comfortable being put forward in a public voting thread. There will be no restrictions on the size of the pool selected for the voting thread. We will co-ordinate the training across as many people available, particularly server admins. This way we can focus on meeting the demand and take away the large task of training moderators from such a small group of people. Clarify Ensuring that the list of nominees chosen by the community and moderators through discussion and feedback are a representation of a wide range of people so that everyone can feel more assured that the person will be able to handle the role of serving the community well. During the voting thread, when voting 'No' for a nominee, this is a vote to state that you don't feel they are currently ready or that you do not know them well enough to feel confident bringing them aboard. I would appreciate further thoughts on this, it would be great to begin declassifying this thread in due time too alongside a new topic in the Mod Chat Forum so that everyone know our expectations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Former Staff Posted October 5, 2013 Report Share Posted October 5, 2013 We're at 6 days since the last reply and there have been no further points raised yet. Pending any further areas of discussion, I'll make a post in the Mod Chat forum area on Sunday 6th with the content in my post above, in addition to a further explanation for the topic being brought up in the first place. We'll be moving this topic to the archives in one week, Saturday 12th October for declassification, you're welcome to make an edits by then. Edit: The topic has been posted in the Mod Chat forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buzzinbee Posted October 13, 2013 Author Report Share Posted October 13, 2013 Bump for moving this discussion over to the archives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Former Staff Posted October 13, 2013 Report Share Posted October 13, 2013 Thanks for the reminder Buzzinbee, to the archives! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts