Selection of Mods

OutlawPete

Deleted User wrote: »

Dav's PM is pretty clear about why he wasn't deemed to be acceptable.

Clear but it doesn't address what URL would specifically like to know.

Note the bold, as you seem to imply that his "mates" want to know also, I see no evidence of that at all.

Deleted User wrote: »

how can this question be answered without going into personal details about other people?

Well, he could be PM'd and told what exactly is the reason.

I don't agree with discussing this type of thing in public either and recently got in a disagreement over a similar thing back on the MOD Poll thread when explanations were called for from a Mod.

The whole crux of this is that URL feels others have been choosen to MOD AH that have a far worse posting record than his, which I have to agree with him on.

He just wants a little more PM'd feedback that will make that decision more understandable. Is that a lot to ask from someone who has put in as much as URL has to AH?

My name is URL

Dav wrote: »

I haven't had a much time to look in on this today. Every private communication I've had with URL has ended in him saying he was happy with what I'd said and there was no further request for information or clarification. Now why he felt he couldn't ask for this clarification when we were talking is beyond me, but here it is:

Just in reply to this part, the last PM I received from you was an expansion of the reasons given to me originally, which I said I understood and respected. I don't know how I could have asked for clarification after the lengthy response you'd already provided me with.

I appreciate you taking the time to respond, but the issues I had with the reasoning applied to my case to begin with (and specifically, not to others) were still there afterward.

OutlawPete

OutlawPete wrote: »

Clear but it doesn't address what URL would specifically like to know.

Note the bold, as you seem to imply that his "mates" want to know also, I see no evidence of that at all.



Well, he could be PM'd and told what exactly is the reason.

I don't agree with discussing this type of thing in public either and recently got in a disagreement over a similar thing back on the MOD Poll thread when explanations were called for from a Mod.

The whole crux of this is that URL feels others have been choosen to MOD AH that have a far worse posting record than his, which I have to agree with him on.

He just wants a little more PM'd feedback that will make that decision more understandable. Is that a lot to ask from someone who has put in as much as URL has to AH?

Ok, lets do this from first principles

A + B = C
A is all the good things you've done on the boards
B is all the bad (negative)
C is the total.

Lets say the admins have a minimum value for C for a person to be a mod.

Now URL was given 'B' in the pm, express reasons why he wouldn't be chosen as a mod. But, Url has pointed out that others have also done these things (and worse?) and are made mods.
I said this earlier - most of the these people have done something or other that means that admins go 'ok, s/he messed up and acted the dick but they also did 'A' and because of this we think they'll be ok at modding.

Now, I've no idea what the craic is with URL or the Admins, but it would seem that 'A' is not large enough to overcome 'B'.

This whole thread is basically URL saying that he isn't satisfied with the response of 'B' and he wants to know why other people, with the same or grater value of 'B' are mods. In other words, he is asking for 'A' of other people which is really none of his, mine, yours or anyones business, bar the admins and the user in question.

It doesn't matter if he has 1 post or 52,000 posts - 'A' of other people is none of his business. None of mine. None of yours.

My name is URL

Deleted User wrote: »

A + B = C
A is all the good things you've done on the boards
B is all the bad (negative)
C is the total.

That's an interesting way of looking at things, maybe a little subjective though

I'm not going to try and list off my 'A' points on boards, but I feel that they outweigh my 'B' parts tbh. Maybe I'm just deluded though :rolleyes:

The point about me wanting other cases discussed in public is still wrong tbh

My name is URL

My name is URL wrote: »

That's an interesting way of looking at things, maybe a little subjective though

I'm not going to try and list off my 'A' points on boards, but I feel that they outweigh my 'B' parts tbh. Maybe I'm just deluded though :rolleyes:

The point about me wanting other cases discussed in public is still wrong tbh

I've no idea - you could make a great mod, you might not. End of the day, the admins say no!

Really though - the only way for the admins to go into detail is relative; you v other people. Thats where 'A' of URL v 'A' of The Zohan or whoever comes into it, and that isn't fair to anyone.

Dav

My name is URL wrote: »

Just in reply to this part, the last PM I received from you was an expansion of the reasons given to me originally, which I said I understood and respected. I don't know how I could have asked for clarification after the lengthy response you'd already provided me with.

I appreciate you taking the time to respond, but the issues I had with the reasoning applied to my case to begin with (and specifically, not to others) were still there afterward.

Well (and I say this to everyone) if I haven't answered the question you want answered, please do come back to me - I honestly thought I'd covered all you'd asked, so my apologies for that.

Have I addressed your issues now with my previous post? I'd really like to put this to bed (and head home tbh )

Dav

OutlawPete

I didn't do well in Algebra, my Dad waterboarded me as a kid

Deleted User wrote: »

Now, I've no idea what the craic is with URL or the Admins, but it would seem that 'A' is not large enough to overcome 'B'.

That would appear to be the case, yes.

Deleted User wrote: »

This whole thread is basically URL saying that he isn't satisfied with the response of 'B' and he wants to know why other people, with the same or grater value of 'B' are mods.

Okay, I will go along with this..

Deleted User wrote: »

In other words, he is asking for 'A' of other people which is really none of his, mine, yours or anyones business,

Ahh!! That is one mighty leap you made via "In other words..".

They are YOUR words, not anybody elses.

Here is where you are WRONG!

He, nor anybody else is asking for 'A' of other people. This has been said to you numerous times but your like a dog with a bone with it.

URL can correct me on this if I am getting him wrong, but all I see him wanting is more of an explanation on what his "B" crimes are, not what other's 'A', 'B', 'C' or even 'D' is.

OutlawPete

OutlawPete wrote: »

I didn't do well in Algebra, my Dad waterboarded me as a kid

Your missing out - algebra is fun!

URL can correct me on this if I am getting him wrong, but all I see him wanting is more of an explanation on what his "B" crimes are, not what other's 'A', 'B', 'C' or even 'D' is.

URL isn't happy with the response given by Dav.
Dav stated reasons, URL didn't accept them.

The only way to go into more detail is make the discussion relative, because the 'A' of Url is less then the 'A' of other people. He has been told that, but wants more detail.

Only way to give more details then is to make them relative, which isn't on and URL said he doesn't want.

So we remain in an circular impasse..

My name is URL

Dav wrote: »

Well (and I say this to everyone) if I haven't answered the question you want answered, please do come back to me - I honestly thought I'd covered all you'd asked, so my apologies for that.

Have I addressed your issues now with my previous post? I'd really like to put this to bed (and head home tbh )

Dav

Well I can't say that you haven't

I'd still disagree with some points... having to discipline people, becoming burnt out etc.. all that goes hand in hand with Modding, regardless of who is made Mod, and me not being able to adapt to that, I feel is an incorrect assumption, and loosing a user because of alienation is probably worse than them becoming burnt out tbh

But hey, it's over and done with now, and no amount of to-and-fro is going to change anyone's opinion

Dav

Well, there's nothing wrong with being at opposite ends of the issue as long as we have mutual understanding and it seems like we've thrashed it out as much as we need to here.

Dav

Tigger

whoever asked you originnally was acting above thier pay grade and they are the ones who should apologise for making you feel rejected

the admins cannot by defination be wrong and therefore owe you no explination or apology and that is why you got none.

My name is URL

Tigger wrote: »

whoever asked you originnally was acting above thier pay grade and they are the ones who should apologise for making you feel rejected

the admins cannot by defination be wrong and therefore owe you no explination or apology and that is why you got none.

I don't think AC was in the wrong, he may have been the reason why wires got crossed but I'm sure he was only doing what he thought was the right thing based on his experience of how things have been done in the past, he wasn't to know how things would develop

I certainly don't expect an apology from him one way or the other, or from anyone else for that matter

If nothing else it's a good thing that this happened, it means it won't happen again

I wonder if I'm on the "Never to be Mod" list now with Pighead They should just add Louth to that list!

Tigger

My name is URL wrote: »

I don't think AC was in the wrong, he may have been the reason why wires got crossed but I'm sure he was only doing what he thought was the right thing based on his experience of how things have been done in the past, he wasn't to know how things would develop

I certainly don't expect an apology from him one way or the other

i i don't think he was deliberatly or knowingly wrong but if his is not the final say then he shouldn't mentiopn it till it was definate, i'd feel sooo pissed if i thought that i was being given something i wanted then some uber authority figure took it away without explination. gotta bbe a real kick in the stomache

OutlawPete

Tigger wrote: »

i i don't think he was deliberatly or knowingly wrong but if his is not the final say then he shouldn't mentiopn it till it was definate, i'd feel sooo pissed if i thought that i was being given something i wanted then some uber authority figure took it away without explination. gotta bbe a real kick in the stomache

Same thing happened me.

In 1983 my brother told me he seen a BMX in the attic that was my xMas gift.

Turned out my mam had seen kids pulling wheelies on them and said no to it and what my bro seen was just a Super Deluxe

bonkey

My name is URL wrote: »

I know that in future, I personally will have little faith in how things are done though, and it seems that Admins have little faith in the Mods and users of the forum either

With respect, it seems that you had little faith in how things were done when you started this thread.

Since then, despite several Admins having repeatedly engaged to discuss the issue, and address a number of complaint over the past couple of hundred posts.

You've asked what this thread has achieved, and surmised that its probably nothing. What did you hope to achieve?

I would say that its achieved as much as any such thread can. It has led to a discussion which is food for thought. It has led to a number of things being clarified, which some people clearly weren't aware of...which is an improvement in transparency. It has been recognised as the type of thing that is worth improving on in the Feedforward forum when it arrives. The reasons for the breakdowns in communication were identified, and apologies offered.

That's hardly "nothing"...unless you had a specific something thats not in there.

You made it clear that you didn't start this in some attempt to be given the position you were turned down for....so honestly....what did you hope to achieve that you feel has been lost along the way?

My name is URL

bonkey wrote: »

With respect, it seems that you had little faith in how things were done when you started this thread.

I wouldn't have bothered starting the thread if that was the case

Since then, despite several Admins having repeatedly engaged to discuss the issue, and address a number of complaint over the past couple of hundred posts.

You've asked what this thread has achieved, and surmised that its probably nothing. What did you hope to achieve?

Well we'll see what it achieves, all I can see it ultimately achieving is that CMods will be on a tighter reign when charged with nominating Mods. What I hoped to achieve was to give the Mods and Userbase more voice when it comes to decisions on how the forums they post in are run, or at the very least honest answers from the start on why that cannot be the case.

The Sweeper

My name is URL wrote: »

Well we'll see what it achieves

All it's achieved for me is I don't want to ever be a poster on anything you might moderate in the future, because it's become obvious that if we ever fall out, your approach will be to go around in perpetual circles, reiterating your side of the argument, which will remain unshakeable no matter how many points are presented to you, and all that will remain for me to do is either capitulate or quit.

Tigger

The Sweeper wrote: »

All it's achieved for me is I don't want to ever be a poster on anything you might moderate in the future, because it's become obvious that if we ever fall out, your approach will be to go around in perpetual circles, reiterating your side of the argument, which will remain unshakeable no matter how many points are presented to you, and all that will remain for me to do is either capitulate or quit.

so he's perfect for the job

copacetic

The Sweeper wrote: »

All it's achieved for me is I don't want to ever be a poster on anything you might moderate in the future, because it's become obvious that if we ever fall out, your approach will be to go around in perpetual circles, reiterating your side of the argument, which will remain unshakeable no matter how many points are presented to you, and all that will remain for me to do is either capitulate or quit.

sounds like perfect mod/cmod or admin material to be fair.

Tigger

copacetic wrote: »

sounds like perfect mod/cmod or admin material to be fair.

snap

bonkey

My name is URL wrote: »

Well we'll see what it achieve or at the very least honest answers from the start on why that cannot be the case.

Reading back through the thread, the first Admin to engage in discussion was Dav, making sure it was okay with you to discuss the details. This was followed by OscarBravo, who said from the start that the opinions you refer to are taken into account, but that they were not the only factor and that ultimately the decision is a call made by the admins.

You responded with a comment about how there should be some compromise, which was followed very shortly by deVore making it very clear that not only is moderator selection not about user popularity, but why its not....and also referring to how Feedforward should tackel issues like this.

Dav came next, again saying how Feedforward should look at this type of issue.

I'm at a loss as to how you can suggest that there was a lack of answers from the start on this issue, when the first gamut of posts were all addressing and answering this exact point.

I'm not trying to pick a fight here, just so we're clear. I think there are lessons to be learned, and improvements to be won. I'm just trying to nudge you to see what other lessons can be learned and what other improvements can be won, (given that this is Feedback).

My name is URL

bonkey wrote: »

Reading back through the thread, the first Admin to engage in discussion was Dav, making sure it was okay with you to discuss the details. This was followed by OscarBravo, who said from the start that the opinions you refer to are taken into account, but that they were not the only factor and that ultimately the decision is a call made by the admins.

You responded with a comment about how there should be some compromise, which was followed very shortly by deVore making it very clear that not only is moderator selection not about user popularity, but why its not....and also referring to how Feedforward should tackel issues like this.

Dav came next, again saying how Feedforward should look at this type of issue.

I'm at a loss as to how you can suggest that there was a lack of answers from the start on this issue, when the first gamut of posts were all addressing and answering this exact point.

I'm not trying to pick a fight here, just so we're clear. I think there are lessons to be learned, and improvements to be won. I'm just trying to nudge you to see what other lessons can be learned and what other improvements can be won, (given that this is Feedback).

You're seeing my reasoning from a perspective that only begins with the thread. It's been nearly a month since I was contacted by a Cmod asking if I wanted to be Mod because they needed one and felt I was a good choice, and 5 months since I was first told by a Mod in AH that they wanted me to join the team.

The Sweeper

@ Copacetic and Tigger - but it goes full circle then, doesn't it? If that's how you feel, you should accept that you need to either capitulate, or quit...

bonkey

My name is URL wrote: »

You're seeing my reasoning from a perspective that only begins with the thread.

No...I'm seeing it form a perspective of when you first apparently asked the question.

Regardless of what went on before that, it would seem somewhat unrealistic to expect that answers be available before the question was asked...

Looked at from a different perspective, admins have always had the final say on mod appointments. The question as to why this is so, or why the wishes of the posters at large, or the mods of the forum in question, or (more recently) the cmods of the category only carry the weight they do....that question has existed as long as we've had mods. I'm not sure that there's ever been any attempt at concealing this...although I welcome the current attempts to add increase transparency to the definition (and maybe even working) of such processes.

I don't think any of these perspectives, including yours, are invalid. I would, however, point out that this is Feedback and not whatever-it-is-they-renamed-Hepdesk-to. From my perspective, this would suggest that your particular grievance should take a back seat (so to speak) to the larger question.

bonkey

Tigger wrote: »

so he's perfect for the job

Speaking personally, I'd never want to work with a co-mod who had an unshakeable belief in the correctness of every action they took.

This isn't suggesting I agree with the post you were responding to. It is, rather, an observation of what I believe make good moderator qualities.

Personally, I will always argue my perspective....but I can be convinced that I'm wrong. Even when that doesn't happen, I often end up reviewing the basis of how I make decisions, to try and make better ones over time.

I'm by no means a perfect mod, but seriously...anyone who is "unshakeable" isn't one either.

pickarooney

Dav's post (271) is as complete and resonable as I think it's possible to get.

If MNIU had been PMed that exact text from the get-go (and it's a world away from the vague reasons apparently given and which have given rise to pages and pages of 'what did I do wrong') this thread would surely never have seen the light of day.

If anything useful is to come of the thread it would be that - reply to candidates clearly and on time and they have no cause to feel aggrieved.

Tigger

pickarooney wrote: »

Dav's post (271) is as complete and resonable as I think it's possible to get.

If MNIU had been PMed that exact text from the get-go (and it's a world away from the vague reasons apparently given and which have given rise to pages and pages of 'what did I do wrong') this thread would surely never have seen the light of day.

If anything useful is to come of the thread it would be that - reply to candidates clearly and on time and they have no cause to feel aggrieved.

i think that if any sorta pm had been sent this thread would not have happened, but that would mean we lived in a different boards


mabey this feedforward (stupid name based on the flashback/flashforward program) will help but i fear it'll be a box ticking exercise

Tigger

bonkey wrote: »

Speaking personally, I'd never want to work with a co-mod who had an unshakeable belief in the correctness of every action they took.

This isn't suggesting I agree with the post you were responding to. It is, rather, an observation of what I believe make good moderator qualities.

Personally, I will always argue my perspective....but I can be convinced that I'm wrong. Even when that doesn't happen, I often end up reviewing the basis of how I make decisions, to try and make better ones over time.

I'm by no means a perfect mod, but seriously...anyone who is "unshakeable" isn't one either.

yet they have risen to the highest echelons(sp?)

minidazzler

bonkey wrote: »

Speaking personally, I'd never want to work with a co-mod who had an unshakeable belief in the correctness of every action they took.

This isn't suggesting I agree with the post you were responding to. It is, rather, an observation of what I believe make good moderator qualities.

Personally, I will always argue my perspective....but I can be convinced that I'm wrong. Even when that doesn't happen, I often end up reviewing the basis of how I make decisions, to try and make better ones over time.

I'm by no means a perfect mod, but seriously...anyone who is "unshakeable" isn't one either.

Noone said he was unshakeable, he is unshakeable on this particular issue maybe, we all have strongly held beliefs right?

copacetic

The Sweeper wrote: »

@ Copacetic and Tigger - but it goes full circle then, doesn't it? If that's how you feel, you should accept that you need to either capitulate, or quit...

agreed, but quitting and not capitulating is the way to keep your sanity;)

(you've still got yours, right?:pac:)