Selection of Mods

Sharpshooter

Is there not a chance that URL could be given a probationary trial as mod of AHs?

Surely this would let admin see if he had changed his ways, (as it is being put to the regulars of AHs and URL).

Just a suggestion that could be acted on if Admin were so inclined.

Should he make a mess of it the posters in AHs would be the very ones to say he is not the man for the job.

And I am talking about the regular posters here, not trolls that make the usual complaints against the AH Mods.

Nevyn

minidazzler wrote: »

lol.

Technically the admins need no reason to not accept him, it's their site after all, but does anyone else feel like they seem to be clutching at straws? There still hasn't been one very good reason!

Maybe they have a good reason but don't' want to embrass him?
Discretion being the greater part of valour.

Sharpshooter

Thaedydal wrote: »

Maybe they have a good reason but don't' want to embrass him?
Discretion being the greater part of valour.

If that was the case, would they not have already told him via Pm?

In which case, if it was that bad would he have started this thread in the first place?

Discretion is one thing, but wouldn't the true valour be the admin stating to all interested parties what their reason are?

URL doesn't seem to mind.

K-9

Thaedydal wrote: »

Maybe they have a good reason but don't' want to embrass him?
Discretion being the greater part of valour.

Jaysus, it would need to be pretty bad Thaedydal!

An infraction is usually minor enough, people getting caught up in a thread. Manys a mod of a forum gets infractions while mods of another forum.

Trolling, I'd be less understandable of, though people cop on.

I've had a ban rescinded through pm's with a mod. They admitted it was because they were too touchy on an issue. Fair play and much appreciated.

Some posters wouldn't bother appealing or pm'ing.

Nevyn

Actually it used to be that you could as a mod get away with getting infractions and the odd ban here and there in forums you didn't mod but that has changed.

Over the last two years newer members of the site expect mods to be more exemplary and
to not get banned anywhere, which frankly has ruin a lot of my fun on the site cos
getting banned has become much more serious bizness.

A poster can get banned from a heap of forum or get a heap of bans from the same few forums and not be tought less of but a mod does it we get roasted, so the whole notion of that mods are just posters in other forums is a big steaming heap o shíte cos posters won't let us be.

But that may go off topic pretty quickly.

The admins could have seen posts he made in AH which are not inline with the charter or the fourm or the site or they see the need for AH to be steered in a certain manner and as a result went with more known quanties.

The ah mod team as been pretty unsettled of late with various mods stepping down and going with those who are currently mods and are a bit more experienced may seem like a better way to go then what was done previous which was a heap of new mods being let loose in AH.

Maybe next time around there will be a newbie mod appointed this time the admins have gone for those who's running forum has been established. That's thier call and it should be accepted.

K-9

Thaedydal wrote: »

Actually it used to be that you could as a mod get away with getting infractions and the odd ban here and there in forums you didn't mod but that has changed.

Over the last two years newer members of the site expect mods to be more exemplary and
to not get banned anywhere, which frankly has ruin a lot of my fun on the site cos
getting banned has become much more serious bizness.

A poster can get banned from a heap of forum or get a heap of bans from the same few forums and not be tought less of but a mod does it we get roasted, so the whole notion of that mods are just posters in other forums is a big steaming heap o shíte cos posters won't let us be.

But that may go off topic pretty quickly.

The admins could have seen posts he made in AH which are not inline with the charter or the fourm or the site or they see the need for AH to be steered in a certain manner and as a result went with more known quanties.

The ah mod team as been pretty unsettled of late with various mods stepping down and going with those who are currently mods and are a bit more experienced may seem like a better way to go then what was done previous which was a heap of new mods being let loose in AH.

Maybe next time around there will be a newbie mod appointed this time the admins have gone for those who's running forum has been established. That's thier call and it should be accepted.

I understand what you are saying about mods, definitely. I'd agree with you.

I don't buy the Admin line seeing things in AH Mods or CMods wouldn't see. Sorry, don't buy that one! The mods and CMods know AH better than the Admins.

Tbh, the mods stepping down are long term mods, not the newer mods. Most of the mods left are virgin mods!

From that, first time mods are more reliable, safer hands! You know what I mean. The longer term mods on AH seem to be more likely to go!

Maybe toeing the party line is more important?

Sharpshooter

K-9 wrote: »

Tbh, the mods stepping down are long term mods, not the newer mods. Most of the mods left are virgin mods!

From that, first time mods are more reliable, safer hands! You know what I mean.

Tar asked to be removed for the 100th time and then it was done.

Monty has not been online since around September last year.

Terry decided it wasn't for him.

Doc stepped down.

Frada said he would not be around as much, so he was given Cool Vid's.

AFAIK, javaboy's new job would take up too much time.

So you are stuck with the remaining mods, and Rabies is in a different time zone, so beware of late night posting.:p

K-9

Sharpshooter wrote: »

Tar asked to be removed for the 100th time and then it was done.

Monty has not been online since around September last year.

Terry decided it wasn't for him.

Doc stepped down.

Frada said he would not be around as much, so he was given Cool Vid's.

AFAIK, javaboy's new job would take up too much time.

So you are stuck with the remaining mods, and Rabies is in a different time zone, so beware of late night posting.:p

Yep, was aware of Monty, Tar and Javaboy. Kind of knew they were gone anyway, not really about in months.

Overheal

Monty has not been online since around September last year.

do we know if hes dead?

Poccington

Overheal wrote: »

This.

Im sure it wouldn't be the first time a poster had been modded while having a previous history of bans and infractions.

Or the first time a Cop had join the force with a previous conviction.

etc.

Before I became a Mod I recieved a 1 week ban in AH and then a 2 week ban in the Military forum... In the week that my ban was lifted from the Mil forum, I became a Mod in the Military forum.

If previous behaviour comes into play... **** knows how I ended up as a Mod when I did.

pickarooney

I honestly think that AH badly needs good posters and interesting threads far more than it does new moderators. It would be nice to think that the moderators themselves could be at least partly responsible for an improvement in the quality of content there, but the truth is that modding the place seems to be an endless task of cleaning, moving, deleting, merging and dealing with whingeing with barely any time to make a posting contribution.

I have a feeling that appointing low-input members with a bit of experience could be a very good thing.

The mod selection process should probably just (have) be(en) done with zero visible input from the forum itself and with no PMs to potential candidates until a shortlist of admin-approved members drawn up, at which point they should be contacted in descending order of preference with regards to taking up the job.

6th

pickarooney wrote: »

I honestly think that AH badly needs good posters and interesting threads far more than it does new moderators.

I have a feeling that appointing low-input members with a bit of experience could be a very good thing.

Have to say I agree with this. Let the good posters post. I've seen some great posters become great mods but at the cost of a good poster.

Thats not to say you cant be both, its just harder.

minidazzler

Sharpshooter wrote: »

Is there not a chance that URL could be given a probationary trial as mod of AHs?

Not a chance they would go back on their decision now methinks, they would view it as a sign of weakness.

Have the Admins now being saying they want more transparency in the running of this site? In the decision made? I don't think there has been much transparency here, just alot of reasons that aren't really all that good.

Sure he was banned from a few of the serious forums months ago, but that was a ages ago as far as the internet goes!

oscarBravo

I'm going to weigh in here again. This may not be a politically correct post, and it almost certainly won't be a popular one. I also don't claim to speak on behalf of the admin team here; this is my view.

This thread is dragging on and on, with lots of you seemingly of the view that we made a mistake in not appointing URL as AH mod, because you think he'd be a great moderator. I'm not sure why you think he'd be a great moderator, or what makes most of you think you're a better judge of what makes a good moderator than the admins, but I accept that you guys think that you're right and we're wrong.

I'm not sure what you're trying to achieve, though. Are you demanding that we go against our judgement and make him a moderator? Why is it so important to you that he be a moderator? (I'm also curious why it's so important to him that he be a moderator.) Is this just an exercise in people power; in trying to claim that the people entrusted by the site owners with the overall welfare of the site can't be trusted to have the best interests of your forum at heart?

I honestly don't understand what the fuss is about.

IITYWYBMAD

Poccington wrote: »

Before I became a Mod I recieved a 1 week ban in AH and then a 2 week ban in the Military forum... In the week that my ban was lifted from the Mil forum, I became a Mod in the Military forum.

If previous behaviour comes into play... **** knows how I ended up as a Mod when I did.

I think this ^^ more than anything else demonstrates the BS being trotted out by some Admins and some posters on this thread. There are mods (current mods) who operate quite well, and are currently banned from other forums. Past/current behavior obviously does come into it when making a decision, but be honest ffs.....it's a popularity contest most of the time.

If an Admin has a grudge against a certain user, that user gets black-balled. This is not the first time this has happened, and it won't be the last. So why don't ye all quit with the "we prefer you as a user, as you might loose the use of your humor" type BS because it simply does not ring true. Did you not prefer Dr B as a user? Terry? Frada?

Thaedydal wrote:

Over the last two years newer members of the site expect mods to be more exemplary

Where is the evidence of this?

oscarBravo

IITYWYBMAD wrote: »

Past/current behavior obviously does come into it when making a decision, but be honest ffs.....it's a popularity contest most of the time.

If an Admin has a grudge against a certain user, that user gets black-balled.

Which admin are you accusing of having a grudge against URL?

Smcgie

Can someone add a tag to this thread.. He's a few I thought of:

Mod beggars
My name is UR-no mod
Lazy Admin
Url for mod
AH crew v Admin
Thanks whores v admin


This thread is hilarious IMO

IITYWYBMAD

oscarBravo wrote: »

I'm going to weigh in here again. This may not be a politically correct post, and it almost certainly won't be a popular one. I also don't claim to speak on behalf of the admin team here; this is my view.

This thread is dragging on and on, with lots of you seemingly of the view that we made a mistake in not appointing URL as AH mod, because you think he'd be a great moderator. I'm not sure why you think he'd be a great moderator, or what makes most of you think you're a better judge of what makes a good moderator than the admins, but I accept that you guys think that you're right and we're wrong.

I think there are 2 main issues.

1) You have highlighted 1 above, and I don't know what those who are calling for him to be modded are hoping to achieve. I actually do not think that URL would take the gig if it was offered to him.

2) People are looking for an explanation as to why this was communicated so badly to the user concerned (and why it continues to be communicated so badly). I see no actual reasons as why this user was turned down for modding. There are some references to this, that and the other, but no actual reasons. There have been 3 Admins (AFAICS) posting on this thread, and not 1 has said "URL you where turned down because of X". Now that might set off another FFest of a thread, but so what. Handle it. Communication is the key here folks, and it does not take a genius to work that out.

IITYWYBMAD

oscarBravo wrote: »

Which admin are you accusing of having a grudge against URL?

Where did I say that an Admin did have a grudge against URL? Is your quoting of me supposed to demonstrate that?

Why don't you stop trying to pick holes in peoples posts, and deal with the actual issue?

Did you honestly expect me to answer that question, or are you trying to divert this thread elsewhere, or perhaps looking for a reason to lock it? FFS......

Ponster

IITYWYBMAD wrote: »

2) People are looking for an explanation as to why this was communicated so badly to the user concerned (and why it continues to be communicated so badly). I see no actual reasons as why this user was turned down for modding. There are some references to this, that and the other, but no actual reasons. There have been 3 Admins (AFAICS) posting on this thread, and not 1 has said "URL you where turned down because of X". Now that might set off another FFest of a thread, but so what. Handle it. Communication is the key here folks, and it does not take a genius to work that out.

> I see no actual reasons as why this user was turned down for modding.

I really don't think you're going to get any reasons. Why should the entire site know why someone wasn't picked to become mod?


> Communication is the key here folks, and it does not take a genius to work that out.

True, but communication between URL and the chmod/Admins....no one else.

oscarBravo

IITYWYBMAD wrote: »

2) People are looking for an explanation as to why this was communicated so badly to the user concerned (and why it continues to be communicated so badly).

I see no actual reasons as why this user was turned down for modding. There are some references to this, that and the other, but no actual reasons.

The reason the user was turned down for modding is that the administrators of the site - the people entrusted by the owners of the site - collectively decided that, in their considered opinion, he was not the best candidate for the job.

That's the reason. That's not the first time that the reason was given. It may not be a reason you agree with, but that doesn't make it not a reason, or even not a good reason.

There have been 3 Admins (AFAICS) posting on this thread, and not 1 has said "URL you where turned down because of X". Now that might set off another FFest of a thread, but so what. Handle it. Communication is the key here folks, and it does not take a genius to work that out.

URL, you were turned down because we don't believe that you are the right person to moderate After Hours at this time.

IITYWYBMAD wrote: »

Where did I say that an Admin did have a grudge against URL? Is your quoting of me supposed to demonstrate that?

So that was a complete off-topic tangent, with nothing whatsoever to do with the subject matter of this thread? Fair enough so.

My name is URL

oscarBravo wrote: »

(I'm also curious why it's so important to him that he be a moderator.)

It's not that important to me.. when I signed up here I didn't do it with the intention of becoming a moderator

What's important about all this for me is the fact that I'm being made out to be somebody that would be damaging to the forum if I was a Mod, that's quite hard to swallow. I've been very active in AH, I understand how the forum works, and I get on with the people that post in it

And before you say it, yes.. I know popularity doesn't count towards something like this

Again, the Mods of AH felt I was a good choice, regardless of how I post in that forum, so the reasons of 'not taking part in discussion' and 'the language I use', seem to me, to be sidestepping what you think is the real issue

Quazzie

oscarBravo wrote: »

The reason the user was turned down for modding is that the administrators of the site - the people entrusted by the owners of the site - collectively decided that, in their considered opinion, he was not the best candidate for the job.

Thats the decision that was reached, not the reason for the decision.

IITYWYBMAD

Ponster wrote: »

> I see no actual reasons as why this user was turned down for modding.

I really don't think you're going to get any reasons.


> Communication is the key here folks, and it does not take a genius to work that out.

True, but communication between URL and the chmod/Admins....no one else.

I'm pointing out the issues in response to OB's post, if you look at my post, you will see that. As for your communication "point", you really don't get it, do you?

Everybody has been communicating on this forum, Admins, Mods, Ex-Mods, Users etc...

The communication between URL, the CMods and Admins, were pretty much one way, until URL PM'd DaV. It's that lack of communication that is the issue, while the content is actually beside the point, or certainly the point of 99% of the users here.

IITYWYBMAD

oscarBravo wrote: »

The reason the user was turned down for modding is that the administrators of the site - the people entrusted by the owners of the site - collectively decided that, in their considered opinion, he was not the best candidate for the job.

That's the reason. That's not the first time that the reason was given. It may not be a reason you agree with, but that doesn't make it not a reason, or even not a good reason. URL, you were turned down because we don't believe that you are the right person to moderate After Hours at this time.

I think Quazzie has hit the nail of the head tbh.

So that was a complete off-topic tangent, with nothing whatsoever to do with the subject matter of this thread? Fair enough so.

No, it was not. Nor was it an attempt to connect two endpoints. I think you know what I was talking about, in fact I'm sure you know, but if you want to obfuscate, that's fine.

Nevyn

IITYWYBMAD wrote: »

Where is the evidence of this?

Yes in my pm box and the reported posts forum and being told by admins that getting banned from forums for the lulz is not acceptable.

Also being told in AH to stop posting and go back to the serious forums :mad:

oscarBravo

My name is URL wrote: »

What's important about all this for me is the fact that I'm being made out to be somebody that would be damaging to the forum if I was a Mod, that's quite hard to swallow.

I don't think any admin has suggested that you would be damaging to the forum.

I've been very active in AH, I understand how the forum works, and I get on with the people that post in it

And before you say it, yes.. I know popularity doesn't count towards something like this

It's a factor, but it's a long way from being the most important factor.

Again, the Mods of AH felt I was a good choice, regardless of how I post in that forum, so the reasons of 'not taking part in discussion' and 'the language I use', seem to me, to be sidestepping what you think is the real issue

The views of the existing mods are also a factor, but they don't get the final call either.

The mistake that was made here was allowing you to believe that you were going to be given the role before the admins had had their say. That's a mistake that we're going to try to make sure isn't made again.

LoLth

IITYWYBMAD wrote: »

Where did I say that an Admin did have a grudge against URL? Is your quoting of me supposed to demonstrate that?

Why don't you stop trying to pick holes in peoples posts, and deal with the actual issue?

Did you honestly expect me to answer that question, or are you trying to divert this thread elsewhere, or perhaps looking for a reason to lock it? FFS......

can I ask you to stay calm here? Admins are not "looking for a reason to lock" this thread. No-one has assigned motives to anyone yet and more than once posters have expressly pointed out that that is not their intent.

as for where you said and admin has a grudge

If an Admin has a grudge against a certain user, that user gets black-balled. This is not the first time this has happened,

From the wording it could easily be read to mean that "this" in "this is not the first time" refers to URLs application to be a mod. OscarBravo has every right to ask why you would think that.

This thread has been relatively civilised and rational thus far. Taking a minute before reacting to a post might be a good tactic at this point.

My name is URL

oscarBravo wrote: »

I don't think any admin has suggested that you would be damaging to the forum. It's a factor, but it's a long way from being the most important factor. The views of the existing mods are also a factor, but they don't get the final call either.

The mistake that was made here was allowing you to believe that you were going to be given the role before the admins had had their say. That's a mistake that we're going to try to make sure isn't made again.

All of those little factors add up, and I'd assume that collectively they become a fairly big factor, so it must have been a bloody massive factor to counter those..

When people say things like 'we have the best interests of the site to take into account' it implies that making me a Mod would be against the best interests of the site, ergo - me being a mod would be damaging to the site

LoLth

ok, this is going in circles.

URL, I've asked Dav if its ok to post the PMs that were initially discussed. Is it ok with you if I do so?