Super Mods!!!

StupidLikeAFox

And the prison forum is only for prisoners?

Asok

Ecksor for admin!

Stabshauptmann

Sangre

Rofl! That brings back some memories Asok.

I should be a Super-mod...to...eh...mix it up!

amp

Mercury_Tilt wrote:

This post has been deleted.

Yeah, because being on Tilt's list is a sure fire gaurantee of supermodship. Let's face it Tilt would never nominate me for personal reasons rather than my ability to moderate. I know this, everybody else knows this, so let's not pretend it's anything else.

Suffice is to say I'd rather stay on topic and I shall. No real value in pointing out i used a well know phrase "power corrupts" rather than actually stating mods were corrupt. But sure if thats the "picking point" Need an example?? gave an example. Hardly corruption par se but it suited what I mean originally rather than amps decided version.

Gandalf was corrupt because he edited a post in a forum of which he is the catagory moderator. I believe he was acting in the interests of boards. You chose to define it as one moderator stepping into anothers territory which is complete garbage given that no moderator should see a forum as their territory. If they do then that's closer to corruption than Gandalfs actions.

What can you do tbh. No pleaseing some people. Perhaps two example would have done it... we will never know... or perhaps that would not have sufficed either... again we will never know.... I could take an educated guess though...

One actual example would suffice.

For my next trick... Ill may pull up a quote from a concerned party stating "attack the post and not the poster".... the irony.....

You're the one that claimed to be doing something for the good of the community. I merely highlighted examples of things you do and have done in the past that have not helped this community. Attack the poster when it's in context baby.

Duh..duh...duh!!!!! Or I may not.

I prefer the topic at hand!

I don't believe I'm off-topic. I'm replying to your original post and the content within it.

azezil

noone ever votes for me

mad m

azezil wrote:

noone ever votes for me

Azezil i'm going to ask you to leave the Hacienda,but before you go i want to know.Are you Gay or Straight?.


put Azezil on Super Mod list......

Beruthiel

Mercury_Tilt wrote:

This post has been deleted.

I think that’s a pretty unfair thing to say Mercie.
I don’t see it as a popularity contest, rather it’s probably just more of a fact that people tend to vote for Mods who’s experience they know – what I mean by that is, I cannot claim to know well every Mod on Boards because I do not frequent their forums. There are probably many good ones I don’t know because of this. Hence I voted for people I know in this context. What other feasible way would you have had in mind?

Mercury_Tilt

This post has been deleted.

bonkey

gandalf wrote:

The only thing I agree with you on is the choice of bonkey as one of the "Super Mods" who I think would be an absolutely excellent choice.

Yes yes. Pick me. I want the job...and thus by my own criteria should be excluded.

Seriously...I'd be a terrible choice. The fact that I'm not a mod of anything should hint towards that.

jc

ecksor

bonkey wrote:

Seriously though....if you're in any way criticising the mods for not being able to suggest "super-mods" from within their own ranks without it turning into a popularity contest....how the hell do you think the users can suggest super-mods without it being flawed in exactly the same way?

The phrase "turkeys voting for christmas" comes to mind. Still, there's definitely potential for some good suggestions to come from the users at large on boards and transparency of how the boards are going to be organised is a good thing in this case.

vinnyfitz

What will the supermods be expected to do?

zenith

I thought I was keeping a very low profile, which is what I think moderators should do. If you make too much noise, it becomes the forum versus the moderator, and life's too short. Speak softly, and carry a big stick.

I also think that supermods should show an ability to police policy, and a disinterest in making it: it's how most political and policing systems work, hand-in-hand.

For what it's worth, I know DeVore from well before boards, so I'd consider myself unsuitable for promotion: if the admins asked for my advice, I'd prefer they didn't promote any more 'insiders', but picked from the community proper, and would exclude myself for that reason.

I also think that this discussion should be carried out in plain view.

zenith

uberwolf

zenith wrote:

I'd prefer they didn't promote any more 'insiders', but picked from the community proper

what do you mean by insiders? - because if you mean to exclude all mods then your suggestion is flawed. I say this because being a moderator first should be an absolute prerequisite for this role. How else is this new tier of user to be vetted? trained? have the experience?

As for personal friends - that may not be inappropriate either. This site is a private entity. Owned by a few, rather than belonging to the masses. Whilst the admins strive to make that distinction invisible, fiercly protecting free-speech it is inappopriate to believe that the site is there for everyone to rule. It is their decision who or whom takes on this role. Friendship is not a qualification - but it may provide the element of trust that is going to be required to allow them hand over the new set of keys.

This persons job will be invisible to most, behind the scenes, with the occasional spammer bust. Consequently the community may have no perspective on it.

Conversely, your point re: mods keeping their head down means that this discussion has validity. A good mod may have a low profile recognised by their forum users only, not necessarily the other mods.

Hobart

Ah mercie.....

If the rules had been different I know you would have included me in that initial list . However the rules state that you cannot vote for yourself so,,,

As for nobody voting for Hobbes, your wrong. Re-read the thread. As for it being a popularity contest, imo, the process was started the way it was, it was only ever going to be a popularity contest.

I think our esteemed ex-admin summed it up with his reference to yuletide. ^

Again, imo, the admins had little choice in the way the nominations where structured. Imagine the case where the admins go off too, oh lets say, Shanahans on the Green. After copious amounts of Chateau neff Du Pape and a nice Baileys ice cream desert they decide to nominate (e.g.) Merc as one of the new supermods. It is announced on the mod board. Could you imagine the amount of consternation and ****e they would have to put up with? All the "why him?" "he's a bad choice.", "why don't we have a say?" type posts that would arrive? People seem to think the "higher up" one rises in the ranking, the more popular they become. Or the more respect the can command.

How many times have we seen people asking how to become mods, asking for toaster forums, etc... We have even had one poster here expressing his desire to be an admin????And he was serious.

It's all about popularity, power, self worth etc.... Leave them off I say.

As for the "nominations", I won't comment on some of the other nominations, and some are laughable imo, but of the 5 I "put forward" I have had "run in's" with 4 of them. However there "style" of moderation and presence here in something I had borne in mind will typing in thier names.

As for your ability to stir it up, rofl, keep it up.

Giblet

I'd do it in a second if I didn't have to overcome the giant wall of the super-clique

HAHA

zenith

uberwolf wrote:

what do you mean by insiders? - because if you mean to exclude all mods then your suggestion is flawed.

I don't mean to exclude all mods: the opportunity to promote from within the community is too good to miss, though. While we're all friends here, some are more friendly than others: and I think that that's not a basis to make a recruitment decision in a community of this size. Future expandability is important, and now's a good time to make those decisions.

uberwolf

from an organisational perspective this site has tiers.

I emphasise organisational because Mods are no more important than newbies in the grand scheme of things.

To launch in someone who has no experience of moderating and allow them ban people from the site and allow them access to the boards database is a recipe for disaster. The only means the admins have of assessing someone is through their moderating background.

However important the community is, ultimately we're guests of the owners of the site. Those owners are proposing handing over a spare set of keys to their fiefdom. The community perspective on the suitability of users is less useful than the moderators. Which is why you've seen my name crop here as a potential when it didn't on the moderator board.

i do agree that I'd also like to see the thought process for the sites development clarified at times, and there are probably hundreds of people who would willingly and honestly give of their time to improve this place (other than the mods who do this already).

But you cann't parachute in somebody to this role. Trust needs to be earned, suitability needs to be vetted. Moderatorship appears to me to be the only vehicle to achieve this. Have you an alternative in mind?

Stabshauptmann

it shall be a race around the world...the queen herself will draw the checkred flag

BuffyBot

Off on a tangent:

The problem with boards as an expanding community is that it's caught between two stools. It's a private entity with an active user base that many commercial sites would kill for. The continuing growth of the site puts a lot of strain on the "old" informal ways of doing things, as we've seen lately with the Helpdesk replacing the help forum.

To launch in someone who has no experience of moderating and allow them ban people from the site and allow them access to the boards database is a recipe for disaster.

Although moderation experience on boards would be hugely beneficial to whoever takes the role, if you find the right person, they could perform without it. Your point is valid too - find the wrong person, and it can all go to crap. I've seen it happen elsewhere.

jesus_thats_gre

I want to be a mod so I get 4 stars

The Muppet

uberwolf wrote:

The community perspective on the suitability of users is less useful than the moderators. Which is why you've seen my name crop here as a potential when it didn't on the moderator board.

I don't agree with you there Uberwolf. Choosing the right "supermod" is very important for the future of this site. I don't believe you need to be part of the old guard to be able to Mod in an impartial and reasoned way which imo is the most important aspect of modding. I mentioned youself And Mike65 because from my experience that is how you both do things. I don't believe you would be a politic's mod if the Admins were not of the same opinion.

I fell the users are best positioned to comment on the Modding ability of individual moderators as they are the ones most aware of how they go about it. There may be other criteria that the admins will want to take into account before appointing anyone but how the new supermod interacts with the rest of the community will be a prime concern in putting the right people in place.

WhiteWashMan

why not just bring back in the karma system for moderators.

all karma donations can be seen, and some osrt of reason must be given, and can only be given through a forum they moderate. that way, you will see wha the people who use that forum think of a mod.

lets face it, its all subjective. i have very different views from a lot of people on what a mod is for. and i happen to be in the majority of moderators who think this way. but then again, i was one of the first batch of moderators introduced, and i dont think i have had a complaint yet
maybe i do know something about modding after all!

PiE

'Megamod' would make a better name.

Crash

the way this conversations going - it has to be said sooner or later. cant believe no one has used this word yet. i dont agree with it, it just needs to get out of the way.

CLIQUE

WhiteWashMan

well, i think you should wait for whatever happens before you bandy things around.

you may be pleasantly surprised at what happens.

Giblet

crash_000 wrote:

the way this conversations going - it has to be said sooner or later. cant believe no one has used this word yet. i dont agree with it, it just needs to get out of the way.

CLIQUE

No-one even reads my posts.

Civilian_Target

I don't quite see the need for super mods I have to admit, although that's possibly because the existing supermods work 25 hours a day on muppet banning, I dunno.

From my experience of boards I have to admit I'm surprised that Biohazard, Karl Hungus and Kali aren't on your list. That said, I guess, the mods you see are dependant on the boards you browse...

Gordon

Merc, yer a strange wee laddie.

Sleepy

To be perfectly honest I can see some of Merc's point. I can think of one or two mods who go on little ego trips every now and then, or allow personal feelings towards someone to cloud their modding, yet it's not something the general user base (particularly newbies) will always feel in a position to point out as many mods seem to have gotten their position through their popularity and turning half of a board against you isn't something too many users enjoy (though I seem to be an exception to this at times! )