Report, edit, etc...Posted by BeeR_KeG on 2006-03-05 at 11:56:19
Ok, I assume that we've all read http://www.staredit.net/index.php?showtopic=27363, especially DEAD's, Yoshi's, Moose's and "Kellimu's" posts in that thread and throurouly analized them.
The thread basically blew what was left of the finger nail of the little finger of my left foot that was scrapped of by running barefoot on the street.
Here's a few summarized points and my conclusions about each of those.
1) New Admin
Yoshi requested a new Admin to help Moose out, many people inmediately nominated me for the position even though I've been a bit inactive during the past few weeks. I'll gladly take the position if I'm to be appointed to it, just know that I won't be coding for a while because I don't have enough PHP knowledge to do much.
2) New Global Moderators
While everyone was asking for a new Admin, Moose rejected the idea and instead planned to add 2~3 Global Mods. Who are we going to add? I recomend Cheeze, Rantent and CaptainWill. The only problem I see with this is that people will still think that we only add old time friends and members of SeN, maybe we should add a newer member, that knows the rules and is respected by both the members and Staff. The first person to come to my mind is Doodan, but there might be a better candidate.
3) Crime and Punishment
Okay, people are complaining about how biased we are against members when punishing them. I propose that we do one of two things:
a) Get very strict, doesn't matter what was done, with what purpose or manner, we will take down anyone.
b) Change the rules
Personally, I'd rather go with option A.
4) Double Accounts
The hardest of all 4 points simply because of Proxies and changing IP addresses. We can determine if it's a double account by using the ISP information, which takes some time to analyze and determine wether or not it's a double account. DEAD suggested a pretty good method to prevent double accounts but it has it's flaws, like the following:
a) He suggested adding new people to the Staff roster to fill the job. In essence, we would be giving members' IP numbers and e-mails to way too many people.
b) It slows down member registrations and could essentially, stop them.
I suggest that a similar system be implemented, but that a member doesn't have to wait until a Staff//Admin accepts them, they will just stay in a "Waiting to be accepted" section until we check if it's a double account. They will still have the same priviledges as a normal members. This would also make our descisions more accurate because we can easily determine it by post IP numbers and posting pattersn. The people who would have access to this are the people who already do so, Admins and Globals.
The thread basically blew what was left of the finger nail of the little finger of my left foot that was scrapped of by running barefoot on the street.
Here's a few summarized points and my conclusions about each of those.
1) New Admin
Yoshi requested a new Admin to help Moose out, many people inmediately nominated me for the position even though I've been a bit inactive during the past few weeks. I'll gladly take the position if I'm to be appointed to it, just know that I won't be coding for a while because I don't have enough PHP knowledge to do much.
2) New Global Moderators
While everyone was asking for a new Admin, Moose rejected the idea and instead planned to add 2~3 Global Mods. Who are we going to add? I recomend Cheeze, Rantent and CaptainWill. The only problem I see with this is that people will still think that we only add old time friends and members of SeN, maybe we should add a newer member, that knows the rules and is respected by both the members and Staff. The first person to come to my mind is Doodan, but there might be a better candidate.
3) Crime and Punishment
Okay, people are complaining about how biased we are against members when punishing them. I propose that we do one of two things:
a) Get very strict, doesn't matter what was done, with what purpose or manner, we will take down anyone.
b) Change the rules
Personally, I'd rather go with option A.
4) Double Accounts
The hardest of all 4 points simply because of Proxies and changing IP addresses. We can determine if it's a double account by using the ISP information, which takes some time to analyze and determine wether or not it's a double account. DEAD suggested a pretty good method to prevent double accounts but it has it's flaws, like the following:
a) He suggested adding new people to the Staff roster to fill the job. In essence, we would be giving members' IP numbers and e-mails to way too many people.
b) It slows down member registrations and could essentially, stop them.
I suggest that a similar system be implemented, but that a member doesn't have to wait until a Staff//Admin accepts them, they will just stay in a "Waiting to be accepted" section until we check if it's a double account. They will still have the same priviledges as a normal members. This would also make our descisions more accurate because we can easily determine it by post IP numbers and posting pattersn. The people who would have access to this are the people who already do so, Admins and Globals.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Voyager7456(MM) on 2006-03-05 at 12:04:47
QUOTE(BeeR_KeG @ Mar 5 2006, 11:56 AM)
Ok, I assume that we've all read http://www.staredit.net/index.php?showtopic=27363, especially DEAD's, Yoshi's, Moose's and "Kellimu's" posts in that thread and throurouly analized them.
The thread basically blew what was left of the finger nail of the little finger of my left foot that was scrapped of by running barefoot on the street.
Here's a few summarized points and my conclusions about each of those.
1) New Admin
Yoshi requested a new Admin to help Moose out, many people inmediately nominated me for the position even though I've been a bit inactive during the past few weeks. I'll gladly take the position if I'm to be appointed to it, just know that I won't be coding for a while because I don't have enough PHP knowledge to do much.
The thread basically blew what was left of the finger nail of the little finger of my left foot that was scrapped of by running barefoot on the street.
Here's a few summarized points and my conclusions about each of those.
1) New Admin
Yoshi requested a new Admin to help Moose out, many people inmediately nominated me for the position even though I've been a bit inactive during the past few weeks. I'll gladly take the position if I'm to be appointed to it, just know that I won't be coding for a while because I don't have enough PHP knowledge to do much.
You'd make a good admin.
QUOTE
2) New Global Moderators
While everyone was asking for a new Admin, Moose rejected the idea and instead planned to add 2~3 Global Mods. Who are we going to add? I recomend Cheeze, Rantent and CaptainWill. The only problem I see with this is that people will still think that we only add old time friends and members of SeN, maybe we should add a newer member, that knows the rules and is respected by both the members and Staff. The first person to come to my mind is Doodan, but there might be a better candidate.
While everyone was asking for a new Admin, Moose rejected the idea and instead planned to add 2~3 Global Mods. Who are we going to add? I recomend Cheeze, Rantent and CaptainWill. The only problem I see with this is that people will still think that we only add old time friends and members of SeN, maybe we should add a newer member, that knows the rules and is respected by both the members and Staff. The first person to come to my mind is Doodan, but there might be a better candidate.
I agree, those are good choices. Doodan is a good choice for moderator, but I'm not sure about Global Moderator... maybe make him mod of Null/Light Discussion first and see how he does?
QUOTE
3) Crime and Punishment
Okay, people are complaining about how biased we are against members when punishing them. I propose that we do one of two things:
a) Get very strict, doesn't matter what was done, with what purpose or manner, we will take down anyone.
b) Change the rules
Personally, I'd rather go with option A.
Okay, people are complaining about how biased we are against members when punishing them. I propose that we do one of two things:
a) Get very strict, doesn't matter what was done, with what purpose or manner, we will take down anyone.
b) Change the rules
Personally, I'd rather go with option A.
I think that harder punishments might be needed... I'm never too sure when moderating how harsh punishments should be, so I think I tend to let people off lightly.
I also think that making warn logs public might be a good idea. Maybe less people would complain that member X got banned if they saw Member X had reached 100% 3 times.
QUOTE
4) Double Accounts
The hardest of all 4 points simply because of Proxies and changing IP addresses. We can determine if it's a double account by using the ISP information, which takes some time to analyze and determine wether or not it's a double account. DEAD suggested a pretty good method to prevent double accounts but it has it's flaws, like the following:
a) He suggested adding new people to the Staff roster to fill the job. In essence, we would be giving members' IP numbers and e-mails to way too many people.
b) It slows down member registrations and could essentially, stop them.
I suggest that a similar system be implemented, but that a member doesn't have to wait until a Staff//Admin accepts them, they will just stay in a "Waiting to be accepted" section until we check if it's a double account. They will still have the same priviledges as a normal members. This would also make our descisions more accurate because we can easily determine it by post IP numbers and posting pattersn. The people who would have access to this are the people who already do so, Admins and Globals.
[right][snapback]439737[/snapback][/right]
The hardest of all 4 points simply because of Proxies and changing IP addresses. We can determine if it's a double account by using the ISP information, which takes some time to analyze and determine wether or not it's a double account. DEAD suggested a pretty good method to prevent double accounts but it has it's flaws, like the following:
a) He suggested adding new people to the Staff roster to fill the job. In essence, we would be giving members' IP numbers and e-mails to way too many people.
b) It slows down member registrations and could essentially, stop them.
I suggest that a similar system be implemented, but that a member doesn't have to wait until a Staff//Admin accepts them, they will just stay in a "Waiting to be accepted" section until we check if it's a double account. They will still have the same priviledges as a normal members. This would also make our descisions more accurate because we can easily determine it by post IP numbers and posting pattersn. The people who would have access to this are the people who already do so, Admins and Globals.
[right][snapback]439737[/snapback][/right]
Maybe also have some sort of automated PM that PMs an admin/global if the IP address matches one already on record?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by DT_Battlekruser on 2006-03-05 at 12:52:19
1) A new admin might be useful, although I'm not really sure how much it would help.
2) I'm strongly opposed to a large influx of new Global Moderators. I think a large part of what people complain about are biased punishments and a lack of overall consistency. There's the expression "Too many cooks spoil the soup", and I think if you get many more Global Moderators we'll get a rampant problem of inconsistency in punishments. At most, one should be added, and if added my opinion is it should be Ratent. To solve our problem, I think it is best to make sure we have active specific-forum moderators and make sure they actually warn people when taking action. Often times I see utter spam topics in Null locked without any action against the member directly (for example, PacmanEx's topic about a list of noobs). Perhaps the best solution is to promote a Global Moderator to Administrator and promote Rantent to Global Moderator. Not to be a narcissist, but I'm not positive BeeR is the best choice. He among all of us probably has the most going on in his life and can't be as active, although in his actions when he takes them I'm sure he'd be the most suitable.
3) I agree; it's time we battened down the hatches. Yoshi was a lot more strict in his day, although I think the biggest problem of SEN is this: Too much focus on the Other forums, and none on the Mapping section. I myself haven't helped anybody in Assistance for weeks, being too busy trying to keep Other under control. The site seems to be swaying away from mapmaking, and this is probably due in part to a falling in the popularity of Starcraft (I myself haven't played it in months; not since I reformatted my hard drive and haven't bothered to install it). SEN is almost becoming more of a political forum than a mapping site. There is, however, nothing that can be done to change this, so we must handle the situation as best we can.
4) We receive, on average, eight registrations per day. If you can actually find senior staff willing to throw their life into this, the idea might work (I flatly decline doing this), but mostly you'll get a huge pile of waiting members as everyone is too lazy to check. It is simpler to follow Yoshi's path and send letters of complaint to the miscreant's ISPs, as there are only four or five people that have ever threatened us with constant multiple accounts.
2) I'm strongly opposed to a large influx of new Global Moderators. I think a large part of what people complain about are biased punishments and a lack of overall consistency. There's the expression "Too many cooks spoil the soup", and I think if you get many more Global Moderators we'll get a rampant problem of inconsistency in punishments. At most, one should be added, and if added my opinion is it should be Ratent. To solve our problem, I think it is best to make sure we have active specific-forum moderators and make sure they actually warn people when taking action. Often times I see utter spam topics in Null locked without any action against the member directly (for example, PacmanEx's topic about a list of noobs). Perhaps the best solution is to promote a Global Moderator to Administrator and promote Rantent to Global Moderator. Not to be a narcissist, but I'm not positive BeeR is the best choice. He among all of us probably has the most going on in his life and can't be as active, although in his actions when he takes them I'm sure he'd be the most suitable.
3) I agree; it's time we battened down the hatches. Yoshi was a lot more strict in his day, although I think the biggest problem of SEN is this: Too much focus on the Other forums, and none on the Mapping section. I myself haven't helped anybody in Assistance for weeks, being too busy trying to keep Other under control. The site seems to be swaying away from mapmaking, and this is probably due in part to a falling in the popularity of Starcraft (I myself haven't played it in months; not since I reformatted my hard drive and haven't bothered to install it). SEN is almost becoming more of a political forum than a mapping site. There is, however, nothing that can be done to change this, so we must handle the situation as best we can.
4) We receive, on average, eight registrations per day. If you can actually find senior staff willing to throw their life into this, the idea might work (I flatly decline doing this), but mostly you'll get a huge pile of waiting members as everyone is too lazy to check. It is simpler to follow Yoshi's path and send letters of complaint to the miscreant's ISPs, as there are only four or five people that have ever threatened us with constant multiple accounts.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by CaptainWill on 2006-03-05 at 17:11:14
I think that member confidence in our ability to do our job is at an all time low, thanks to the numerous complaint threads which have sprung up in recent weeks.
We've been accused of bias most frequently, and inactivity. Whilst I can accept the second accusation (there are times when I really can't be online - I'm away some weekends, for example), the first one stings a little, because I try to be as reasonable as possible.
What I would suggest is a Moderator's Code of Conduct. The members have a basic code of conduct written in the FAQs which both they and we have to follow, so why not have a mod-specific one as well?
If we have a code of conduct then we know where we stand, and so do the members of SEN. When we are accused, it will be fairly if we have breached our own rules, and our decisions will be reversed.
Furthermore, confidence will hopefully be inspired if we allow the members to help us put together this code of conduct, so that it doesn't appear to be a document produced by the mods themselves.
What do you all think of this idea?
EDIT: http://www.streamofthought.co.uk/modcode.html <--- My first draft of the code.
We've been accused of bias most frequently, and inactivity. Whilst I can accept the second accusation (there are times when I really can't be online - I'm away some weekends, for example), the first one stings a little, because I try to be as reasonable as possible.
What I would suggest is a Moderator's Code of Conduct. The members have a basic code of conduct written in the FAQs which both they and we have to follow, so why not have a mod-specific one as well?
If we have a code of conduct then we know where we stand, and so do the members of SEN. When we are accused, it will be fairly if we have breached our own rules, and our decisions will be reversed.
Furthermore, confidence will hopefully be inspired if we allow the members to help us put together this code of conduct, so that it doesn't appear to be a document produced by the mods themselves.
What do you all think of this idea?
EDIT: http://www.streamofthought.co.uk/modcode.html <--- My first draft of the code.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by BeeR_KeG on 2006-03-05 at 17:19:49
Get started on writting for that Moderator handbook 
Report, edit, etc...Posted by LegacyWeapon on 2006-03-05 at 20:14:40
QUOTE(CaptainWill @ Mar 5 2006, 05:11 PM)
http://www.streamofthought.co.uk/modcode.html <--- My first draft of the code.
[right][snapback]439958[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]439958[/snapback][/right]
QUOTE
100% Warn Level: Sending of a PM requesting that the offender reform his/her behaviour. 3-Day suspension. Resetting of Warn Level to 0%
How about "Resetting of Warn Level to 20% more than original start. When 100% is reached and reset is also going to be 100%, member shall be banned."Or something like that.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Mini Moose 2707 on 2006-03-05 at 20:15:45
1. I don't think a new admin is really what we need. The reactivation of the IP tool has boosted the powers of Global Moderators. I don't really see much that another admin would do that he couldn't as a global moderator.
2. There is a new global moderator. I'm also planning to add new normal moderators. Moogle is taking charge of the mapping section, and I have EzDay ready for some forums which currently have yet to be decided (going off on a tangent - any objections or opinions?).
3. The thing with the rules are just that... there aren't many rules written down besides the antiquated FAQs forum. My intentions were to encourage independent thinking among moderation, so they wouldn't have to fall back on a book. While I haven't always encouraged this, it has led to some confliction in decisions, confusion in situations, and various other difficulties. I do feel moderation is becoming somewhat lax and that we need to take more action. This is why I started the moderation handbook topic. While not needing to fall back on a book is nice, it doesn't hurt to have it when you need it. Think of it as a calculator with low batteries and no spares.
4. This one is my fault. When I first heard of Bun Bun and the others, I didn't investigate further, instead I let it sit for weeks. I never thought of checking for proxies and everything until it was too late. Either way, this makes me learn.
2. There is a new global moderator. I'm also planning to add new normal moderators. Moogle is taking charge of the mapping section, and I have EzDay ready for some forums which currently have yet to be decided (going off on a tangent - any objections or opinions?).
3. The thing with the rules are just that... there aren't many rules written down besides the antiquated FAQs forum. My intentions were to encourage independent thinking among moderation, so they wouldn't have to fall back on a book. While I haven't always encouraged this, it has led to some confliction in decisions, confusion in situations, and various other difficulties. I do feel moderation is becoming somewhat lax and that we need to take more action. This is why I started the moderation handbook topic. While not needing to fall back on a book is nice, it doesn't hurt to have it when you need it. Think of it as a calculator with low batteries and no spares.
4. This one is my fault. When I first heard of Bun Bun and the others, I didn't investigate further, instead I let it sit for weeks. I never thought of checking for proxies and everything until it was too late. Either way, this makes me learn.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by CaptainWill on 2006-03-05 at 20:17:59
I still think that a sort of written constitution is a good idea for SEN. Like you said, there's a lot of confusion, and it isn't just the mods getting confused.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Revelade on 2006-03-11 at 22:43:41
I believe your page with the listings make perfect sense and is a good step towards the future.
But then you begin to realize, does the function of moderators change? I happen to think so. Right now, moderators are the deciders AND the doers. Rules take away the decision portion and moderators become people who do as they are told. This is something any decent person can do, however there always must be safeguards to prevent a moderator abuse.
I consider myself an open-minded guy. If someone says my religion is wrong, I try to see it from his point of view and why he would say that to me. I could give an argument, but at the end of the day, he is the one that decides what he believes, so I let him be.
In relation to these forums, there's people that consider this and that flaming, but the rest of the people don't seem to notice that is happening. Then there's people that might be offended by something like writing messages in a certain color than white.
It must be established that we must not punish for the sake of punishing, but to teach the individual it is a bad thing and to show an example to would-be offenders to change their actions.
My point is that what CaptainWill is doing is great. Being ruled by the opinions of IP, Moose or DBTK leads to vague uncertainties and chaos when they are gone. Rules help establish something everyone can agree on, without confusion, complaints or anything.
But then you begin to realize, does the function of moderators change? I happen to think so. Right now, moderators are the deciders AND the doers. Rules take away the decision portion and moderators become people who do as they are told. This is something any decent person can do, however there always must be safeguards to prevent a moderator abuse.
I consider myself an open-minded guy. If someone says my religion is wrong, I try to see it from his point of view and why he would say that to me. I could give an argument, but at the end of the day, he is the one that decides what he believes, so I let him be.
In relation to these forums, there's people that consider this and that flaming, but the rest of the people don't seem to notice that is happening. Then there's people that might be offended by something like writing messages in a certain color than white.
It must be established that we must not punish for the sake of punishing, but to teach the individual it is a bad thing and to show an example to would-be offenders to change their actions.
My point is that what CaptainWill is doing is great. Being ruled by the opinions of IP, Moose or DBTK leads to vague uncertainties and chaos when they are gone. Rules help establish something everyone can agree on, without confusion, complaints or anything.