Moderators: 'junior' and 'senior' or just 'moderator'?

Let yourself be heard in our official polls!
Locked

Should there be junior and senior moderator or just moderator?

Keep as it is: juniors and seniors
20
42%
Merge the two and just have one rank 'moderator'
18
38%
I don't mind either way, as long as it is properly organized
10
21%
 
Total votes: 48

User avatar
Tom brady
Premium Donator
Posts: 1360
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2013 10:22 pm
Location: 912 -> 706

Re: Moderators: 'junior' and 'senior' or just 'moderator'?

Post by Tom brady » Sat Aug 31, 2013 8:52 pm

Maurits wrote:
Mike wrote:Then perhaps we should keep the 'senior mod' rank as something that is only given to moderators who have been with us for a very long time and who truly deserve the recognition. Any other mods would then simply have the 'moderator' rank.
This way, you'd no longer have these two 'teams', just one team of mods (who all have the same responsibilities and powers), a few of which have a red crown to signify their senior status.

Slashy wrote:As a person who loves equality, I say yes to this - I do however, have a question, would this only belong to those staff who've been constantly for an x amount of time on the staff team?(Example of this would be Eater, who's never had any faults) or would this be fit for staff who might have come and gone over the years?(Those without a clean record, but fantastic staff, like Tom Brady and Pure Rick).


It should only be staffmembers that have been moderator for a long constant time, so not resignation/demotion in between.
Aslong as the Senior moderators don't think they're more and do less, I'm fine with it.


I was a moderator for 18 months straight, now 22 months total, and you're telling me I WOULDN'T get it? Same with Rick, he has been a mod for what, over a year?
FRO TIME :afro:
OPRAH!

User avatar
Maurits
Honor Player
Posts: 8803
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2013 3:21 pm
Location: Retirement Home

Re: Moderators: 'junior' and 'senior' or just 'moderator'?

Post by Maurits » Sat Aug 31, 2013 8:55 pm

Tom brady wrote:
Maurits wrote:
Mike wrote:Then perhaps we should keep the 'senior mod' rank as something that is only given to moderators who have been with us for a very long time and who truly deserve the recognition. Any other mods would then simply have the 'moderator' rank.
This way, you'd no longer have these two 'teams', just one team of mods (who all have the same responsibilities and powers), a few of which have a red crown to signify their senior status.

Slashy wrote:As a person who loves equality, I say yes to this - I do however, have a question, would this only belong to those staff who've been constantly for an x amount of time on the staff team?(Example of this would be Eater, who's never had any faults) or would this be fit for staff who might have come and gone over the years?(Those without a clean record, but fantastic staff, like Tom Brady and Pure Rick).


It should only be staffmembers that have been moderator for a long constant time, so not resignation/demotion in between.
Aslong as the Senior moderators don't think they're more and do less, I'm fine with it.


I was a moderator for 18 months straight, now 22 months total, and you're telling me I WOULDN'T get it? Same with Rick, he has been a mod for what, over a year?


So if sting would become moderator, he'd instantly get senior after he passed trial.
Because he USED to be moderator for a long time.

Yes, its what I am saying.
Image

User avatar
Tom brady
Premium Donator
Posts: 1360
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2013 10:22 pm
Location: 912 -> 706

Re: Moderators: 'junior' and 'senior' or just 'moderator'?

Post by Tom brady » Sat Aug 31, 2013 9:01 pm

He was a moderator for over two years, if the rank has no powers, why would it matter giving it to him if the crowns would be 'equal'?
FRO TIME :afro:
OPRAH!

User avatar
Maurits
Honor Player
Posts: 8803
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2013 3:21 pm
Location: Retirement Home

Re: Moderators: 'junior' and 'senior' or just 'moderator'?

Post by Maurits » Sat Aug 31, 2013 9:06 pm

Tom brady wrote:He was a moderator for over two years, if the rank has no powers, why would it matter giving it to him if the crowns would be 'equal'?


What would it matter if we'd only give it to players that were moderator for a straight timeline, instead of resignations/demotions in between.
Image

Rick
Unstoppable
Posts: 7731
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2013 4:33 pm

Re: Moderators: 'junior' and 'senior' or just 'moderator'?

Post by Rick » Sat Aug 31, 2013 9:07 pm

Maurits wrote:
Tom brady wrote:He was a moderator for over two years, if the rank has no powers, why would it matter giving it to him if the crowns would be 'equal'?


What would it matter if we'd only give it to players that were moderator for a straight timeline, instead of resignations/demotions in between.


See and ofcourse again some bullshit stuff.

I really don't care. I'm seen as a Senior among the staffteam. However why should I have an other crown then? I think we can just all have the same crown.
Image

User avatar
Emerald silk
Honor Player
Posts: 354
Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2013 1:45 pm

Re: Moderators: 'junior' and 'senior' or just 'moderator'?

Post by Emerald silk » Sat Aug 31, 2013 9:11 pm

Instead of quoting everything that's been said I'll just put my opinion here:

Yes to making it just a 'moderator' rank, but make Toe Mould a Senior.

Let's say as a hypothetical that it takes 6 consecutive months to be Senior mod.
If you get demoted in that time that should count as an inconsistency and you wouldn't get "credit" so to speak for that time towards being a Senior.

However if you resigned IMO you should still be recognized as being there for awhile and if you become a moderator again maybe you only need 3 months or something.

Not sure if what I wrote makes sense or not but basically: ToeMould5eva

Blahblahdie
Premium Donator
Posts: 5388
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 6:22 am

Re: Moderators: 'junior' and 'senior' or just 'moderator'?

Post by Blahblahdie » Sat Aug 31, 2013 9:33 pm

Emerald wrote:Instead of quoting everything that's been said I'll just put my opinion here:

Yes to making it just a 'moderator' rank, but make Toe Mould a Senior.

Let's say as a hypothetical that it takes 6 consecutive months to be Senior mod.
If you get demoted in that time that should count as an inconsistency and you wouldn't get "credit" so to speak for that time towards being a Senior.

However if you resigned IMO you should still be recognized as being there for awhile and if you become a moderator again maybe you only need 3 months or something.

Not sure if what I wrote makes sense or not but basically: ToeMould5eva

Agreed, because resignation and demoted are 2 serperate forms of leaving the staff team. You have to look at how long they have played the server, not the time they played consistantly.
Image
Image

User avatar
Subtle
Premium Donator
Posts: 793
Joined: Fri May 03, 2013 1:49 am

Re: Moderators: 'junior' and 'senior' or just 'moderator'?

Post by Subtle » Sun Sep 01, 2013 1:41 am

Kay, finally had the chance to read this a bit more. I was a tad bit oblivious thinking there was no PvP and Help Moderator ranks, I clearly haven't kept up with the times..

Honestly, I don't think there should be Help and PvP moderators. It should legitimately just be senior, junior and trial. It honestly just causes crap, as you can tell. You guys keep categorizing things down to the T, and I don't think it's helping, overall. You have a system that's flawed at the moment, and instead of trying to fix what is in front of you, you're trying to implement more things and abolishing other things. It's honestly not going to fix things, it's only going to make things harder. You can't please everyone, so what you have to do in this situation is think of what's better for the community. Even if there's a large portion of the staff team that doesn't agree with the way you want to do something. In that sense, their opinions matter, but don't count. Because their opinions can be biased. Their opinions and beliefs don't out speak the needs of the community. They are there to help people and enforce the rules. If they are fighting amongst each other, because of these labels you have bestowed upon them, how do you think it's going to look to the community?

Fuck the labels, fuck the custom ranks. Simplicity is always best in some circumstances, and I think it perfectly fits into this. You don't need the PvP and moderator statuses, because it does just cause drama. I know having senior and junior moderators may make people feel as if they are inferior/superior to another, but is that not what the PvP and Help moderator departments have been doing for a long time?

At least with the titles of senior, junior and trial you can see how far one is progressing. I don't believe it should be labelled based on the amount of time the individual has spent within the team, why? because it means someone could be gone for over a year, come back, apply, have the potential to be accepted, pass their trial then go onto senior just because they were staff for an x amount of time? Seriously, I don't agree with it.

It should be based on their work ethics, the effort they put in how well they carry out their duties. Time has nothing to do it. What if you get someone that surpasses the abilities current and past moderators have? That they excel beyond everyone else but they get hidden amongst the shadows just because they haven't been staff long enough.

All that is needed is the duties to be outlined clearly, staff members coming to the same understanding and conclusions for punishments etc.. if you want to know more of what I mean, just look back to my first reply...

Tl;dr, you're creating more work for yourself in trying to please everyone. That is a task that is nearly impossible, and just because the forums community is happy with the decisions, what of those in the in-game community? Do their opinions and thoughts get cast aside just because they don't like to use the forums?

The forums community is too limited, and only a few people will actually speak their minds about it, and I'm sorry, but we who use the forums are not the majority. We may be the group of people who probably care about the server the most, but that does not mean the conclusion(s) we reach is what is going to be right and 'just' for the overall well being of the server.

Edit: What is merging the two ranks going to accomplish? Sure there will be no inferior and superior debates, but do you know what will come out of it? Favouritism. Why? because there will always be new and older moderators within the team. The older ones are going to know me and are going to be looked upon to answer their questions. Newer ones? well, they don't have the proper experience to deal with certain things. What's it going to look like if a new player comes to the server, gets a moderator who just past their trails and can't help them with what they need. They'll be passed around up until the point that they grow tired of waiting, and either quit or rage at the staff members. I'm not saying that this is what will happen, but you know how it is. You see it now with the appeals, cases and reports.
Image
I humbly invite you to join me on my proverbial beach chair

Image

Image

Blahblahdie
Premium Donator
Posts: 5388
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 6:22 am

Re: Moderators: 'junior' and 'senior' or just 'moderator'?

Post by Blahblahdie » Sun Sep 01, 2013 2:04 am

Subtle wrote:Kay, finally had the chance to read this a bit more. I was a tad bit oblivious thinking there was no PvP and Help Moderator ranks, I clearly haven't kept up with the times..

Honestly, I don't think there should be Help and PvP moderators. It should legitimately just be senior, junior and trial. It honestly just causes crap, as you can tell. You guys keep categorizing things down to the T, and I don't think it's helping, overall. You have a system that's flawed at the moment, and instead of trying to fix what is in front of you, you're trying to implement more things and abolishing other things. It's honestly not going to fix things, it's only going to make things harder. You can't please everyone, so what you have to do in this situation is think of what's better for the community. Even if there's a large portion of the staff team that doesn't agree with the way you want to do something. In that sense, their opinions matter, but don't count. Because their opinions can be biased. Their opinions and beliefs don't out speak the needs of the community. They are there to help people and enforce the rules. If they are fighting amongst each other, because of these labels you have bestowed upon them, how do you think it's going to look to the community?

Fuck the labels, fuck the custom ranks. Simplicity is always best in some circumstances, and I think it perfectly fits into this. You don't need the PvP and moderator statuses, because it does just cause drama. I know having senior and junior moderators may make people feel as if they are inferior/superior to another, but is that not what the PvP and Help moderator departments have been doing for a long time?

At least with the titles of senior, junior and trial you can see how far one is progressing. I don't believe it should be labelled based on the amount of time the individual has spent within the team, why? because it means someone could be gone for over a year, come back, apply, have the potential to be accepted, pass their trial then go onto senior just because they were staff for an x amount of time? Seriously, I don't agree with it.

It should be based on their work ethics, the effort they put in how well they carry out their duties. Time has nothing to do it. What if you get someone that surpasses the abilities current and past moderators have? That they excel beyond everyone else but they get hidden amongst the shadows just because they haven't been staff long enough.

All that is needed is the duties to be outlined clearly, staff members coming to the same understanding and conclusions for punishments etc.. if you want to know more of what I mean, just look back to my first reply...

Tl;dr, you're creating more work for yourself in trying to please everyone. That is a task that is nearly impossible, and just because the forums community is happy with the decisions, what of those in the in-game community? Do their opinions and thoughts get cast aside just because they don't like to use the forums?

The forums community is too limited, and only a few people will actually speak their minds about it, and I'm sorry, but we who use the forums are not the majority. We may be the group of people who probably care about the server the most, but that does not mean the conclusion(s) we reach is what is going to be right and 'just' for the overall well being of the server.

Edit: What is merging the two ranks going to accomplish? Sure there will be no inferior and superior debates, but do you know what will come out of it? Favouritism. Why? because there will always be new and older moderators within the team. The older ones are going to know me and are going to be looked upon to answer their questions. Newer ones? well, they don't have the proper experience to deal with certain things. What's it going to look like if a new player comes to the server, gets a moderator who just past their trails and can't help them with what they need. They'll be passed around up until the point that they grow tired of waiting, and either quit or rage at the staff members. I'm not saying that this is what will happen, but you know how it is. You see it now with the appeals, cases and reports.

Dianne writes books, so I'm just going to ' nod' my head, and agree with whatever she said above. Why? Because she's usually 100% correct and accurate.
Image
Image

User avatar
Stefan
Advisor
Posts: 6535
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2013 3:52 pm
Location: Hell

Re: Moderators: 'junior' and 'senior' or just 'moderator'?

Post by Stefan » Sun Sep 01, 2013 2:04 am

^ Dianne, I think you may have misunderstood, there'll be three ranks:(unless I misunderstood)

-> Special trial rank(probably a bit less power than senior/moderator)
-> Normal senior rank(called moderator)
-> Another 'normal' moderator rank, with no additional powers, just a different crown for veterans, like Patel.

The two 'moderator' ranks will be completely equal, this idea will eliminate the ''I'm above you'' feeling, furthermore, all moderators deal with the same things and then there'll possibly be the helper rank(not a stairway to trial moderator) for the help requests that consist of: ''How to make money'' and so on, generally, it'll be a less confusing system, and far more equal.
Image

Locked