Dion

Looking Back - 5 months have passed, what now?

@Ruby Fair enough - but the original point stands. I didn't intend to accuse of nepotism - that's what Kangaroo turned it into and in my mind you and perhaps his reappointment were the only two cases where I thought previous friendships had to do with it in part. Regardless, the original point was that elections are dumb because of nepotism, random drawings are dumb because you can't ensure quality, and whimsically nominating random people by the mods is dumb because you are missing out on candidates that would do really good but who have been demotivated by occurrences or just.. are not very visible or known.

An improvement can be made here and - god forbid me saying it - we might just have to look to Iwaku to see what they're doing because this is the one thing where I'd learn from them.

<Snipped quote by Odin>

Yes I completely agree that quality is subject to a lack of objectivity, but my initial point remains is that who has ever registered me as a bad mod who should never return. As far as I am aware, it's no-one. Ergo an argument that my reappointment as a mod as being a sign of nepotism is most likely null and void and symbolistic of a failing of the system. If it's the second, please go ahead and tell me what I'm doing wrong, I welcome constructive criticism; the main criticismIi've received thus far was that I was too lenient.

@Kangaroo

I.. no, I'm not saying you're doing anything wrong, I was raising the point that after you got reappointed you were still not as active as some as the others. You were inactive for 3 days when I wrote it, so I presumed you were just busy. It was never about good or bad mod. If you want constructive criticism then I'd say log in more often? Just because you're on discord doesn't mean there aren't users who might PM you because they don't know you're not on RPG as much. It's not that much effort to log in daily once, right, so I don't see the harm there.

Who would you consider as bad mods considering I can only think of one nomination that I personally made in the past who hasn't made mod. The rest hasn't been direct naming as far as I am aware, so you're either accusing a mod directly or making speculative judgements. As for the consideration process, it is mostly based off the opinion of the current staff. To make something public that was previously private, I nominated Nutts as my successor because I believed he was right for the role and I stand by that nomination.

@Kangaroo

Again, not really my point. I'll state it clearly so it cannot be misunderstood or misread;

If you do not have a process for moderatorship that includes some form of application, you are potentially missing out on moderator candidates that are perfect, because you are not allowing them to partake. By nominating people you are limiting yourself to people you know. By having one staff member i.e. Hank determine potential candidates and making a choice you're limiting yourself even further.

It's not about the current mod selection in this case, it's about the process of getting there. Like I said to Ruby, look at Iwaku - they have a process where you can apply with relevant information and then the staff decides who is good enough.

I believe the main part of this is asking why I wasn't present on forums? as I said, I would be active on discord when needed but may have periods where I fall back to relying on push notifications.

@Kangaroo

No, I'm saying if you'd informed people about your inactivity, that would've been better because I would've understood your situation instead of having to make assumptions.

Looking Back - 5 months have passed, what now?

<Snipped quote by Odin>

Having reread the conversation, I did misinterpret it but I guess I will address the points raised nonetheless. This may seem like an argument of semantics but sometimes definitions are important; I personally consider nepotism to be promotion/selection in spite of ability; ergo the appointment of someone right for the role does not entail nepotism. Am I perhaps arrogant by suggesting that I am a good mod? perhaps, but that is built off the commentary of multiple people from different cliques.

@Kangaroo

What constitutes a good mod and what not is, also, entirely subjective. I'm not saying you're wrong, because you're not, but as Hank has previously stated, he prefers janitor-style mods and I myself prefer a different style of mods. Neither of us is wrong, we just have different preferences.

I think there are plenty of good candidates for moderator positions that, as far as I know, have never been considered, where as I do know some people that I personally think are probably one of the worst picks you could make have been considered. Perhaps for that reason I'll ask @Hank if he could run me/us through the process that you go through when you are being considered for moderator. Or perhaps one of the other mods could. I'm interested to see what the process is from start to finish. How do you get considered for the position all the way to how is the acceptance of a new moderator announced.

The idea I have is that at the moment it's entirely whimsical and based on nominations from other moderators. You should be aware that you're missing out on a lot of good candidates like @Nytem4re or others, who by now have lost either the backing or the desire to help at all.

Is the fact that I have previous experience with the mod team and a history of interaction a factor in my reappointment; absolutely. It's the same as a company rehiring someone who'd previosuly done a good job, they're hired off merit and the knowledge that they can perform with the team currently assembled.

The ruby reappointment I can't comment much on as it was during my period of well documented absence but my own I am happy to discuss beyond my personal issues. I'd put out an offer to resign from being a moderator around a year before my actual leaving because I recognised that i didn't have the same activity that I thought would be required from a mod. The feedback i received that there was no cap on mod numbers and I was free to continue because my opinion and perspective on issues was desired.

When I resigned was because I was cutting ties to focus on some central personal issues, when I resolved them I sent a message to Hank and made the point that the issues were resolved and that I was more free in terms of time. About two months later he contacted me and asked if i was still returning because he wanted my opinion for the defence of a genre thread/event. That is the circumstances of my return.

@Kangaroo

I don't and didn't mean to pry in your personal life - when you resigned I respected it because you'd shown that you were critiquing yourself as well and I liked that. When I named you here, I critiqued you for still not being as active as others. Perhaps it was a momentary thing, I can't tell as I am not omniscient. The reasons for that are irrelevant to me if I am not aware of them - this is why the suggestion of a moderator thread where mods can post status updates or other things is a good suggestion because it makes people aware that one given mod might be away for a few days - in this case I was unaware of the reasoning for you being gone and therefore could not make a weighted judgement. You're telling me now, yes, but if I'd known this prior, perhaps I would've understood why you were gone instead of having to judge that for myself.

<Snipped quote by Odin>

Yeah, at that point, we'd had some casual conversations when he worked at a resort, but nothing Guild related. Our first Guild related chats were about an issue I had unrelated to him, and when I realized maybe it'd be good if I went back and helped site staff again. Hank didn't appoint me the second time, either; that was Mahz.

@Ruby

I thought it was Hank as I seemed to recall reading that somewhere, but in that case my apologies. You don't feel like your prior friendship with Mahz might've influenced the rather quick reappointment whatsoever? I do.

Looking Back - 5 months have passed, what now?

@Ruby I meant your re-appointment, as in, the time you came back. The 2nd time if you will. Unless you're saying you'd never spoken to him then?

Looking Back - 5 months have passed, what now?

@Odin if you don't mind me asking, what precise appointments would you point to as cases of nepotism?

@Kangaroo

First of all: any appointment of a new moderator is going to be influenced by a little bit of nepotism. Denying that is ridiculous. If you think that you were selected 100% for being a good moderator, then you're doing yourself a disservice. Whoever selects moderators (I imagine Hank + Mahz + the rest of the moderator team is allowed to pitch in) is naturally going to have a preference for people they like.

Whether that is because they just like them, or because they would fit well in the team, that is another matter, but ultimately nepotism is bound to play a role to a lesser degree. It's more problematic when it occurs in larger degrees. As far as I know we've not reached that point yet and I'd like to keep it that way (hence, I'm not really looking to have moderator elections).

Secondarily: appointments where nepotism played a larger role than expected/usual would probably be that of Ruby. It's not really a secret Hank and her get along and it didn't take too long for her to be re-appointed. Call me a cynic but I don't believe she was approved for re-entry just because she's, according to the rest, a good moderator. It definitely helped her case that a lot of the moderators know her and like her.

Your own reappointment also comes to mind although that event was far less publicized so I have even less of an idea how that all played out. If it was you returning and saying 'hey I got time again, make me mod again please' then clearly that's not the process it should've been. But, as usual, nothing was really said about it, so I'm not sure.

Besides that I am unaware of recent appointments as all the other members of the moderator team have been there for quite a while. But.. do note that you're inferring that I said there was nepotism involved in the current staff. I never said that. I said we should beware of that. There's a difference. The nepotism on Newguild is far less rampant than it used to be in my eyes and I want to keep it that way too.

The key point I was trying to make and that I am sure you'll agree with is that elections for moderator positions are ridiculous and stupid and invite nepotism.

Looking Back - 5 months have passed, what now?

<Snipped quote by Odin>
I'd like to see you try, if it means that you'll finally reply to my points.

@catchamber

Jesus christ.

<Snipped quote by Odin>
Here's what I posted:

My Replies

Except [Moderators need more capacity to do things or otherwise a secondary co-admin with equal or slightly less powers should be appointed] does have to do with increasing moderator power, because the changes that would've done just that weren't implemented by Mahz.

@catchamber

Why do you think it's in the partially completed sector? The goal is ''Moderators need more capacity to do things or otherwise a secondary co-admin with equal or slightly less problems should be appointed''. You understand that right? That is the suggestion made 5 months ago? You could've read that yourself?

Okay, good. Then you'll also understand that this suggestion has been partially met but not completely and therefore they can be found in the partially completed sector, which is for you guessed it, partially completed things, and therefore your question is nonsense because nothing was wrong with what was written there to begin with?

Maybe you should just create [some sprites to make the forum more aesthetically pleasing], post a thread showcasing your effort, let the community share their opinions about it, then see what the staff does with it.

@catchamber

No.

If [community events] wasn't your suggestion, whose was it? Also, why didn't you tell them they can invite people to community events by posting threads about them in Off-Topic Discussion and Spam Forum, so those that can't access the chat can also participate?

@catchamber

For point 1; look it up yourself in the OP. The answer is right there. Yes, this can be found in OP.

If you want me to do my own research [about rules not being enforced] for once, maybe you should provide me with certain keywords to run through the chat logs, and I'll let you know what I find. Does that sound fair?

@catchamber

I would look for certain infractions that went unpunished so you can see them, but then that'd require me to access the discord. So, no, I can't, but you're free to ask around yourself.

I lost count after you started repeating yourself in various portions of your OP. Want to tally up the non-repetitive points for us?

@catchamber

I don't but feel free to do it yourself since the answer is there in the OP.

If [We should as a whole venture more into the introduction area and greet newcomers, ask them how they are, what kind of role plays they like, and generally make them feel like they're entering into a positive community] wasn't your suggestion, whose was it?

@catchamber

OP.

I'm asking for hard evidence [that moderators being too inactive is causing problems]. If someone else has provided some, please quote it, because I didn't see any when I read the rest of this thread.

@catchamber

Well, let's see, if moderators are too inactive, then people get away with things they shouldn't get away with. We can agree that's bad no? If there were no moderation all together that seems like a bad thing? What, you want scientific proof that if there are no moderators that are active or the moderators aren't active enough all together then that's bad? What the heck?

Don't the moderators already interact with the community, beyond providing answers to questions, responding to reports, and so on? How much interaction is required for community building to take place?

@catchamber

This is subjective, but if you are asking for my opinion, then moderators should be involved in community activities too such as RPGN or contests. Which they were, but no longer are.

I mean that specific moderators could be assigned to the forum, chat, or both. At present, all of them are assigned to both.

@catchamber

... okay and? That's a problem? You know Hank literally said in this thread that he's implementing chat mods? Assuming you know that since you read the thread like a well-informed poster, right?

Better is subjective, and it's my opinion that a better alternative hasn't been presented.

@catchamber

OK? Why?

Thank goodness Lady Amalthea created the Articles And Guides Index, which is stickied in the Articles And Guides subforum.

@catchamber

I've already told you that the subforum you're referring to needs to be boosted up in where it is on the page, so this isn't an end-all solution, it's a solution that someone else came up with on their own to combat issues that weren't or couldn't be dealt with by the moderators. The real solution should be much more official than it is.

I'd also like to think so. But, I'd also like to think that the police would always respond as quickly as possible to each and every emergency call, no matter how significant of a criminal record certain callers possess. I'm sure you can see where I'm going with this.

@catchamber

.. I can't, you're just proving my point - you expect the police to react accordingly regardless of this persons' background. Just because it doesn't happen doesn't make it right.

You're the one claiming that the community is dissatisfied. Do less than 10 members get to speak on behalf of the entire community?

@catchamber

In my opinion yes, if the rest of the guild is satisfied with sitting in their roleplays and roleplaying and not offering their suggestions and opinions, yes, they do.

If you sent me death threats off-site, I'd call the police, which is the real world equivalent of the forum's staff. The staff wouldn't need to know about it, because it wouldn't be any of their business.

@catchamber

That's gonna do a lot for someone living across the ocean. The point here was/is that a lot of off-site drama went into the discord and no mind was paid to it even after one would report it for the sake of preventing drama.

Were you the one that tried [to make another version of RPGNews]? If so, did you contact the staff before you tried it?

@catchamber

How is that relevant? No I was not. It doesn't matter, because it got banned and nuked because the old news suddenly got pissy after being AWOL for 3 gorillion years.

So, are you going to make your own version [of the Contests], or offer ideas?

@catchamber

I'm not allowed to host official contests and non-official contests are unlikely to attract more attention than the official ones, so no, I'm not. Since you're suggesting, maybe you could do it. Have fun.

I already offered my ideas - for the 2 relevant moderators to get busy and make a contest.

Except plenty of things that they requested happened, which you pointed out in your OP.

@catchamber

... okay? This thread isn't an attack, it's a reminder of the list and me wondering why so little has happened in 5 months?

If my reply was so obvious, why didn't you tell the user that brought up your initial point about cliques that this is how the internet works?

@catchamber

Because my job wasn't to tell people they were wrong, my job was to compile a list of all relevant ideas and thoughts.

I'd be content with that. I define inactivity as absolutely no posting.

@catchamber

Then we differ from opinion.

Can you do me a solid and tell me whose suggestion [Changing decorum and communication tactics can be a fix to activity problems.] was?

@catchamber

No. Read the thread.

That's not a yes or no answer [to Would you prefer that the moderators be trigger-happy with their banning powers, and never let people appeal their bans?].

@catchamber

You are correct in stating that it is not a yes or no answer. I don't think a yes or no answer is required because that'd forego the context. Context is key.

Sure, try that, but don't be surprised when you get banned. They're not obligated to engage with the community beyond their Mahz-given responsibilities, and you've yet to define how much interaction is required on their part to encourage community building.

@catchamber

ok

@catchamber

Looking Back - 5 months have passed, what now?

@catchamber Dude you seem to just be lacking in common sense. Do you want me to go point by point to explain why and make you look stupid, or are you going to reflect on the questions and look for yourself?

Looking Back - 5 months have passed, what now?

Yeah, I'm not really sure if we need section specific mods. The mods themselves have stated that their primary issues with doing things on this list are just because they can't. Adding section mods might relieve them of their attachment to 'moderating the sections' but as it stands that is only a fraction of their work anyway. It'd alleviate a burden that currently has no need to be alleviated.

Rather I'd add more moderators like we currently have to relay the administrative tasks and keep people focused in the right direction. If the mods want to maintain their status as janitor staff, then that is fine, that's their choice no matter how much I disagree with it. But fact of the matter is, more hands are needed, more janitors are needed, not because there's so much rules being broken (according to the staff, since there's not many reports apparently) but because A) there is no vision for the future and if there is, it's not unified and every moderator has a vision for themselves and B) they need people to take over the slack that inevitably arises when Mahz is not present.

So, having section moderators will probably just make things more complicated than they have to be.

And that is entirely unrelated to elections, which is imho just a bad idea. I'd rather have a system where there is a form you can fill in to 'apply' for a moderator position where you include things like past experience, motivations and other relevant information which will then be evaluated by the admins and I suppose other moderators.

That way you ensure that everyone can at least have a shot to put their name in the basket. It doesn't mean that we won't end up with nepotism in terms of picking other mods, but that is something that no matter of process can prevent anyway unless we literally start drawing random names for the positions - which would be awful and don't do that.

Naruto: Revival

@Project well, the vote last time went against PVP, so I'm assuming we will predetermine it.

Except I get the feeling it'll be hard to satisfy the ego's involved.

Looking Back - 5 months have passed, what now?

@catchamber My mans, you realize that 99% of the questions you asked are answered in the front page? Like, instead of always saying 'hey, can you give me source for x? hurrrr' you could actually bother to read and see that the answer to the question 'who suggested it' can be found in the link on the first post.

So no, I can't be arsed to help you because I would rather not answer questions that could be answered if the person asking it took five seconds out of their time to look for answers themselves rather than relying on others to do their work.

Naruto: Revival

@Project @j8cob @spanner @altered tundra @reflection

To avoid coming to a standstill perhaps it's smart to host the question here where everyone can see - will we predetermine the fight outcome or will we play it all out and see who wins.

We've already voted but Project wasn't there and now Kiku and Shizuka are dropped from the fight (well, Shizuka can still come back but Kiku already made it clear she was running away).

Personally, I'd rather predetermine the outcome. We can satisfy the needs of both parties and work to a compromise rather than arguing for hours about hurt ego's and whose character has the best made up jutsu. It'd be faster and way cooler because we can write in scenes that are far nicer to read.