A Question to the Administration Regarding a Recent Issue

*smooches bane* *hugs bane* *squeezes bane's neck until his eyes pop out* feel the luv, sweetie

 

"squeezes bane's neck until his eyes pop out"

My hamster did that when I hugged him! It scared me! Bane, are you a hamster?

¤Night

 

My eyes! The bans do nothing!

- McBane.

 

Any who harm hamsters shall answer to Minsc! Mess with the furry, and answer to Minsc?s fury!

 

I am neither a hamster nor do I use them in any recreational fashion.

Can you all say the same? Hmmm?

 

Keep this thread on topic guys. The question still hasn't been answered.

JMA

 

I answered; I like my answer.

 

There are three threads on this topic alone in the ModSquad. We are taking it very seriously.

There should be some news later tonight or tomorrow.

 

Incidentally JMA, my question hasn't been answered either:

Why? I haven't seen any poor moderators be put into place (the administration has nothing to do with TFN staff moderatorships) anytime recently. It doesn't seem to be getting any worse. Maybe you could provide some examples and evidence?

 

"There should be some news later tonight or tomorrow."

What kind of news? Give us a hint.

Amazing.

 

Fresh news, as opposed to the stale variety.

I don't know; we're trying to come to concensus and so forth.

 

KW-

Are you trying to incite drama? I could provide several names of moderators that I am unhappy with, and that I feel do a less than stellar job, but is that the point of this thread? My personal opinion has no bearing on what was supposed to be the main point of discussion.

My original question consisted of this:

"Why is the mod squad against letting the regular user have a voice in moderator selection?"

That's it. This isn't a thread to voice opinions on certain moderators. Please stop trying to take my thread off-topic, into a realm that you know will incite even more controversy in this forum.

JMA

 

I am by no means attempting to incite drama. For what it's worth, DarthAttorney asked a similar question right after me. You made claims saying that the system "sucks," and that it's going downhill. I asked for evidence. That's all. I don't believe that qualifies as inciting drama.

 

You're asking for my personal opinion as to what sucks about the system, which in this case pertains to what moderators suck. If that isn't an opening for drama, I don't know what is...

EDIT:

I've fallen prey to my own admonition. *sigh*

All I'm wanting to know is what the Mod Squad has against regular users nominating those that you guys would eventually pick. That's all I'm looking for here.

JMA

 

Again, I'm just wondering why the AC is needed for this, exactly. It just seems like it would be more efficient to just go from the users straight to the admins. I don't think the extra work is a real problem, and I don't see why trust would be either. Yes the AC has no reason to tamper with things, but neither does the administration.

Whether the mistrust between regular users exists or not, it would remove the possibility of a mod tampering with the nominations. It's the same reason you don't have party officers working the polls. Even if you guys are honest (which I personally believe most of you are), having the AC take the nominations with an AC sock would remove the ability of anyone to accuse the admins of tampering.

 

"Why is the mod squad against letting the regular user have a voice in moderator selection?"

Mod Squad is not against users having a voice about who gets promoted. It's the level of involvement that needs to be discerned before we progress.

It's that simple.

Lit needed another mod before the level of involvement was discerned. Hence the current situation.

 

It's the level of involvement that needs to be discerned before we progress.

As far as I've seen though, that has never been an issue for debate. Even the regular users have always stuck with one recommended level of involvement: nomination. As someone else stated, we're not proposing an Athenian democracy here. That would be insane. All we want is the ability to voice our opinion on who should and should not be elected, and be the one to select the pool from which the administration makes their selection.

JMA

 

What is stopping you from PMing the mod for the forum in question with who you think would be best atm? ?

 

What is stopping the Mod Squad from requesting a list of candidates from the members of the forum? ?

JMA

 

A pre-existing system that works really, really well and in fact has yet to fail.

Answering a question with question is a sign of a failing argument, JMA

 

A pre-existing system that works really, really well and in fact has yet to fail.

Pardon the term but...

Baloney.

Yet to fail? Need I point the example of PreacherBoy? And does "fail" always have to mean "demoted"? THere are several amongst your ranks right now that I would deem failures of the current system.

So I PM my opinion to a moderator. Great. What guarantee is there that the moderator will even give my suggestion more than a cursory glance, let alone take it into serious consideration?

If I enter a name into an OFFICIAL nominations thread however, there stands a much greater chance that all the mods will take a look at the suggestion I have made, especially if I back it up with a post of evidence as to why my candidate is best.

Now I'm going to be late to work, but there is your answer.

JMA

 

What is stopping you from PMing the mod for the forum in question with who you think would be best atm?

In JMAs defence, we've been conditioned to believe that giving a suggestion for who would be a good mod, would automatically count against them.

Mind you, the way I see it, members should be able to suggest candidates, and then the mods should consider them, and anyone else they see fit. The candidates should in no way be limited to those the members put forward.

Basically, members give suggestions and mods take them into account.

 

...having the AC take the nominations with an AC sock would remove the ability of anyone to accuse the admins of tampering.

I just realized that it would also prevent us from being able to do checks on the people voting to see if they are socks. That could be a problem.

And I still don't understand this tampering argument. If the mods don't want someone to be premoted, they just won't premote them. It's as simple as that. No tampering required.

Oh, and what happens when ACers start getting nominated? (Which they will.) That's a bit of a conflict, isn't it?

 

Viable concerns that I honestly hadn't thought of. Thanks for chiming in with that GriffZ.

I don't, however, think those alone merit the trashing of this idea.

JMA

 

Hmmm...Alot of good points have been raised. Right now I'm leaning more to the idea of just passing the nominations directly to the mods rather than through the AC. But I'll think about it some more and post my final thoughts later.

*runs to class to avoid being late*