[GEN] Continued Discussion Regarding the Moderator Selection Process

This discussion began in the thread welcoming zacparis and droideka27 as Moderators of the Jedi Council Community forums. In an effort to discontinue the derailment of that thread, this thread will serve as a continuation of the discussion.

I believe we were discussing the idea of a group of JC'ers to assist in the Moderator selection process.

 

why reduce the selection to a 'group' rather than the entire JC ?

 

I believe that this was utilized before. I cannot recall when--it is most certainly important to include the entire JC in the process, but I am reading comments that this would be far too difficult to do and would turn out to a be a popularity contest?

 

Not just 'a group' of Jc'rs, but how about input from the various comunities with a bit of warning when new mods are due to be selected? Right now it feels like a 'like it or lump it - or leave' case senerio.

Noms (of potential mods) could be by PM and a group can be selected from them, at least let us know who the choices are.

 

Any group will have some bias, as would the JC as a whole.

No matter what, there's always going to be some level of bias present.

 

I would like to nominate myself for the next mod opening. I'm a relative unknown so I'm similar to zacaparis but the few who do know me don't really care for me so I'm a little bit like droideka27. The best of both worlds!

Mull that one over and let me know.

QGM

 

Yodajeff, it is not about erasing bias completely, it is trying to make the process as fair as possible for all sides involved. We cannot escape bias in any shape or form completely in this matter.

And if anyone knows how, I'd like to know

 

Personally I'd like to see some of the 'options' before having them sprung on us as new mods. That way we (the users of the community) can at least get a sense of who's 'up' and discuss any potential 'shortcomiings'.

And If A mod-electee can't handle a sensible discussion (non flaming) about their capabilties before hand, I wonder about their actual performance.

And Moonie, I think you have as much chance as being asked to join the JCC mod squad as I do in Fan Fiction...

 

And If A mod-electee can't handle a sensible discussion (non flaming) about their capabilties before hand, I wonder about their actual performance.

Excellent point, DarthBreezy.

 

I believe we were discussing the idea of a group of JC'ers to assist in the Moderator selection process.

- Who would pick that group?
- What would make the group more qualified to leave biases at the door than current staff?
- What value-add is there from a group vs.forum mods?
- What happens if the moderators (either from that forum or other staff) dislike all selections presente to them by the group?

 

And Moonie, I think you have as much chance as being asked to join the JCC mod squad as I do in Fan Fiction...

See, my point exactly. Breezy knows me yet doesn't like me. PERFECT!!!

QGM

 

Also, judging by how much drama happens AFTER the MS backs someone and promotes them, we'd NEVER get through a discussion with the majority of users happy.

And then we'd still have the same problems.

 

<<Beats Moonie with a stick.

You only want to Mod to ban all the John Kerry supporters


*ANYWAY*

I don't think there should be a 'group' per say, but when there is knowlege of an opening, people should be encouraged to make recomendations via PM, then when there are enough noms, a short term discussion thread should be opened up for the comunity to discuss the pros and cons of the nomenees.

Edit Actually, I see another MS promotion thread that is almost devoid of 'drah-mah' as most regulars see it as an excellent choice.

 

- Who would pick that group? This is up for discussion.

- What would make the group more qualified to leave biases at the door than current staff? There are plenty of impartial, open-minded people who are capable of contributing to such a 'group.'

- What value-added is there from a group vs.forum mods? The chance of having a well-rounded decision made. This process of group discussion is widely used in our society. [aka a committee]

- What happens if the moderators (either from that forum or other staff) dislike all selections presente to them by the group? Well, you have to consider that this might happen..however I believe the odds of this are fairly low.



Droideka27, how do you think we can avoid the problems?

 

most regulars see it as an excellent choice.

Most regular users don't agree.

 

I don't think there should be a 'group' per say, but when there is knowlege of an opening, people should be encouraged to make recomendations via PM, then when there are enough noms, a short term discussion thread should be opened up for the comunity to discuss the pros and cons of the nomenees.

Isn't it sort of self-explanatory that, y'know, when someone retires the chances are that we're going to promote someone else?

I know it doesn't happen in all cases, but the majority of the time -- it does! So if someone retires, just send in suggestions. Solves the problem, no?

EDIT:
- There are plenty of impartial, open-minded people who are capable of contributing to such a 'group.'

So you're implicitly stating that you don't believe that the current MS staff is impartial in these decisions? Or, if not, what makes one group of impartial decision makers better than another random group of impartial decision makers?

- The chance of having a well-rounded decision made. This process of group discussion is widely used in our society. [aka a committee]

But doesn't "management" make decisions about direction and promotion, rather than employees?

 

"a short term discussion thread should be opened up for the comunity to discuss the pros and cons of the nomenees."

Do you honestly see that turning into anything other than a huge "I hate this person because..." or "Promote my friend because..." thread?

Also, just speaking from my experience, moderators tend to point out many of the pros and cons of particular users when they are suggested. I know I did it, and would often research posting habits of users who I weren't familiar with in order to make an informed decision on who I thought should be promoted.

 

I think there should be a admin/mod vote for nominations, and then select users(not a group just any well trusted unbias users) should vote with the mods/admins for who gets to become mod.

 

But don't you agree that if everyone decides to PM a Mod or Admin to nominate or suggest a candidate, you all would be overtaxed! Imagine the response if such a thing were to occur openly. [IE Posting a sticky thread in each forum asking for nominations.]

If this were to happen, a committee or group could assist the MS in going through all of the PMs, etc. This committee could serve as ending the arguments/disagreements we've been having over this entire issue. It can work. I know it can.


Guys, there is a better way to do this. I'm sensing that some people don't even want to discuss this and change a darn thing. Mods, don't take offense when someone suggest change.

 

But don't you agree that if everyone decides to PM a Mod or Admin to nominate or suggest a candidate, you all would be overtaxed

No.

I've stated now many times I'd openly accept PMs at any time, and so far I've received 1.

 

Please read my entire post. I am sensing hostility from you, malkie. I am sorry if this offends you.

 

It's not that we don't want to change a darn thing, but that there's never going to be a 100% method of avoiding the promotion of people who aren't supported for whatever reason. PMing suggestions is just as good simply because then the current mods can watch the posting patterns. For me, when someone gives me a name and I'm not familiar with that person, I take time to watch. Just because you PM a suggestion doesn't mean it's not going to be taken seriously.

There are plenty of impartial, open-minded people who are capable of contributing to such a 'group.'

That aren't involved in any off site group? Whose opinions would be respected by 100% of users here?

 

But don't you agree that if everyone decides to PM a Mod or Admin to nominate or suggest a candidate, you all would be overtaxed! Imagine the response if such a thing were to occur openly. [IE Posting a sticky thread in each forum asking for nominations.]

I agree with the Scot.

We shouldn't be overwhelmed because that's our JOB -- provide our services to our forum to make it a better place. Taking suggestions on improvement -- including who'd make a good moderator when there's an open slot -- is part of it.

 

There's nothing else in the rest of your post that changes what I've said.

And I'm not offended - if anything I'm agreeing with you on the point of accepting input from regular users for mod promotions. I'm saddened that you can't see that.

If so many people want to make suggestions then why have I only received a single PM with nominations in the 3 months I've been a Mod ?

 

I agree with the Scot.

We shouldn't be overwhelmed because that's our JOB -- provide our services to our forum to make it a better place. Taking suggestions on improvement -- including who'd make a good moderator when there's an open slot -- is part of it.

As a long-time JCer who cares very much about her chosen online community, I feel I have much to offer in regard to suggestions on improvement. It should not just be a mod's 'job.'

Katya, we cannot find anyone out there in the world who is completely unbiased and unaligned. I'm not asking that.

I never knew that you all were looking for mods in the JCC. When was it announced?

Malkie, this is the part of my post that I don't think you are understanding:

Guys, there is a better way to do this. I'm sensing that some people don't even want to discuss this and change a darn thing. Mods, don't take offense when someone suggest change.

You're arguing against me when little do you realize how on your side I am.