Proposal for Mod Review Process

Yes the board is slower than it once was but the number of mods shouldn't be totally determined by how much posting is going on. The board is still active 24 hours a day 365 days a year so there is still the same amount of time to be covered regardless of how much activity is happening over those hours.

The lower activity is nice for the mods as it allows them the time to be active on the board and not just dealing with things that spring up. I can play JCC Pyramid and post my single random phrase, maybe even visit other areas of the board to see what things they are talking about.

 

I completely agree. However, I think that further separates the less active mods from their forums--which has been one of the major concerns in this thread. One would assume that less policing would equal more community activity.

 

why isn't that reflected in their posting habits?

 

I suspect malkie isn't saying any such thing, but noting that we have a few mods who have posted very little in the last couple months - and not just in their own boards, but in general. And there are others who aren't at that level posting-wise but might need looking at for other reasons. I think that's a valid point to raise and for the administration to take a look at.

(malkie, if you are saying that... *shakes fist* )

 

So quick to jump and get defensive on a straight forward comment.

As Keralys suggests, I picked up on PrincessChattyCathy's point that "lower activity is nice for the mods as it allows them the time to be active on the board", and I'm just pointing out that this isn't being reflected in some mods posting habits. There's no accusation or judgement going on from my part, just merely pointing out a straight forward observation.

 

Sure, that's certainly agreeable.

I'm going to start a separate thread so that we can branch out from this and move into a more general discussion about various ideas and opinions.

 

For the record, this is a strawman that keeps getting brought up every time people ask for quantifiable mod reviews. No one has ever suggested that one number is a good metric across the board(s) (lol). What statistics like Malkie's do suggest, is that "all mods should be posting at least 1 time per week (unless they're green)" is not being met, and that is unacceptable.

 

Yes, but what would happen in these slower forums, that only generate five threads per day, if there was a great moderator who engaged people in entertaining conversation, and made the place lively and entertaining, instead of using the slow pace as an excuse for their low participation?

 

That sounds like a good idea.

Do you have specific proposals on how to do that in, say, Fan Sites? I'm not saying that in any way to be patronizing, I really want to know. It's a very slow moving board, though Bac does a good job IMO. What does that look like, in more than a general sense?

 

Perhaps a contest for the best fan site?

Advertise in some more active forums, and create categories to judge sites on? Recruit judges from all over the boards.

 

No offense Grimby, but I really think that's a cop out.

 

I think when all options have been exhausted (try the contest! ), and the forum still doesn't generate conversation / participation, then it's probably time to close that forum. I mean, what is the point in keeping a forum open when there is no interest in it?

 

Well, I don't think what Grimby's saying is a cop out. The structure of Fan Sites is such that it's not a place for in depth discussion, and it's not a place where people are likely to socialize. That's just the nature of it, and I don't think there's a need for jedimasterbac to try and drum up participation, because in a forum that's just a repository of links, it doesn't really make sense. And that doesn't mean it needs to be closed, either. It might be collapsible into the other Fan Activities forums, but then all of these threads would have pretty much disappeared. It's nice to have, as I said, a repository of links where someone can go and see a bunch of sites.

On the other hand... I don't understand why Fan Sites needs a dedicated mod at all. It's not a community like the more active boards are. A cursory glance shows that the forum had about 30 posts in the last month. That's about 1/day. Surely one of the mods of any of the other forums could pop in to Fan Sites every time they log in and make sure everything is okay in there? I don't know what the structure was like before, but in bac's promotion thread DVEditor says he'd still be around if there's any help bac needs. Was the forum actually becoming too much for DVE to handle in addition to his other forums? What was the rationale behind promoting a dedicated Fan Sites mod?
It's one thing if there was a dedicated mod historically in the forum, but this promotion happened 2 months after this thread was posted when we already recognized a problem with over-staffing. Can someone explain that?

 

Grimby, this thread/issue is all about over-staffing, and how it doesn't make sense to have such a huge moderating team when the forums are dwindling. Sheer volume is the problem. That is the issue. So I don't think "Why not?" is really a good answer.

In other words, we shouldn't be asking "What's the downside to promoting this person?" but rather "Does anyone need to be promoted at all?"

 

On the other hand, simply having a higher mod-to-post ratio doesn't necessarily mean that we're overstaffed. It's quite possible that during previous years, we were understaffed -- that we want a healthy coverage of mods to spread the work out and stop the burnout and high turnover and to make sure that no problems go missed. and that during the peak years we were actually short of that goal.

Now, I'm not saying that we're definitely not overstaffed -- but I think that before we jump to the conclusion that we're overstaffed because we got through more active times with fewer mods before, we have to consider how we're actually doing with the mods we have.

 

Havac, I don't think "whether we're overstaffed" is really a question at this point. No one is jumping to conclusions, we've been discussing it in this forum for months. (It might do you well to read some of those discussions before you jump into a conversation and accuse people of jumping to conclusions.) If you need any evidence that it is generally agreed that we are overstaffed, you might note that, as Grimby mentioned, the admins have decided to start reducing numbers by attrition at least.

Also, you might want to look back over the last few posts in this thread and the new thread 506 posted, some of which contain concrete numbers involving the drastic drop-off in traffic this year. To be perfectly frank, the notion that we were understaffed in 2005 during the ROTS rush and are only now - with the same size moderating team - properly staffed is absurd.

Grimby, of course I am not expecting you to answer the jedimasterbac question, as I doubt you were involved in the decision to promote a dedicated Fan Sites mod. As for why overstaffing is an issue, it's been discussed before, but I can briefly recap some of the points:

* a big moderating staff in a small community, where numbers approach 1:1 in active mods to active users, the feelings of "us vs. them" increase and cause tension
* a lot of mods with not a lot of work to do leads to overmoderating, when some mods feel like they should be doing something, so they lock or edit what they don't need to lock or edit
* related, number of mods should be proportional to amount of work to be done generally. in this environment you don't promote everyone you can trust to make the right calls just because you trust them. you promote the people you need when you need them because you need them. that's one kind of basic message board philosophy (if there is such a thing ). On the other hand, smaller boards tend to admin everyone because it makes things easier. But the former is the philosophy the JC has always followed.
* security-wise, it's a better idea to have as few accounts with special powers and access as possible

I'm sure there are points I missed, but those are the ones I remember off the top of my head from the last 8+ months of discussion.

 

I'm actually rather curious where the notion that we're overstaffed came from. I'm not disputing it, per se; I just have no idea what actually gives rise to that idea. I don't think it true, myself, but am willing to be convinced. (My opinion isn't really that strong.)

 

I'm sorry if I give that impression, but I've read through every post I can find on the topic, and frankly none of the arguments in favor of those points have convinced me, mostly because they have all stayed in rather vague generalities without getting into specifics.

More, in my opinion, those points tend to get more into the issue of promoting new mods than eliminating those already onboard. The main issue seems to be the "us v. them" issue, since that's basically the only point that continues to be raised on a regular basis.

I believe it is an issue for some users; I don't see it being a major issue in Lit. Certainly none of the feedback I got in the Mod Review process had any comment to that effect. In which forums do you think that's a major issue? I would guess, off the top of my head, that the main complaint is YJCC. That's not necessarily either a good or a bad thing, but in watching Comms since I've been promoted - I think I was in here maybe twice ever before that; I simply didn't need to because my community in Lit generally didn't have the sort of issues that needed to be taken to Comms - it seems to be true that most of the issues raised are really more to do with YJCC in particular than the boards as a whole.

That may not be accurate, but it is the impression I've gotten. Agree/disagree/want a cupcake?