[RULE]

Originally Posted by Kiwi Peewee

1. Stop hiding staff votes. I have no idea why staff votes are currently hidden, it just creates tension and confusion for everyone else and removes transparency among staff voting (which isn't currently an issue but it's best to prevent it ever being so). Staff should be setting an example for the rest of the site with their votes, not keeping them secret and unaccountable.

Completely agree, i'd have no problem with my vote being revealed. However i think the reason for this is that staff comments are visible to people who havent voted yet. Some if someone views a battle and sees RULE voted for Kiwi, it might influence there vote. Which is why we masked votes to being with. So UNLESS its possible to have mod comments only shown, but mod votes with comments NOT shown, it wont be possible.

Originally Posted by Kiwi Peewee

2. Stop accounts popping back after years of inactivity to vote on important battles. The solution to this is simple in my opinion. If battling in a tournament is set to be determined on meeting a voting quota in the previous months, so should voting in one. If people could only vote on tournament battles once they'd voted a certain number of times in the current or previous season, that would prevent all of these ridiculous instances where someones buddies (or multis) return to the site after years away just to drop a vote and log off.

Again throughly agree with this. Howabout anyone without a bronze voting badge cannot vote on tournament / PPV battles? This might cause a SLIGHT issue in the first week of every season, but beyond that a good suggestion. In fact i think i will impliment this if the feedback is positive.

Originally Posted by Kiwi Peewee

3. Redefine the FVC. Since the new voting badges system, I think that quantity of votes should no longer be considered the FVC's purpose. We are currently seeing a whole load of new incentives to vote more (tournament entry, cool badges, Auto's competition etc). I think the FVC should focus on having high-quality voters who make sure to cover every important battle and then are pushed to vote more, but with quality over quantity being the goal. When quantity is your #1 priority you end up with inexperienced voters with a high VP swaying battles, which is the opposite of the FVC's purpose.

Voting is opinion based. One person will ike different things but i will agree that i (personally) have found a number of FVC votes veryyyyy difficult to agree with. FVC is very high on the priority list and will be a big part of the new moderator appointment i think.

Originally Posted by Kiwi Peewee

4. Officially strip Row's titles (and award them to the finalists he cheated). I don't know a huge deal about Row, but I know that he was caught cheating in 1 final and the result was reversed, and there seems to be pretty concrete proof he did likewise in his other wins (i.e. the GC against Bleu). If he were officially no longer recognised, this precedent could be carried forward that cheating causes someone to lose all their titles, which adds a much weightier deterrent than a ban that may or may not last.

Anyone PROVEN to of cheated during a tournament they won WILL be stripped. But i will only accept PROOF. Not the fact that they have cheated before. I need to know that they cheated at THAT time.

Originally Posted by Kiwi Peewee

5. Make new accounts start with 0 VP for the first few days/weeks until they become familiar with LB. It isn't their fault that they don't know what they're doing, but it also isn't the fault of battlers who might lose because of it. If some sort of site-greeters program was in place to help guide them and teach them this it would really shorten the length of time this was necessary. (This would also stop people from making new multi accounts just to vote on their battles)

Would be far too hard to manage this. And with the mixture of voting threads, voting badges and & FVC there shouldnt be battles being decided by uneducated voters.

Originally Posted by Kiwi Peewee

6. Have more staff. Idk if the current process is going to add 1 or 2 new staff members, but if it's only adding 1, I don't think that's enough. Basically this whole month Rai has clearly been extremely busy irl, which is totally fine and to be expected. This has meant that since 2FUEL stepped down, RULE has been basically the only active staff member, and there's a limit to how much time he can be online every day. If there was 1 more staff member they would hopefully (due to presumed time-zone differences) act like shift workers, each covering part of the day. However, we'd still only have 1 online staff member the majority of the time. In the case of a situation that needs to be addressed urgently, this means that that staff member must be the one to deal with it, even if they have a conflict of interest or its not their area of expertise. I still trust them to handle it, but it's much better if we have multiple staff online most of the time so this isn't an issue.

Given how many issues there has been in the past, X is understandable reluctant to bring too many people into the fold. I have been made Head Moderator to be able to oversee the mods to ensure this doesnt happen. X would like 1 more moderator, i would like two. We have discussed this (and continue to) but at the end of the day we've gone from some seriously dark times to a big resurgence lately and we have to make sure we get this right. Believe me when i say me and X have spoken about new moderators daily since Fuel stepped down.


Some great points here Kiwi. Look forward to hearing the feedback.

[RULE]

Originally Posted by Kiwi Peewee

1. Stop hiding staff votes. I have no idea why staff votes are currently hidden, it just creates tension and confusion for everyone else and removes transparency among staff voting (which isn't currently an issue but it's best to prevent it ever being so). Staff should be setting an example for the rest of the site with their votes, not keeping them secret and unaccountable.

Completely agree, i'd have no problem with my vote being revealed. However i think the reason for this is that staff comments are visible to people who havent voted yet. Some if someone views a battle and sees RULE voted for Kiwi, it might influence there vote. Which is why we masked votes to being with. So UNLESS its possible to have mod comments only shown, but mod votes with comments NOT shown, it wont be possible.

Originally Posted by Kiwi Peewee

2. Stop accounts popping back after years of inactivity to vote on important battles. The solution to this is simple in my opinion. If battling in a tournament is set to be determined on meeting a voting quota in the previous months, so should voting in one. If people could only vote on tournament battles once they'd voted a certain number of times in the current or previous season, that would prevent all of these ridiculous instances where someones buddies (or multis) return to the site after years away just to drop a vote and log off.

Again throughly agree with this. Howabout anyone without a bronze voting badge cannot vote on tournament / PPV battles? This might cause a SLIGHT issue in the first week of every season, but beyond that a good suggestion. In fact i think i will impliment this if the feedback is positive.

Originally Posted by Kiwi Peewee

3. Redefine the FVC. Since the new voting badges system, I think that quantity of votes should no longer be considered the FVC's purpose. We are currently seeing a whole load of new incentives to vote more (tournament entry, cool badges, Auto's competition etc). I think the FVC should focus on having high-quality voters who make sure to cover every important battle and then are pushed to vote more, but with quality over quantity being the goal. When quantity is your #1 priority you end up with inexperienced voters with a high VP swaying battles, which is the opposite of the FVC's purpose.

Voting is opinion based. One person will ike different things but i will agree that i (personally) have found a number of FVC votes veryyyyy difficult to agree with. FVC is very high on the priority list and will be a big part of the new moderator appointment i think.

Originally Posted by Kiwi Peewee

4. Officially strip Row's titles (and award them to the finalists he cheated). I don't know a huge deal about Row, but I know that he was caught cheating in 1 final and the result was reversed, and there seems to be pretty concrete proof he did likewise in his other wins (i.e. the GC against Bleu). If he were officially no longer recognised, this precedent could be carried forward that cheating causes someone to lose all their titles, which adds a much weightier deterrent than a ban that may or may not last.

Anyone PROVEN to of cheated during a tournament they won WILL be stripped. But i will only accept PROOF. Not the fact that they have cheated before. I need to know that they cheated at THAT time.

Originally Posted by Kiwi Peewee

5. Make new accounts start with 0 VP for the first few days/weeks until they become familiar with LB. It isn't their fault that they don't know what they're doing, but it also isn't the fault of battlers who might lose because of it. If some sort of site-greeters program was in place to help guide them and teach them this it would really shorten the length of time this was necessary. (This would also stop people from making new multi accounts just to vote on their battles)

Would be far too hard to manage this. And with the mixture of voting threads, voting badges and & FVC there shouldnt be battles being decided by uneducated voters.

Originally Posted by Kiwi Peewee

6. Have more staff. Idk if the current process is going to add 1 or 2 new staff members, but if it's only adding 1, I don't think that's enough. Basically this whole month Rai has clearly been extremely busy irl, which is totally fine and to be expected. This has meant that since 2FUEL stepped down, RULE has been basically the only active staff member, and there's a limit to how much time he can be online every day. If there was 1 more staff member they would hopefully (due to presumed time-zone differences) act like shift workers, each covering part of the day. However, we'd still only have 1 online staff member the majority of the time. In the case of a situation that needs to be addressed urgently, this means that that staff member must be the one to deal with it, even if they have a conflict of interest or its not their area of expertise. I still trust them to handle it, but it's much better if we have multiple staff online most of the time so this isn't an issue.

Given how many issues there has been in the past, X is understandable reluctant to bring too many people into the fold. I have been made Head Moderator to be able to oversee the mods to ensure this doesnt happen. X would like 1 more moderator, i would like two. We have discussed this (and continue to) but at the end of the day we've gone from some seriously dark times to a big resurgence lately and we have to make sure we get this right. Believe me when i say me and X have spoken about new moderators daily since Fuel stepped down.


Some great points here Kiwi. Look forward to hearing the feedback.