Since I can't post this in the staff board now....

[Mindless]

Originally Posted by Pugz

I agree with noble.. we do have a revolving door policy in place for mods that can contribute and want to commit later.. but if the work is slacking then we need to make moves to correct it.. i said it before.. if you cant commit the time then really you should step down and let some new blood step in .

And that's fine but why are we demodding people w/o saying anything to them at all first? I wasn't necessarily arguing against demodding them as much demodding them and not letting them be here in the board because guys like Jason and Just C have been around for a long time and done a whole lot for this site so they deserve to be in this board regardless of their activity as a staff member.

Originally Posted by NOBLE

Jason was re-added because he's been around so long but Just C and Phil Banks weren't. Why, because they haven't been around as long? How can we defend against charges of favoritism if both Jason and one of the other current mods go inactive and we demod the other mod but not Jason? Perhaps your position is we don't demod anyone because "activity isn't exactly a flurry around here." Active mods are exactly what's helping to generate the little activity that's still left through organizing tournaments/forum games etc!! If there's no work to do, we as staff should MAKE WORK for ourselves to do. Perhaps we have two different perceptions on what constitutes "activity" because from where I'm standing, in my entire nearly 3 years on staff, Jason has never really been that active. The admin logs will prove it. People aren't stupid. They know when someone is still on staff when they see their comments on battles or when they view "Forum Leaders." Mods complain and feel a certain way when they don't feel like everyone is holding their own weight and they are doing everything. I experienced the same feeling when I was a mod. "Half the mods are inactive" is one of the common complaints people make about the site. If it's not about them being a mod or having mod powers, then you should do what I did when RULE stepped down the first time , because I felt the same way about him having a seat at the table at the time, and simply edit their access mask to be able to view the staff forums. As far as having a few extra hands on deck, like I said before, there will always be people willing to join staff and help out. We never need to keep inactive mods around for fear of that.

I just hadn't gotten to Just C or any of the others yet. I think there does need to be a certain level of favortism towards people who have contributed the most to this site and given the most of their time. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that. Favortism isn't always bad. As far as my position goes it's not that hard to understand. All you have to do is flip their displayed user group around. It takes 1/10th the time it took me to create the usergroup I did and start adding people to it. That's what I was advocating. I've yet to even see anyone define what "inactivity" leads to being demodded.Jay was on vacation and getting his degree and shit but you couldn't just make his display usergroup Exclusive? Why? Why is that such a huge deal? You may have been staff and not seen him be "active" a whole lot in three years but I was staff for seven years and those four years before and any of the old heads will tell you he was and still is one of the most fair and respected moderators on this site. Modding isn't just about deleting votes and changing vote power and shit either. What's Jason's vote count? How many discussions has he been involved in?

Active mods don't generate activity. Active userbases do. The purpose of moderators is to keep that activity within the rules so that everyone has a fair experience with the site. The reason there's so little for the mods to do is because the userbase is shrinking away. Sure, they can generate stuff for themselves to do but to what extent? How many tournaments can they do? At what point do we say "Okay, something else needs to be done?" We get endless promises and ideas but nothing is ever done. At this rate, when I get to the day that marks ten years on this site, if it's still here, I feel like we're going to be in the same place. It's been like this for years now.

Let's be real, you're pissed because I went behind you and changed something. Something that wasn't even that major. You're pulling a power play because I made an executive decision that, as a senior staff member, I had every right to make. De-Staffing me w/o saying anything first or messaging me or anything like that is a snake ass move. @Pugz, I'm sorry this is how this went. X never would have let some shit like this go though. He trusted me and new I could make the right calls and gave me the latitude to make them. I'm not even angry man. I'm just disappointed you couldn't show me the same respect and trust he did.

[Mindless]

Originally Posted by Pugz

I agree with noble.. we do have a revolving door policy in place for mods that can contribute and want to commit later.. but if the work is slacking then we need to make moves to correct it.. i said it before.. if you cant commit the time then really you should step down and let some new blood step in .

And that's fine but why are we demodding people w/o saying anything to them at all first? I wasn't necessarily arguing against demodding them as much demodding them and not letting them be here in the board because guys like Jason and Just C have been around for a long time and done a whole lot for this site so they deserve to be in this board regardless of their activity as a staff member.

Originally Posted by NOBLE

Jason was re-added because he's been around so long but Just C and Phil Banks weren't. Why, because they haven't been around as long? How can we defend against charges of favoritism if both Jason and one of the other current mods go inactive and we demod the other mod but not Jason? Perhaps your position is we don't demod anyone because "activity isn't exactly a flurry around here." Active mods are exactly what's helping to generate the little activity that's still left through organizing tournaments/forum games etc!! If there's no work to do, we as staff should MAKE WORK for ourselves to do. Perhaps we have two different perceptions on what constitutes "activity" because from where I'm standing, in my entire nearly 3 years on staff, Jason has never really been that active. The admin logs will prove it. People aren't stupid. They know when someone is still on staff when they see their comments on battles or when they view "Forum Leaders." Mods complain and feel a certain way when they don't feel like everyone is holding their own weight and they are doing everything. I experienced the same feeling when I was a mod. "Half the mods are inactive" is one of the common complaints people make about the site. If it's not about them being a mod or having mod powers, then you should do what I did when RULE stepped down the first time , because I felt the same way about him having a seat at the table at the time, and simply edit their access mask to be able to view the staff forums. As far as having a few extra hands on deck, like I said before, there will always be people willing to join staff and help out. We never need to keep inactive mods around for fear of that.

I just hadn't gotten to Just C or any of the others yet. I think there does need to be a certain level of favortism towards people who have contributed the most to this site and given the most of their time. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that. Favortism isn't always bad. As far as my position goes it's not that hard to understand. All you have to do is flip their displayed user group around. It takes 1/10th the time it took me to create the usergroup I did and start adding people to it. That's what I was advocating. I've yet to even see anyone define what "inactivity" leads to being demodded.Jay was on vacation and getting his degree and shit but you couldn't just make his display usergroup Exclusive? Why? Why is that such a huge deal? You may have been staff and not seen him be "active" a whole lot in three years but I was staff for seven years and those four years before and any of the old heads will tell you he was and still is one of the most fair and respected moderators on this site. Modding isn't just about deleting votes and changing vote power and shit either. What's Jason's vote count? How many discussions has he been involved in?

Active mods don't generate activity. Active userbases do. The purpose of moderators is to keep that activity within the rules so that everyone has a fair experience with the site. The reason there's so little for the mods to do is because the userbase is shrinking away. Sure, they can generate stuff for themselves to do but to what extent? How many tournaments can they do? At what point do we say "Okay, something else needs to be done?" We get endless promises and ideas but nothing is ever done. At this rate, when I get to the day that marks ten years on this site, if it's still here, I feel like we're going to be in the same place. It's been like this for years now.

Let's be real, you're pissed because I went behind you and changed something. Something that wasn't even that major. You're pulling a power play because I made an executive decision that, as a senior staff member, I had every right to make. De-Staffing me w/o saying anything first or messaging me or anything like that is a snake ass move. @Pugz, I'm sorry this is how this went. X never would have let some shit like this go though. He trusted me and new I could make the right calls and gave me the latitude to make them. I'm not even angry man. I'm just disappointed you couldn't show me the same respect and trust he did.