+- Forums - Open Redstone Engineers (https://forum.openredstone.org)
+-- Forum: Announcements (https://forum.openredstone.org/forum-102.html)
+--- Forum: Announcements (https://forum.openredstone.org/forum-7.html)
+--- Thread: Mod? (/thread-4029.html)
Mod? - tyler569 - 07-11-2014
So I want opinions on the idea of a moderator rank, we obviously had one on the RDF and no longer here.
I want to make entirely clear, this is only to get the community opinion, even if this gets a 100% yes vote, that's not a guarantee it will happen.
I liked PNW's concept of a mod from this post, where a mod could do basic moderation, school apps, perhaps even trials. I imagine this would be an elected position if established.
Again, no guarantees, only thoughts/votes.
RE: Mod? - PNWMan - 07-11-2014
Thank you, tyler, for considering my opinion! However, I do feel that the election should be different than the staff election. Yesterday me and a few ORE friends argued and reasoned that the elections are really a popularity contest. Last staff election, who were the two MOST popular people at that time? Of course they were greatgamer and darkroom. Now, this is not to say the new admins were not chosen improperly, however, it is slightly rigged to popularity and even redstone skill.
May I suggest possibly a nomination for [Moderator], then some sort of trial, where maybe... a volunteer does a quick "fake trial for build" to see how the person does at helping and judging, or possibly a fake application (in a hidden section if possible to avoid clutter) to see how they do at accepting applications.
RE: Mod? - Iceglade - 07-11-2014
This is an amazing idea. I do think that we shouldn't do it like the old staff elections, but I also think that the 'fake trial' would be a huge logistical challenge between having admins to judge them and sort through all the 'trial's. (because EVERY active member or almost every active member would want one of these trials.)
Alternatively, we could have an open "application" for mod with reasons much like a build app (that the potential staff fills out), and the current admins (alone) would pick several (three to four) nominees who would then take the build trial. One way or the other, I do think ORE needs this.
RE: Mod? - David - 07-11-2014
Great idea!
RE: Mod? - newomaster - 07-11-2014
We need to be really careful about doing this. If this were to happen we would really have to solidify our application and trial standards (I suggest we revisit that thread in RB). The more people we trust with the application and trial system, the more opportunities for error and confusion there are, therefore the system must be as robust as possible (which probably means we should rewrite all the application guides and such, to make sure everything is consistent).
iirc the reason we got rid of the Foreman rank was so that all staff had equal power and (in theory) therefore more productive.
-going off on a tangent/rant here, this is partly my answer to cut's thread about the state of the community-
<rant>
In my opinion one of our problems is that we turn down too many people. I know what you'll say: "Their application wasn't adequate;" Visitors do not have a clear idea of our expectations when they log in, and are given little help on applying. For an "Open" redstone server, we sure are exclusive. I realize we have the school server for this, but joining that is as confusing as the build server...even moreso... how would you like to be directed to a totally different server when logging in, told to wait for someone to accept your application, and then try for ages to request the help of a teacher to teach you the required information to finally get into the build server? We need to be more open to new members. I know we like to try to be professional and we don't like the noobs interfering with us, but if we don't make new people want to be with us, we will quickly die out. If we don't have enough teachers and admins to maintain the school server... then get rid of it (build/school merge maybe? I've suggested it before). The school server system is just too confusing. We aren't making people want to learn redstone for the sake of knowing redstone, we are making people want to learn redstone for the sake of getting into the build server (if even that, a lot of people don't even make it that far and give up before then). We need to be a server where a new member can build and get help right away (at LEAST a visitor freebuild). I think concentrating everyone on one server might partly solve the staff issue. (And yes, I'm suggesting modelling our server's structure more after Stym's. It works.). </rant>
Still, having more administration around (presumably active, mature, and intelligent) will help us out with applications and introducing visitors to the server. It's a yes from me, but we have to watch how the new system plays out for a while and decide if we should keep it based on how it affects the server.
RE: Mod? - Iceglade - 07-11-2014
A good way around problem above may be to start with two or three [Moderator], and elect more (up to 4-5?) if that seems to be working okay.
RE: Mod? - PNWMan - 07-11-2014
I think that's a great idea, iceglade. instead of just going full speed ahead into, we should give it a test run to see if it works out nicely.
RE: Mod? - jxu - 07-12-2014
(07-11-2014, 09:40 PM)newomaster Wrote: iirc the reason we got rid of the Foreman rank was so that all staff had equal power and (in theory)This obviously did not happen - instead we got staff that should have been moderator but received too much power.
I agree with a test run - given the overwhelming votes, we have to at least try it.
RE: Mod? - LordDecapo - 07-12-2014
I like all of these suggestions. And i have read the original post and talked to PNW and Cut on the server about this. having about 8-10 Mod's of the more active members and have all the ones that are pretty active and mature put into a poll so ppl can vote on the top 8.
And the Censorship plugin, i have mixed feelings, i know i cuss on the server at times, but i make sure 95% of the time that i only do it if all the ppl online dont mind, and if anyone ever has a problem i stop,
I think it should be given a warning for excessive profanity and maybe a chat mute for set time periods given the frequency and severity of the remark.
Which if we have 8 to 10 active regularly, would be easy to control.
And i agree Mods should be able to do trials if they r decided to become a rank. but maybe like multiple (2-3) mods have to accept a trial to give a more balanced and fair trial, like a 2nd opinion. and again this wont be hard if the mods are active and plentiful,
RE: Mod? - PhysoniumI - 07-12-2014
Censorship plugins tend to misfire really often in my experience with them. In the end, self-censorship and human censors are the best method.
RE: Mod? - LordDecapo - 07-12-2014
(07-12-2014, 02:05 AM)PhysoniumI Wrote: Censorship plugins tend to misfire really often in my experience with them. In the end, self-censorship and human censors are the best method.
Yes. i have been kicked way to much from styms for stupid short hand of non profane words,, its why i dont go on there lol
RE: Mod? - scrounchtike - 07-12-2014
Stym's way of handling swearing is stupid in my opinion.
I don't think banning swears would help our community
ORE should stay the same about profanities, because its perfect that way
RE: Mod? - PNWMan - 07-12-2014
I agree with plugins backfiring. there are 1000 different ways to swear without actually saying the swear words, and those are just as offensive. And if someone is truly offended by a moderate use of swearing, that is their problem and they are not ready to join the internet, imo.
RE: Mod? - jxu - 07-12-2014
Censorship: No
Spam filters: Yes
RE: Mod? - tyler569 - 07-12-2014
Perhaps a rate limiter on chat, i.e. "you've already said 3 things this second, perhaps you may want to wait 3 or 4 seconds before you talk again"
RE: Mod? - PNWMan - 07-12-2014
spam filters are faulty too. what good will it do? slow spam? a message every 3-4 seconds is still spam. even every 10 seconds is still spam. besides, that would be annoying as crap to everyone else. I'd rather have very occasional spam incidents than have to wait for the stupid counter.
RE: Mod? - PhysoniumI - 07-12-2014
There already is a spam filter in Bukkit >.> Have you ever tried to spam? [trololo]
RE: Mod? - Cutlassw30 - 07-12-2014
I think the best anti swear anti spam is a active mod.
RE: Mod? - Nuuppanaani - 07-12-2014
I really like the idea of a mod. But are mods going to be able to punish people, ie. issue mutes or bans? If so the ppl elected as mods would have to be pretty much as trustworthy as staff anyways :/
RE: Mod? - LordDecapo - 07-12-2014
I agree with cut and the posts above his.
Spam filters get annoying, if im teaching someone something or explaining somethign and im sending mesages super fast, its not "spam" but if i type to fast, i can get kicked for no good reason, Mods would be the better solution.
I also agree that if someone is offended by a random F bomb here and there (unless an ass hole is cussing them out with the F bombs) when someone for instance messes up on a build and they just go FUCK!, not directed at anyone,,, then the person offended isnt mature enough to be on ORE, IMO
(07-12-2014, 02:04 PM)Nuuppanaani Wrote: I really like the idea of a mod. But are mods going to be able to punish people, ie. issue mutes or bans? If so the ppl elected as mods would have to be pretty much as trustworthy as staff anyways :/
The should be able to ban, but ONLY like 15min temp ban MAX. and muting for about the same time or a little longer, any serious displinary actions should be decided by staff
RE: Mod? - Iceglade - 07-12-2014
(07-12-2014, 02:39 PM)LordDecapo Wrote: The should be able to ban, but ONLY like 15min temp ban MAX. and muting for about the same time or a little longer, any serious displinary actions should be decided by staff
I absolutely agree with this. The less difficult responsibility we put in the hands of mods (who will likely have little administration experience), the better.
RE: Mod? - PabloDons - 07-16-2014
having mods comes with a lot of advantages, it will for instance make selecting staff a lot easier because of moderation experience. I would also point out that moderators can have an opinion when staff is discussing important things, 2 heads is always better than 1.
In my opinion, moderators should be like a helping hand to staff more than anything because it's always going to be up to staff for any considerable decistions
RE: Mod? - greatgamer34 - 07-17-2014
Ill be willing to switch my vote from "Members/Staff. Nothing else." as long as mods would not try to push for more power than other mods. Like in the past, mod "A" shouldnt have SSH if mod "b" doesnt.
RE: Mod? - JeremyG - 07-17-2014
I agree with greatgamer. What had beforehand caused trouble with the foreman rank was that some foremen had different permissions. There were like 3 foremen who had been opped and the rest not, some had ssh, which was why we merged them in the first place.
I'm completely for having a rank inbetween if the permissions are managed such that every mod has the same powers.
RE: Mod? - Billman555555 - 07-17-2014
(07-11-2014, 09:40 PM)newomaster Wrote: <rant>Let's do an idea brainstorm based on this paragraph of ranting newo.
In my opinion one of our problems is that we turn down too many people. I know what you'll say: "Their application wasn't adequate;" Visitors do not have a clear idea of our expectations when they log in, and are given little help on applying. For an "Open" redstone server, we sure are exclusive. I realize we have the school server for this, but joining that is as confusing as the build server...even moreso... how would you like to be directed to a totally different server when logging in, told to wait for someone to accept your application, and then try for ages to request the help of a teacher to teach you the required information to finally get into the build server? We need to be more open to new members. I know we like to try to be professional and we don't like the noobs interfering with us, but if we don't make new people want to be with us, we will quickly die out. If we don't have enough teachers and admins to maintain the school server... then get rid of it (build/school merge maybe? I've suggested it before). The school server system is just too confusing. We aren't making people want to learn redstone for the sake of knowing redstone, we are making people want to learn redstone for the sake of getting into the build server (if even that, a lot of people don't even make it that far and give up before then). We need to be a server where a new member can build and get help right away (at LEAST a visitor freebuild). I think concentrating everyone on one server might partly solve the staff issue. (And yes, I'm suggesting modelling our server's structure more after Stym's. It works.). </rant>
I think a rebuild of the permissions ranks are in order as well as the applications system. Further to that a combination of the school and build servers.
Then applications could be combined so based upon skill level represented in Aplication/trial. Then giving the visitor a rank of Student if they still have to learn, or builder if they are competent to start building with the rest of us. That way they don't have to put in 2 applications, further to this we could make it so they can request a rank up if they believe they are ready and a Mod/Forman/(insert xeo's new name for them here) could judge.
Just some ideas I thought about.