Page 1 of 1
Moderation Problem
Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2012 6:52 pm
by Sammy_Bro
This isn't a rant or anything, it's a problem that needs to be fixed. We don't have four moderators, or three moderators. We only have 2 active moderators. Stinky is a test moderator by MS, and xprd isn't on as active as before. What I'm saying is we need another moderator election, a poll, or something. This forum was made to have 3 moderators, tyteen, Qloof, and xprd. We need to replace xprd, but we don't need to replace xprd forever, we need to substitute xprd (unless xprd will not come back or still be inactive and active for a few minutes, then we'll have to replace xprd).
We need MS to read this.
If you have any ideas to expand this, please PM me.
Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2012 6:53 pm
by Nobody
I agree a new moderator would be good, but for a completely different reason.
Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2012 6:55 pm
by yot yot5
I don't see any reason to have a new moderator. Tyteen and Qloof are both very busy, and I never see any topic that hasn't been locked and should have.
Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2012 6:57 pm
by Sammy_P
Here are my two cents: We just only need 1 or 2 Moderators for such a small community like this. Tyteen is the most active, and ~x'prd~ is the least active. If we had Moderator elections, the whole Off-Topic would want to be one.
SOLUTION: A moderator election, I guess (I won't be running for Moderator. I'm on board with the idea of Emerald being one)
Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2012 6:58 pm
by Sammy_Bro
yot yot5 wrote:I don't see any reason to have a new moderator. Why not? MS wanted 3 moderators to moderate this area, but one of them is inactive. Tyteen and Qloof are both very busy, I know they are busy, but because they are busy doing other things, we'll need other people to take their "shifts". and I never see any topic that hasn't been locked and should have. This isn't a topic that should be locked under your condition, it's a topic that explains a problem happening now.
Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2012 7:00 pm
by Sammy_P
Sammy_Bro wrote:I know they are busy, but because they are busy doing other things, we'll need other people to take their "shifts".
That makes no sense whatsoever.
Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2012 7:01 pm
by Sammy_Bro
Sammy_P wrote:Here are my two cents: We just only need 1 or 2 Moderators for such a small community like this. All hell will break loose if a spammer will enter and there is only two moderators offline doing important things then. Tyteen is the most active, and ~x'prd~ is the least active. Right. We need someone to replace xprd. If we had Moderator elections, the whole Off-Topic would want to be one. But then no one would be a moderator, because MS would can the idea of moderation.
SOLUTION: A moderator election, I guess (I won't be running for Moderator. I'm on board with the idea of Emerald being one) Just because a person seems like a good moderator doesn't mean he will be a good moderator, no offense Emerald.
Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2012 7:02 pm
by Sammy_Bro
Sammy_P wrote:Sammy_Bro wrote:I know they are busy, but because they are busy doing other things, we'll need other people to take their "shifts".
That makes no sense whatsoever.
When I say "shifts", it means when someone is doing something offline, someone should be moderating online.
Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2012 7:03 pm
by Sammy_P
Sammy_Bro wrote:Sammy_P wrote:Sammy_Bro wrote:I know they are busy, but because they are busy doing other things, we'll need other people to take their "shifts".
That makes no sense whatsoever.
When I say "shifts", it means when someone is doing something offline, someone should be moderating online.
Yeah, like anyone is on the forum all night.
Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2012 7:04 pm
by Sammy_Bro
Sammy_P wrote:Sammy_Bro wrote:Sammy_P wrote:Sammy_Bro wrote:I know they are busy, but because they are busy doing other things, we'll need other people to take their "shifts".
That makes no sense whatsoever.
When I say "shifts", it means when someone is doing something offline, someone should be moderating online.
Yeah, like anyone is on the forum all night.
*cough* Time Zones *cough* Homework *cough*
Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2012 7:06 pm
by Sammy_P
Sammy_Bro wrote:Sammy_P wrote:Sammy_Bro wrote:Sammy_P wrote:Sammy_Bro wrote:I know they are busy, but because they are busy doing other things, we'll need other people to take their "shifts".
That makes no sense whatsoever.
When I say "shifts", it means when someone is doing something offline, someone should be moderating online.
Yeah, like anyone is on the forum all night.
*cough* Time Zones *cough* Homework *cough*
Time zones make sense, but homework?
Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2012 7:08 pm
by Sammy_Bro
Sammy_P wrote:Sammy_Bro wrote:Sammy_P wrote:Sammy_Bro wrote:Sammy_P wrote:Sammy_Bro wrote:I know they are busy, but because they are busy doing other things, we'll need other people to take their "shifts".
That makes no sense whatsoever.
When I say "shifts", it means when someone is doing something offline, someone should be moderating online.
Yeah, like anyone is on the forum all night.
*cough* Time Zones *cough* Homework *cough*
Time zones make sense, but homework?
Homework can consume time. And to reply your next question "Well, don't people all do homework at the same time?" check the bold part.
Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2012 7:12 pm
by MyNameIsKooky
Stupid topic is stupid.
Moderators don't need to be online 24/7, especially on a generally well-mannered forum like this.
Moderators are only good for locking topics.
We don't need any more moderators.
Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2012 7:15 pm
by Sammy_P
MyNameIsKooky wrote:Stupid topic is stupid.
indeef
Moderators don't need to be online 24/7, especially on a generally well-mannered forum like this.
indeef
Moderators are only good for locking topics.
and editing out swears (except for 2 ._.) in a kid-friendly place
We don't need any more moderators.
Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2012 7:18 pm
by Sammy_Bro
Sammy_P wrote:MyNameIsKooky wrote:Stupid topic is stupid.
indeef
Just because you agree that it is stupid doesn't mean you can have anything your way.
Moderators don't need to be online 24/7, especially on a generally well-mannered forum like this.
indeef
Moderators are only good for locking topics.
and editing out swears (except for 2 ._.) in a kid-friendly place
Which means that The Impossible Quiz Fangame thingy should be locked, because one of the questions has a swear in it.
We don't need any more moderators.
Until the time comes where 4chan finds us.
Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2012 9:18 pm
by yot yot5
Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2012 9:50 pm
by Emerald141
Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2012 10:05 pm
by Qloof234
I might be a bit biased here, but dropping my opinion nonetheless...
I don't think we need any more moderators at the moment. There's not really a lot of topics that need locking or situations that need to be cooled down these days.
If things start getting hectic (if you will) again, then by all means more moderators could be very necessary. At this point in time, I don't think so, though.
Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2012 10:14 pm
by Sammy_Bro
Emerald141 wrote:Sammy_Bro wrote:We don't need any more moderators.
Until the time comes where 4chan finds us.
And until that day comes, then this topic is completely irrelevant and unnecessary. Three moderators is already more than enough.
I chatted with xprd on steam. xprd is VERY inactive. So we have only 2 active moderators.
If we DID need another moderator, I'd consider applying for the job myself except for the fact that I probably wouldn't actually end up doing anything.
Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2012 10:49 pm
by Emerald141
Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2012 10:53 pm
by hoomdoom
I don't think we need another mod either, because it seems to me that Qloof and Tyteen are doing a great job moderating.
Do you not think so?
Posted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 12:46 am
by billy bob
This is the least of our problems.
Posted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 12:51 am
by hoomdoom
billy bob wrote:This is the least of our problems.
What do you mean?
Qloof and tyteen have done a good job locking topics and stuff, why do we need another one?
Posted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 1:08 am
by Sammy_P
hoomdoom wrote:billy bob wrote:This is the least of our problems.
What do you mean?
Qloof and tyteen have done a good job locking topics and stuff, why do we need another one?
He means having a new mod is the least of the problems on this forum.
Posted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 4:28 am
by Qloof234
billy bob wrote:This is the least of our problems.
I can't tell if you're implying if there's a bigger problem or not. If so, what is it? I check here on a daily basis, and don't see any real problems.
Posted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 9:21 am
by |Cookie|
MyNameIsKooky wrote:Stupid topic is stupid.
Moderators don't need to be online 24/7, especially on a generally well-mannered forum like this.
Moderators are only good for locking topics.
We don't need any more moderators.
ِAgree with you...
I'm a moderator for another forum and i don't check it everyday!
Maybe every 2 or 3 days...
It's hard to be moderator...
(This is real story!)
Oh!
I must check the forum again!
See ya!
Posted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 12:19 pm
by tyteen4a03
Moderators might be busy, but managing this community probably only takes 5 minutes out of a moderator's everyday life.
Sammy_Bro wrote:All hell will break loose if a spammer will enter and there is only two moderators offline doing important things then.
Sammy_P wrote:Sammy_Bro wrote:Sammy_P wrote:Sammy_Bro wrote:I know they are busy, but because they are busy doing other things, we'll need other people to take their "shifts".
That makes no sense whatsoever.
When I say "shifts", it means when someone is doing something offline, someone should be moderating online.
Yeah, like anyone is on the forum all night.
I take care of moderation at US midnight time (timezone), and Q takes care of moderation at US day time. However, we do not have the banhammer so if a spammer enters, we will still have to bomb MS with PMs in order to get them banned.
May I also remind everybody that new users are still going through manual moderation by MS, so unless the spammer uses a hacked account or the member wanted to spam (we've had this before over at WonderWiki), the chance of spam is very unlikely.
Details please?
Sammy_Bro wrote:We don't need any more moderators.
Until the time comes where 4chan finds us.
That's very unlikely, especially since Wonderland doesn't really have a place in internet culture.
Qloof234 wrote:billy bob wrote:This is the least of our problems.
I can't tell if you're implying if there's a bigger problem or not. If so, what is it? I check here on a daily basis, and don't see any real problems.
I don't think he meant there are bigger problems.
xpr'd is currently quite busy with real-life stuff and will be busy for quite a while, but since the size of the community is really small, 2 moderators plus an admin seems like the best choice of moderation for this forum. As Q said, unless things becomes hectic again, there will be no need for another moderator. I agree with that.
Speaking of a new moderator, I would also like to bring up a reflection topic about the current forum situation. Stay tuned.
