Minor Notices & Staff Changes Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
RE: Minor Notices & Staff Changes (Latest Announcement: Post #83)

I have some questions DNA,

1) How do you know that ordinary members/contributors are capable of making more educated decisions than mods? This is especially important when sensitive information is a factor and only mods are allowed to see all the cards on the table, such as warning history and alts.

2) Who choses the jury? People who can be entrusted with a position of power have already been given one by Shining Raikou and co. To me, it therefore seems that the jury will a) be a bottom of the barrel group picked by the mods or b) chosen by the public. In which case...

2 a) Why would those who have yet to be entrusted with a jury position be any more qualified than someone who has managed power for years (smods)?

2 b) If publicly elected, then the election process for jury members will surely be tainted with bias and will turn into a popularity contest.
 
RE: Minor Notices & Staff Changes (Latest Announcement: Post #83)

Can someone please tell me why we are trying to fix something that isn't broken? This forum doesn't need a 'jury' to appoint a staff member and the mods don't need to ask members if they can sticky a thread. It's a forum. People who deserve promotion, GET promotion based on, I'd assume, the views of other staff members. Nothing more. Nothing less.

Celebi23 made the most black and white post of this entire thread.
Celebi23 said:
A more effective solution would be to give warnings to whoever continues this debate if the mods do not want it continued.
Click to expand...
 
RE: Minor Notices & Staff Changes (Latest Announcement: Post #83)

Deus: Nightmare Autarch said:
<3

Okay, so here's my idea.

The staff could have X amount of members (regular members, I mean) helping out with staff decisions. They'd be told the basic gist of what's been going on, the qualifications, the position, and the candidates, plus whatever information is needed to best make the decision.
These members would be picked beforehand to help out, possibly with the stipulation of not being able to say who the people are or whatever. The people who'd be picked from the member end would be peeps that are well-informed and know how to make decisions well.

The end result is that it can be said that the members are actually giving physical input. Is this any different than the suggestion box? Yes, since the members helping out will know who's being appointed for what instead of just giving nominations.

...I hope that explanation didn't go around in circles as I was trying to get my point across. Basically, just have like 2 or 3 normal members be in on making decisions, like a sort of liaison.
Click to expand...

Even though I love your idea as democracy is always better if you ask me I see a problem with it. It is ironic as it is the same one that you guys had with Nigel's promotion. Who will choose this "committee" which then decides who will be promoted? Us mods? You could as easily disagree with our decision of who will be in it as you disagreed with Nigel's promotion.

Jay said:
I like the idea however I think that there are people who should be/are contributors who shouldnt be making decisions. There are also people who aren't contributors who possibly should be involved in such matters.
Click to expand...

Evidence #1 haha

You can see the problem right here in this posts. Just to make it clear I have nothing against Jay as I think he is a smart and active member. Let's say that Contibutors are the group that is responsible for voting on promotions. He doesn't agree with that some people should be in it and he supports some people that he thinks they should be in it which is normal as everybody has their opinion. Now you tell me what stops him from complaining about the new sistem if he feels that it is unfair? You are just back at square one and that is having problems with Mods decions.

ComfortEagle said:
PokéBeach is not a democracy when it comes to staff. Members just cannot make the judgement or even be involved because you do not know what goes on behind the curtains. The person you might want to get a spot might turn out to be the scumbag who ruined his chances.

The people who deserve Palkia, Suicune, and Milotic get it; the people that do not get it have reasons why.
Click to expand...

I hate when some mods say "you don't know what goes behind the scenes" like it is a national secret. It is not like we have a case file of every member and we just go on saying oh this guys sucks, this one disagreed with me once. That is just silly. Also I have a feeling certain member are writing in this thread in hope of getting more power on the forums which I don't judge as it is in human nature. And please don't say "it is easy for him he is a mod", I can relate to all of you as I was a regural member not so long ago.
 
RE: Minor Notices & Staff Changes (Latest Announcement: Post #83)

So what this really boils down to is everyone in this thread is mad bro because Nigel is pink and is crying foul because he is young.

I mentioned this in the chat room but I'll say it here for everyone else to see:

Ideally, the head (or co-heads, as it were) of TCG should be a high-level player with a consistent and proven record. Almost everyone who fits this description is either retired (Celebi23), banned (see: like all the old strategists), or super banned (z-man).

But someone has to run the section. Serperior and Glace were both nominated to take over, but both declined for their own reasons. In the end, it was decided that Vulpix Yolk and Nigel would be best working together (like Pride and de do for VG) to run TCG, and both of them were nominated by Celebi23 (former head).

Getting mad bro because Nigel is pink implies that you have no faith in not only our judgment, but Celebi23's as well since he also endorsed the decision.

We would love to have someone of z-man's or Celebi's caliber on this site to help lead TCG, but we just don't have any more outstanding players like that. This does not mean that the team of Vulpix Yolk and Nigel can't run the TCG sector effectively. Heck, I could run the TCG section if I really wanted to pour all my energy into doing it.

tl;dr: Until Nigel messes up (and I mean seriously messes up), cut the kid some slack and let him show you what he can do.

I wish you guys would stop trying to invent ways to pick mods that involves you guys. It's not like we're against member opinion, but putting decisions like who is going to help run this forum completely (or even mostly) in the hands of the members is a really bad idea. As was mentioned before, if there's someone you think would make a spiffy mod, tout them in Website Feedback. Convince us. That's not to say that they will definitely become a mod, but if you can get multiple mods to agree, that person has a pretty good chance of being offered a spot the next time we're looking to promote someone.

It's not like we just mod people out of the blue. As a matter of fact, we (the super mod team) have a LOT more autonomy in regards to promotions, demotions, forum changes, etc. than we did, say, three or four years ago.
 
RE: Minor Notices & Staff Changes (Latest Announcement: Post #83)

Shadow Scyther said:
Also I have a feeling certain member are writing in this thread in hope of getting more power on the forums which I don't judge as it is in human nature.
Click to expand...
Either that's not true or they are doing it in a very bad manner. LOL :´D
 
RE: Minor Notices & Staff Changes (Latest Announcement: Post #83)

Okay. I'm not mad or anything that Nigel is pink. I'm only 14 and I think that I could do a good job as a mod/s-mod/etc (Again, I don't want to be a mod or anything, i'm just saying).

My original idea was to have some ex-mods (the unbanned ones with good records) to do this, as they have been in the shoes of the people who have to keep us from killing eachother here and know the format of doing this as well as their previous experience from doing so.

I didn't mean for this to become some sort of battlefield for voicing a simple opinion, but now that I think of it, someone else probably would have anyways.
 
RE: Minor Notices & Staff Changes (Latest Announcement: Post #83)

Eh, yeah, I guess so. It was just a rough idea I had, that's all. And, the way it looks like now, it'd probably make more problems than it would fix. ...I'm going to see how I can improve on my original idea and see where that goes; I'll pop back up again when I think I have a better move.

Shining Raikou said:
I think the idea is valuable. Eventually I can see the Contributors becoming sort of a "jury" for decisions by higher ups. (Since they should be active and well-informed if they are in the group)
Click to expand...

That...could work, to a point. They're connected to the staff and they know part of what's going on, at least. I don't see...too many problems with this.

PMJ said:
Ideally, the head (or co-heads, as it were) of TCG should be a high-level player with a consistent and proven record. Almost everyone who fits this description is either retired (Celebi23), banned (see: like all the old strategists), or super banned (z-man).

But someone has to run the section. Serperior and Glace were both nominated to take over, but both declined for their own reasons. In the end, it was decided that Vulpix Yolk and Nigel would be best working together (like Pride and de do for VG) to run TCG, and both of them were nominated by Celebi23 (former head).
Click to expand...

This is always what I see as "the sad truth". We barely have anyone good anymore lying around and as a result there are very few qualified people to pick from. This...is probably the main reason why I get mad, and it's not all that good of a reason.

Sigh, I'm tired. If you need me I shall be in my trailer.
 
RE: Minor Notices & Staff Changes (Latest Announcement: Post #83)

Bob The Magical Penguin said:
My original idea was to have some ex-mods (the unbanned ones with good records) to do this, as they have been in the shoes of the people who have to keep us from killing eachother here and know the format of doing this as well as their previous experience from doing so.
Click to expand...
Nah, even us former moderators don't have an definite answer to situations like these. But really, what's the problem here? As PMJ said, there's no one better than Vulpix Yolk and Nigel that has shown that they're willing to do the job and at least are capable. Doubters are free to say what they want; it's not like the staff will reverse their decisions from the "whining." If anything, don't sound pushy or arrogant when you make your points. And make your points with solid logic or evidence, mind you.
 
RE: Minor Notices & Staff Changes (Latest Announcement: Post #83)

I hope people understand this.

I don't think we should vote for our police officers. I think that the police chief would be a much better judge over who should be a police officer. Just saying, its very inefficient to try to get anyone to vote for something, especially for a person, not only would it be a popularity contest within the whole forum, but if we had a group voting, it would be even more of, he's my friends so I'm voting for him.
 
RE: Minor Notices & Staff Changes (Latest Announcement: Post #83)

Voting for stuff is a joke. It's not a credibility contest but a popularity contest if you include the general public.
 
RE: Minor Notices & Staff Changes (Latest Announcement: Post #83)

^Agreed.

Guys, please leave the voting to staff. Being a Moderator or Contributor is a hard and thankless job, and I'm pretty sure they wouldn't want to put up with this burden. Just saying.

I do know that if a good and smart person would work hard to earn the Contributor status. It isn't simply something that you can ask for Christmas. Those people are pretty rare. Basically, they're like Absol, who warn people of incoming disasters. In this point of view, the Absol (Contributors) are here to warn (help) people of disasters (which would make the 'Contributors' eligible for the job.)
 
RE: Minor Notices & Staff Changes (Latest Announcement: Post #83)

also, you guys have been bashing nigel for 4 pages. :p
 
RE: Minor Notices & Staff Changes (Latest Announcement: Post #83)

They have. I don't really care either way. I just want to play Werewolf and look at Empoleon decks.
 
RE: Minor Notices & Staff Changes (Latest Announcement: Post #83)

Reshiwott said:
also, you guys have been bashing nigel for 4 pages. :p
Click to expand...

No, others were bashing nigel before this voting thing came up, and was only about 3 pages. That's way over with now.
 
RE: Minor Notices & Staff Changes (Latest Announcement: Post #83)

Ok, you can stop now. Any posts just saying people are bashing each other will be warned as spam...
 
RE: Minor Notices & Staff Changes (Latest Announcement: Post #83)

Anyway, give Nigel a chance. IIRC, he was the one who replaced me when I left modding for Vanguard XD. So I do believe he can do it.
 
RE: Minor Notices & Staff Changes (Latest Announcement: Post #83)

Riskbreakers said:
Anyway, give Nigel a chance. IIRC, he was the one who replaced me when I left modding for Vanguard XD. So I do believe he can do it.
Click to expand...

I am. I think he can do it too. Although I haven't really congratulated him or anything, I'd be a little surprised if he did mess up.
 
RE: Minor Notices & Staff Changes (Latest Announcement: Post #83)

So basically, the reason we're not doing a democratic style for our mods is the following:

"Members are stupid, mods are smart."
"Members would pick their favourite with no regard to the future of Pokebeach."

Honestly... there are members here who have much more experience in Pokebeach than mods. We could prevent the popularity contest problem (which I won't deny is a problem if voting is open to the general public) by either having a post count limit on voting with a fairly high number, maybe around 2000 to weed out any potential newbies. We could also have a group such as Contributors or Professors create a list of "trusted members" that can vote. A popularity contest can be avoided.

As for Nigel, I think he should have a chance to prove himself as long as the current mod system is in place.
 
RE: Minor Notices & Staff Changes (Latest Announcement: Post #83)

Chillarmy said:
So basically, the reason we're not doing a democratic style for our mods is the following:

"Members are stupid, mods are smart."
"Members would pick their favourite with no regard to the future of Pokebeach."

Honestly... there are members here who have much more experience in Pokebeach than mods. We could prevent the popularity contest problem (which I won't deny is a problem if voting is open to the general public) by either having a post count limit on voting with a fairly high number, maybe around 2000 to weed out any potential newbies. We could also have a group such as Contributors or Professors create a list of "trusted members" that can vote. A popularity contest can be avoided.

As for Nigel, I think he should have a chance to prove himself as long as the current mod system is in place.
Click to expand...

The problem with this idea, though, is that this isn't a political setting... :/ Most of us are just volunteers who were asked if we would help out in certain areas of the forums.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top