Something I've noticed lately at PokéBeach

[DNA]

 

[Futa]

Alright, before I begin; people. DNA's entire post is an image, which means you can't quote anything from here by using that lovely quote button. DNA has his reasons for doing this.

Long story short, what I think the biggest point here is the mod/member communication. DNA, and many other members think that the communication between mods and members is awful, and I somewhat agree with his point. From what I've seen from the mods, they're basing communication off of letting members participate in projects, and the mods listening to the members's ideas. Unfortunately, this has not been going well. I'm assuming what DNA means by mod/member communication is by allowing the members to know some of the things that are happening behind the scenes. The closest thing we have to this are the Contributors, but even then, the Contributors are only a handful of members. While yes, it is possible to become a Contributor by constantly submitting articles, not everyone has the time to write articles, do projects for PB, etc.

I might seem strange for a mod speaking for a member's point of view, but perhaps if we allow member-input on certain projects, we can improve the communication between mods and members?

EDIT: DNA, there is a certain thing that I highly disagree with in your image. Bippa being a mod instead of Glaceon. We needed another TCG mod, considering some staff changes that have been happening (yeah, I know this kinda goes against what you said, but...). I can't really speak for VG since I'm never in that part of the forum, but Bippa isn't really knowledgeable about the TCG (no offense), so there's no need to mod him at a time like this.

 

[Vulpix Yolk]

I seriously think I am missing something. What do you want to see change? We can't control what mods decide to do. We can't see the future, when Gale was modded, he was very interested in making changes to the forums. Several month later, he had a change of heart and resigned. The people who work towards picking mods cannot see the future. Regular members cannot see the future either, if members had a say in who was modded, I feel the staff would last just as long, if not for shorter periods of time. People change. We can't control that.

Something that is annoying me is that Glaceon is getting all of this negative energy for being modded simply because of his age. People are not looking even taking the time to look at the reasons he is qualified. He has taken initiative to write for the site on many instances, is good at the TCG, and is an active member. He is much more mature than a lot of people who have been complaining about his moderation, clearly. Chariblaze was 13 when he was modded. Mudkip was 13 when he was modded. Does that mean they shouldn't have been appointed to the staff? People are saying that the staff needs to take more time to consider who they are appointing to staff. If the staff wasn't taking the time to look at all aspects of a member, Glaceon wouldn't have been modded, and would have been shot down simply because of his age. People are not giving the new staff members a chance, because of what a small portion of the people appointed before them did. Gale may have resigned, but out of the 5 other people he was modded with, 4 of them are still on staff and 2 of them have worked themselves up to Super Moderating position. Do you think the wrong members were modded in that instance? You can't expect people to be perfect. Seriously.

As for what goes on behind the scenes, we are fairly opening. Mods can't openly talk about everything a lot of the time, we can be punished for leaking info. Members seem to think that there are a lot of things going on behind the scenes. There really isn't much of importance we keep secret. And the things that are keep secret are kept secret for a reason. Things can be changed, and plans can be cancelled. And things like what members are receiving warnings and such really aren't other people's business. This being said, it could be better. What are the community's ideas? How can communication be improved? Complaining isn't going to get anyone anywhere, pitch ideas.

 

[Juliacoolo]

Communication, responsibility, and poor structure are among the strongest of issues. Communication being the worst.

However, as DNA said, hats off to the staff members who have been pulling strong. Obviously people are still getting their jobs done, as the forums aren't in pieces.

The best thing to do is stick to fundamentals, set up goals, and make things more business like.

Just use Hyperbeem's plan for the whole forum and go from there.

 

[Xous]

Well, after reading all of that text image... xD

I wasn't part of the group of individuals who decided to promote Glaceon, though I don't doubt the validity of the choice - I have faith that the people who came up with that decision put a lot of time and thought into it. That's all I have to say on that matter.

On the topic of transparency when it comes to promoting users, I'm a tiny bit disappointed at the lack of faith in the people who make the choices to promote people - again, they really do put a lot of time and thought into it. It's never a choice made on a whim. However, I do understand it's hard for some people to give people the benefit of the doubt when they have no knowledge of what goes on "behind closed doors" and they only see the demotions happen without total knowledge of why it happens (and why so frequently). If members want the matter of promotions to be more transparent, that's fine with me. Even as a member, I didn't care either way - I put faith in those who were chosen to moderate.

One final important opinion I have on the matter of the duration of moderators: Longer time as a moderator does not always equal being a better / more helpful / more beneficial moderator. Take myself, for example. I've been part of the moderating staff for a while now and there have been countless short-term moderators who I feel have been more beneficial to the site than I have. However, some of these shorter-term people have either (A) had to be let go for specific issues [activity, rule breaking, etc.], or (B) resigned because of personal life issues. Sometimes someone's demotion is out of the staff's hands - it just has to be done. Things change over time, and the people who are promoted may not be able to live up to the reasons they were promoted in the first place. (Even myself, of course.)

What I'm trying to say is this: just because people see "moderators dropping like flies!" or "so many changes in staff!" doesn't mean its a bad thing, in my opinion. It just means things are changing because they have to. If someone needs to be on the staff for a short term, I don't see a problem with it. What matters is results, which in my opinion we've seen.

Again, on the main topic of transparency, I'm all for it if that's what's truly best for the site. I have no problem with it whatsoever.

 

[Cinesra]

I seriously think I am missing something. What do you want to see change? We can't control what mods decide to do. We can't see the future, when Gale was modded, he was very interested in making changes to the forums. Several month later, he had a change of heart and resigned. The people who work towards picking mods cannot see the future. Regular members cannot see the future either, if members had a say in who was modded, I feel the staff would last just as long, if not for shorter periods of time. People change. We can't control that.

Something that is annoying me is that Glaceon is getting all of this negative energy for being modded simply because of his age. People are not looking even taking the time to look at the reasons he is qualified. He has taken initiative to write for the site on many instances, is good at the TCG, and is an active member. He is much more mature than a lot of people who have been complaining about his moderation, clearly. Chariblaze was 13 when he was modded. Mudkip was 13 when he was modded. Does that mean they shouldn't have been appointed to the staff? People are saying that the staff needs to take more time to consider who they are appointing to staff. If the staff wasn't taking the time to look at all aspects of a member, Glaceon wouldn't have been modded, and would have been shot down simply because of his age. People are not giving the new staff members a chance, because of what a small portion of the people appointed before them did. Gale may have resigned, but out of the 5 other people he was modded with, 4 of them are still on staff and 2 of them have worked themselves up to Super Moderating position. Do you think the wrong members were modded in that instance? You can't expect people to be perfect. Seriously.

The point is that we have way too many moderations and demoderations going on than we should have. This happens practically every month and so few moderators have lasted a long time. I agree that we can't see what future obstacles may get in the way of a mod remaining active and helpful, but we'd drastically improve on the staff changing issues if more time were taken to truly evaluate the mod.

I know somebody might say something along the lines of "We already take plenty of time to assess potential mods and our reasons are very valid." How would we members know this? We aren't asked whether we agree with changes to the staff; they just happen. When somebody gets modded or demodded, we aren't given much reasoning besides "We S-mods felt it was best".

When you don't elaborate beyond "We felt it was the best move for the site", we begin to wonder. People may wonder why secrets are being kept from us. This leads to suspicions about things such as corruption, that leads to dissent, and if the dissent doesn't lead to positive change; we get members being apathetic and quitting, or worse. Essentially, keeping secrets ends up hurting the site more than it helps. Personally, I'd love a reason why so many things are kept from us.

 

[Juliacoolo]

The smods don't have to justify every one of their decisions, and believe it or not, mod shuffling is understandable in the struggling situation we're in. Obviously they're doing their best to make a good decision.

The problem is efficiency, responsibility, and communication among staff.

There are reasons why some things are kept from the public, and they're mostly all understandable reasons. The issues come when these decisions turn south, creating upset members. Rather than worrying about the staff, the best that can be done is rethink the morals and guidelines used for everything.

 

[Zyflair]

I know somebody might say something along the lines of "We already take plenty of time to assess potential mods and our reasons are very valid." How would we members know this? We aren't asked whether we agree with changes to the staff; they just happen. When somebody gets modded or demodded, we aren't given much reasoning besides "We S-mods felt it was best".

As half-serious answer to that would be making DNA a moderator, let him see how things are actually going, and then see if he takes back anything.

 

[Zyflair]

Oh. Also guys, what do you think about having a mod election? That way, the members and the staff get to decide.

That turns into a popularity contest.

 

[Glace]

Oh. Also guys, what do you think about having a mod election? That way, the members and the staff get to decide.

That has been recommended before, but is a popularity contest.

Also, don't be afraid to contact mods (directed at everyone).

 

[Juliacoolo]

It's not necessarily a bad idea if it's used to nominate and bring awareness to mature users who the public want to see given a chance. The decision would ultimately be up to staff, however.

 

[Glace]

It's not necessarily a bad idea if it's used to nominate and bring awareness to mature users who the public want to see given a chance. The decision would ultimately be up to staff, however.

Just tell us. The staff will listen to opinions (provided with reasoning, also best not PM WPM and SR, who are in college).

 

[Juliacoolo]

I realize that it's always open, however a public thread would be more appealing, and more comfortable for the common member, if something like that would ever exist

Four of our current smods came from mod applications, so public input has certainly proven to be valuable.

 

[DNA]

Allow me to take these in turn. First off, I'm glad that all of you took the time to read through my points and have answered them with well-constructed responses. It only follows that I should respond to you in the same fashion.

(Fun fact: while I was writing this, the amount of posts in this thread doubled. Cinesra's first was the latest one I saw, then BOOM!)

From what I've seen from the mods, they're basing communication off of letting members participate in projects, and the mods listening to the members's ideas. Unfortunately, this has not been going well. I'm assuming what DNA means by mod/member communication is by allowing the members to know some of the things that are happening behind the scenes. The closest thing we have to this are the Contributors, but even then, the Contributors are only a handful of members. While yes, it is possible to become a Contributor by constantly submitting articles, not everyone has the time to write articles, do projects for PokéBeach, etc.

You are largely correct. Part of the increased communication can be allowing members a little peek behind the scenes of things. Obviously I'm not asking for full disclosure, but tidbits here and there about the future would be nice - and I'm referring to more than just the Portal announcements.

And honestly, you don't need to be in the Contributor group to help out PokeBeach. Normal members help out in the various sections every day. I try to help out where I can too; although I don't have a normal userbar, I am far from being full staff, and I only oversee one tiny section that doesn't need much maintenance to begin with.

I might seem strange for a mod speaking for a member's point of view, but perhaps if we allow member-input on certain projects, we can improve the communication between mods and members?

Congratulations, Gliscor. I believe you know what it takes to be an effective mod - being able to see things from a member's perspective as well. As long as you keep that up I believe you'll be better equipped to make PB a better place for everybody.

To be honest, I think that is one of the prime criteria that a good staff member should fulfill.

EDIT: DNA, there is a certain thing that I highly disagree with in your image. Bippa being a mod instead of Glaceon. We needed another TCG mod, considering some staff changes that have been happening (yeah, I know this kinda goes against what you said, but...). I can't really speak for VG since I'm never in that part of the forum, but Bippa isn't really knowledgeable about the TCG (no offense), so there's no need to mod him at a time like this.

I was more so referring to the fact of overall qualification when I brought that up. I'm aware that Bippa isn't a TCG buff, but I'd like to pose a question: do we really need any more TCG mod manpower? Most of the Contributors help out with the TCG, and we have enough stickied threads and insight from them that it's basically flowing out the ears. (Just my two cents.)

[W]hen Gale was modded, he was very interested in making changes to the forums. Several month later, he had a change of heart and resigned.

Gale had a change of heart in wanting to make changes to the forums? That doesn't sound right.

The people who work towards picking mods cannot see the future. Regular members cannot see the future either, if members had a say in who was modded, I feel the staff would last just as long, if not for shorter periods of time. People change. We can't control that.

While I agree that precognition is impossible, there is the factor of foresight - namely, will this person that we are picking for this position be more helpful than just the here and now? Granted, the first couple weeks of modship are usually the most productive, but what happens after that? Will this person picked for the job be able to keep it up?

Something that is annoying me is that Glaceon is getting all of this negative energy for being modded simply because of his age. People are not looking even taking the time to look at the reasons he is qualified. He has taken initiative to write for the site on many instances, is good at the TCG, and is an active member. He is much more mature than a lot of people who have been complaining about his moderation, clearly. Chariblaze was 13 when he was modded. Mudkip was 13 when he was modded. Does that mean they shouldn't have been appointed to the staff?

I don't have anything against Glaceon, and neither does anybody else - don't forget that. It's more so of the decision that is receiving this "negative energy" as you so call it. The thing is that Glaceon didn't get picked to be a mod until after Gale resigned. Does that mean that staff positions are being treated like job openings? Why wasn't Glaceon modded before?

I'll be honest, I did have my doubts about Chariblaze and Mudkip when they were modded due to age, but those doubts were later dissuaded when I saw them pursue their jobs with great fervor. And they're still mods today. If Glaceon pursues his job in earnest, then so much the better.

Members seem to think that there are a lot of things going on behind the scenes. There really isn't much of importance we keep secret. And the things that are keep secret are kept secret for a reason. Things can be changed, and plans can be cancelled. And things like what members are receiving warnings and such really aren't other people's business. This being said, it could be better.

Think of it this way. The mods have a hidden forum that only they can see, where they may conduct their discussions and all that jazz. Is there anything that isn't too sensitive of material that can be shared with the rest of us? If so, why aren't we seeing much of it?

Try to understand where I'm coming from here. From my perspective, it sounds like you guys are keeping a lot of things secret from us. That may not be the case, but that is the image that is being projected. (Also, I am aware that reasons for warns are largely private; I'm not really asking to see things like that.)

I wasn't part of the group of individuals who decided to promote Glaceon, though I don't doubt the validity of the choice - I have faith that the people who came up with that decision put a lot of time and thought into it. That's all I have to say on that matter.

I'm going to assume that the super mods are in charge of that. That being said, do all of them participate equally in the decision-making process? And when did the discussion start - was it right when Gale resigned (which was...not that long ago actually) or do they have a list of candidates they have lined up ahead of time or something?

However, I do understand it's hard for some people to give people the benefit of the doubt when they have no knowledge of what goes on "behind closed doors" and they only see the demotions happen without total knowledge of why it happens (and why so frequently). If members want the matter of promotions to be more transparent, that's fine with me. Even as a member, I didn't care either way - I put faith in those who were chosen to moderate.

Heh, I believe you hit the nail on the head. You're right - it is very hard for us to give the benefit of the doubt to the decision-makers when all we see is the end result. All we end up seeing is who, and we aren't really given a reason why. This is why it's difficult for some people, including myself, to understand why certain individuals are chosen over others. (Cinesra touched on this.)

When all is said and done, though, I do not criticize the people chosen to be mods. I always sincerely hope they can do their jobs and do them well. I'm more interested in actual results than I am in who brings them about.

One final important opinion I have on the matter of the duration of moderators: Longer time as a moderator does not always equal being a better / more helpful / more beneficial moderator. Take myself, for example. I've been part of the moderating staff for a while now and there have been countless short-term moderators who I feel have been more beneficial to the site than I have. However, some of these shorter-term people have either (A) had to be let go for specific issues [activity, rule breaking, etc.], or (B) resigned because of personal life issues. Sometimes someone's demotion is out of the staff's hands - it just has to be done. Things change over time, and the people who are promoted may not be able to live up to the reasons they were promoted in the first place. (Even myself, of course.)

I don't disagree with this at all - some of the mods who have served shorter terms have accomplished greater things than those who have been on the staff for years. The concern is more so the frequency of the layoffs: why can we not seem to go very long without the new guy being handed a pink slip? I know that some did resign because of personal life issues, but that can't be applied to everyone. (Cinesra touched on this too.)

I am glad that you have a good firm grasp on the situation; you are very informed about how all this works and you express it in a form that's understandable and easy to agree with.

You work hard to get modded. You want it badly. I don't know what it is, but we all want something that comes with either the power, or the respect that comes with it so that we can help out with the forums. However, you have to be very careful with everything you say and search your words and opinions with a fine tooth comb. You don't want to lose that mod position, because you worked very hard for it, and if you lose it, odds are you aren't getting it back. And your goal here was to help the forums in the first place, right?

I believe that's true in 95% of cases - the people who become mods are largely the people who want to be. Yes, they're nominated first, but then they have to accept. I believe pretty much anyone given a staff position has pure motives, really. The variable is how well they're allowed to enact what they wish to bring about for the general good, and whether or not it jives with what the higher-ups want. That's largely the reason why Zero got laid off - the higher-ups did not agree with his methods. (In fact, this is the second time he has been laid off for this reason, if I recall correctly.)

Oh. Also guys, what do you think about having a mod election? That way, the members and the staff get to decide.

I can think of a good way to implement this that doesn't turn it into a popularity contest.

The members talk amongst themselves and decide who they feel would be the best at becoming a mod. They write up...I don't know, anywhere from 5 to 10 names? They all have a general consensus about it, and then this list of choices is then submitted to someone on the staff, whereupon it gets discussed.

That way, the members are satisfied because their preferred choice is picked, and the mods are satisfied because they'll end up picking who they think is most capable. It's not a bad system, really - you can't deny its merit.

 

[Mudkip711]

What I don't get is why you guys keep complaining about lack of communication. Honestly, if you want something done, go out and do it instead of complaining. Gale saw the problem and tried to fix it. As mods, we are very busy "behind the scenes" or with our personal lives, so we don't have the time to go through each of your individual problems and fix them all. It would help us a lot more if instead of complaining, you tried to do something productive.

However, I do kind of agree with the modding/demodding problem though. Ever since September 2010, PokeBeach has always been a joke about its staff size. Within the first 2 months of all the promotions, 3 or 4 mods were already gone. Then a couple of months later 5 more mods were added. Just because someone goes doesn't mean we need to get someone else, IMO. I know I've talked to a couple of s-mods about it, but nothing's really been done.

As half-serious answer to that would be making DNA a moderator, let him see how things are actually going, and then see if he takes back anything.

While in that process we let him see everything we're working on and give him mod powers? If we did that, do you know how many people will start that nonsense to be a mod?

 

[Cinesra]

The smods don't have to justify every one of their decisions, and believe it or not, mod shuffling is understandable in the struggling situation we're in. Obviously they're doing their best to make a good decision.

The problem is efficiency, responsibility, and communication among staff.

There are reasons why some things are kept from the public, and they're mostly all understandable reasons. The issues come when these decisions turn south, creating upset members. Rather than worrying about the staff, the best that can be done is rethink the morals and guidelines used for everything.

Mod shuffling is understandable, but I feel that we could improve on the situation if there were more evaluation of potential mods. I understand that nobody is perfect, but that's exactly why there's always room to improve. Staff changes was mostly an example and as a reply to VY, there are still other things to improve on.

When decisions turn south, members would be less upset if they had more of a say in these decisions, or at least knew the full reasoning behind them. Members get much more upset when changes that they didn't have a say in go wrong, instead of ones that they did.

This brings up the question "Why did this decision go wrong and how can we fix the situation?" If members had more contribution to the decision, they could take responsibility for their own mistakes, rather than blaming it on the others that made the decision for them. Mistakes are easier to understand and fix when we make them ourselves.

Being upset with the decision makers isn't necessarily a bad thing. If members are upset, then things should be at least attempted to be changed and improved upon. If these are rightfully the fault of the decision makers, then maybe we need to change how the decisions are made or who makes the decisions.

 

[DNA]

Darn, I hit "reply" too early. Now I must respond to Mudkip's post also.

What I don't get is why you guys keep complaining about lack of communication. Honestly, if you want something done, go out and do it instead of complaining. Gale saw the problem and tried to fix it. As mods, we are very busy "behind the scenes" or with our personal lives, so we don't have the time to go through each of your individual problems and fix them all. It would help us a lot more if instead of complaining, you tried to do something productive.

As I stated initially, change starts with the individual. I'm not complaining as much about the lack of communication (in fact, I think 'complaining' is an inaccurate word in that case) - I'm complaining because some people on staff aren't willing to change. A member brings something up, and one of the responses is "stop complaining and start doing stuff", without any large action on the staff's part. End result? Nothing gets done. (I believe you did bring this up partly.)

I feel as if there could be more openness and cooperation between members and staff in this regard, really. We want to help, and we want to hear what you guys are planning for the future of PokeBeach. I know you guys want us to "stop complaining and start doing stuff". Sure thing. Where can we sign up?

I think you get the idea. We are looking for the opportunity to assist and work closer with the staff. Initially the Contributor group was the solution, but I feel like that's become another wall - it's like only a certain handful of individuals are even allowed to sign up. That's going to discourage who can and cannot help.

While in that process we let him see everything we're working on and give him mod powers? If we did that, do you know how many people will start that nonsense to be a mod?

Although I mostly agree with the first half of that first sentence, I don't agree at all with the second half. Besides, you can let people see what's going on without giving mod powers to them.

 

[HenryP]

tl;dr. Anyone?

 

[DNA]

I'm not sure if I can sum up all I said in a tl;dr, but I will try. (It definitely doesn't do it justice, though.)

Long story short, there's a problem with Pokebeach's chain of command and all of the decision-making processes reside with a handful of small people. In addition, the factor of secrecy on the part of the staff in not really divulging anything except for the end result (i.e. we know who gets modded, but not why) makes most of the members (and even some staff) dissatisfied as to why so many things must be kept behind closed doors.

 

[Xous]

I'm going to assume that the super mods are in charge of that. That being said, do all of them participate equally in the decision-making process? And when did the discussion start - was it right when Gale resigned (which was...not that long ago actually) or do they have a list of candidates they have lined up ahead of time or something?

(The following is simply my opinion on the matter.)

Super Moderators are not exclusively in charge of it - the matter is normally brought up with the rest of the moderators of the section the promotee may moderate (TCG, for example), if not all of the moderators. From what I've seen during my time as a moderator, some moderators may have more say on the matter due to (A) knowing more about the promotee [his/her past actions, personality, experience, skill, availability, etc.] and/or (B) knowing more about the section the promotee may moderate [what's needed, if the promotee would be a good fit, etc.].

For example, I would have very little say in the matter of possibly promoting someone to be a TCG moderator because I have next to no experience in the TCG. However, if I knew the possible promotee well and knew they had a bad attitude or couldn't come online much, I could add that to the discussion of their promotion and it'd be taken into account.

As far as a list of candidates goes, I don't think there's a physical list (I've never seen one) but I think it's safe to say everyone keeps people in mind. I see the people around the forums and remember what they do (be it positive or negative) and when someone should be promoted in an area I can add an opinion on, I give my opinion.