Forum Mods

[PyronIkari]

Realistically... there isn't a single person I would choose to be a mod out of the the normal posters on this forum.

[XpHoBiaX]

Would you choose me Pyron?? ;D
I'm far from normal...(well, I believe so...)

[PyronIkari]

Would you choose me Pyron?? ;D
I'm far from normal...(well, I believe so...)

HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA no.

[XpHoBiaX]

Would you choose me Pyron?? ;D
I'm far from normal...(well, I believe so...)

HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA no.

You're not invited to my birthday party. >:/

lol, that was pretty funny though...

[sysadmin]

I just went through a few business cards...and the only one that has a clear back is an old business card from last year. @_@ Nothing relating to me. I'll find something...How soon do you need this thingy?

The sooner it comes in, the sooner the application is processed.

If a business card won't do, a piece of paper with a stick figure is fine.  Be creative with it, but don't stress on it.

[XpHoBiaX]

Okay. Thanks!

[JTchinoy]

Not to be a debbie downer or anything, but after your explanation of a mod's power (or lack there of) it doesn't seem like it's anything beyond being the person that notifies admin of issues among the posters.  I personally don't think that a person without direct power to delete, modify, or lock posts/entire threads will have any influence within occurring while the admin is away.  I'd apply for said mod position, but I can't imagine how many disputes I would get into for regulating when the posters may think I'm being too much of a "stiff ass" as a mod.

[XpHoBiaX]

Again with your ass...jeez. j/k

Sysadmin:
You'll like what I drew up and sending out to you tomorrow. Even if i don't make the cut, I hope you hold onto it.

[Chun]

Moderators lack the direct power to ban.

They can recommend a ban or other action to the admins (there is a special moderator-only place for that), but ultimately, the admins handle punishment or discipline.   This is essentially a hand-brake for drama.

Sysadmin, that seems like a really mundane management power given the amount of formal application required for the position (Under the assumption there's no monetary compensation). In previous message boards these models really haven't shown any present influence (At all) for moderation of content, and becomes an extra step/hassle for administrators to do much of anything. This is under the assumption thread moving/locking/merging/deletion properties are not avaliable; it doesn't warrant the need for that much hassle if the position does nearly nothing in that respect.

~Chun

[Stormfalcon]

Moderators lack the direct power to ban.

They can recommend a ban or other action to the admins (there is a special moderator-only place for that), but ultimately, the admins handle punishment or discipline.   This is essentially a hand-brake for drama.

Sysadmin, that seems like a really mundane management power given the amount of formal application required for the position (Under the assumption there's no monetary compensation). In previous message boards these models really haven't shown any present influence (At all) for moderation of content, and becomes an extra step/hassle for administrators to do much of anything. This is under the assumption thread moving/locking/merging/deletion properties are not avaliable; it doesn't warrant the need for that much hassle if the position does nearly nothing in that respect.

Basically, the mods would be the canaries in the proverbial coal mine from the sound of things.  They'd be there to alert Sysadmin to problems on the forums.  Of course, with the amount of drama going on, it might indeed be a headache for Sysadmin instead of a help with all the alerts that would pop up ("So-and-so did a personal attack in this post!"  "Such-and-such made a thread that's a group attack in and of itself!"  "Mikey made another post!").

Then again, if mods were given any real power at all, I highly suspect that the first order of business would be a race to see who could ban Mikey the fastest and with how much snark in the use of the Almighty Banhammer.  A tempting thought, but indicative of how easily abusable that kind of thing could be.

[JTchinoy]

I see I'm not the only one that sees the issue.

[sysadmin]

I personally don't think that a person without direct power to delete, modify, or lock posts/entire threads will have any influence within occurring while the admin is away.

This is under the assumption thread moving/locking/merging/deletion properties are not avaliable...

Mods have regular powers to move/lock/merge/delete.

They just do not have the power to unilaterally and immediately ban someone.
.
Honestly, I wish you people would ask questions, instead of jumping to conclusions.
This really pisses me off.

[XpHoBiaX]

I personally don't think that a person without direct power to delete, modify, or lock posts/entire threads will have any influence within occurring while the admin is away.

This is under the assumption thread moving/locking/merging/deletion properties are not avaliable...

Mods have regular powers to move/lock/merge/delete.

They just do not have the power to unilaterally and immediately ban someone.
.
Honestly, I wish you people would ask questions, instead of jumping to conclusions.
This really pisses me off.

This also happens to be stated in the About section of the forum. O_o I made sure I read up on everything (and thought about it for a good while) before I applied or asked a question...I assumed that mods would have basic functions, and if anyone really has common sense, they'd think about it too. O_o

When/if you get the position, tasks and "mod powers" will be assigned.

I may be a ditz, but damn I try to think about shit before I type it.

[Chun]

This is under the assumption thread moving/locking/merging/deletion properties are not avaliable...

Honestly, I wish you people would ask questions, instead of jumping to conclusions.
This really pisses me off.

Since my statement was on the assumption of that much limitation it's practically invalid.

In a nutshell, it's a standard mod position, but with more paperwork than really necessary (In my opinion). If for bannable options and overall topic/category organization level powers, the paperwork is somewhat reasonable but otherwise it seems a bit overkill.

~Chun

[G.I.R]

Moderators lack the direct power to ban.

They can recommend a ban or other action to the admins (there is a special moderator-only place for that), but ultimately, the admins handle punishment or discipline.   This is essentially a hand-brake for drama.

Sysadmin, that seems like a really mundane management power given the amount of formal application required for the position (Under the assumption there's no monetary compensation). In previous message boards these models really haven't shown any present influence (At all) for moderation of content, and becomes an extra step/hassle for administrators to do much of anything. This is under the assumption thread moving/locking/merging/deletion properties are not avaliable; it doesn't warrant the need for that much hassle if the position does nearly nothing in that respect.

Basically, the mods would be the canaries in the proverbial coal mine from the sound of things.  They'd be there to alert Sysadmin to problems on the forums. 

Yeah, but aren't canaries the first ones to die when rhings go wrong  ::)

[XpHoBiaX]

That is how a typical chain of command works though, the grunts always get stuck with alot of work. If you think about it. A mod is just that, like a babysitter. You can't spank the kid, you can't yell at them, but you can report it to the parents. You are the eyes and ears for the Admins.

If it's too much paperwork, don't apply. In this world, you need to work to get things. Even if it's a ridiculous amount of 'paperwork'. Not everyone is born with a silver spoon. If you want to do more, go apply for being an admin. But I doubt you'd get it before being a mod. Like I said, chain of command.

It was stated that he wasn't basing his judgements off previous knowledge or experience, he was making a 'Fair Go' for everyone who wanted to apply. If it's too much for you, don't even bother debating this if you are not going to apply. It's common sense. Stop nit picking on stuff that isn't going to go into effect until AFTER you've applied and got the job. >:/ You have NO IDEA what you will be put in charge of and what 'powers' you will have. >:/

Like I said: READ.

The door was open, so I checked it out and hoped on the bus. Doesn't mean I'll get the job, but I tried. Quit thinking about it and do it. He may never do this again. >:/

[sysadmin]

Basically, the mods would be the canaries in the proverbial coal mine from the sound of things.

I think a better analogy is a small claims judge.

They can make a ruling and pronounce judgment (you need to pay the other guy $250 for damages).
However, they don't literally grab the guy's hand and make him write out the check.
There's all that behinds the scenes work where its filed and docket numbers are crossed, and other deep details.

So, moderators do not have the direct power to ban.
However, they have to power to assign bans.

Assuming that I pick smart moderators who are not dramatic and who can mete out the proper punishment in a given situation, the distinction between the two reduces to "who clicks on the final button".  (This also means that there is "no race to the ban button", which was the discussion at the time).

[otakuapprentice]

anyone who thinks its a race to ban people should not even bother trying to apply.

[gmontem]

@Ryu: Im going to be honest, you arent very level headed in terms of forum moderating, you tend to be a bit biased when it comes to arguments drama stuff :T

+1
QFT
QFE
Seconded
etc, etc.

[LordKefka]

anyone who thinks its a race to ban people should not even bother trying to apply.

lol