Request for more moderators or to bring back the Arbiters

HK-47 · Post by **HK-47** » Fri Feb 24, 2006 3:02 pm

xero : no one knows anything because you say so...wow...hmm...

UnlockedTitan · Post by **UnlockedTitan** » Fri Feb 24, 2006 3:10 pm

Veegie wrote:I'm the best. Champion of the internet. Me for mod.

No.

Xero wrote:Make me an admin.

...and No.

What we have now is fine, the mods are trying hard to improve the site, give it time. I see no need for more mods, there are mods active everyday from what I can see on the bottom of the index page.

HK-47 · Post by **HK-47** » Fri Feb 24, 2006 3:27 pm

Ombre is the coolest decision they made x.x.

Xero · Post by **Xero** » Fri Feb 24, 2006 3:30 pm

*Looks at Ketchup_Bomb.

theycallmechad · Post by **theycallmechad** » Sat Feb 25, 2006 8:42 am

How about instead of nominating and voting for new staff members like it looks like is happening, we just let the current mods/admins take care of it? The can just PM their own nominees and ask if they're up for the responsiblity. That way it's not a popularity contest: they know the people on their forums and what kind of people they want to help lead it. That way they keep control of the forums, not us.

Anyway, that's just my two cents worth (if it's worth even that). I have noticed since this topic started that there seems to be a lot more moderation and that halomods in general (at least on the halo 2 forum) has been a lot nicer. I'm pleased with the direction it's headed. As I've said before, ultimatly it's going to be up to the members of the forum, not the moderators, who will be able to make the biggest difference.

Snave · Post by **Snave** » Sat Feb 25, 2006 8:54 am

I'm sure the decision of who gets moderating power is already in the hands of the admins.. and not the users.

theycallmechad · Post by **theycallmechad** » Sat Feb 25, 2006 9:29 am

Snave wrote:I'm sure the decision of who gets moderating power is already in the hands of the admins.. and not the users.

I think you missed my point. I think you're saying that I believe the members are in control over the halomods forums and not the mods/admins? If so, that's not what I'm saying at all. Yes, it's obvious that only those with the power can give it to someone else. All I'm saying is that we need to not let this be a popularity contest with people saying "pick me" or "pick him" or anything. We need to trust they'll take care of it. The issue has been addressed, and that's about all we can do as members.

People try to read too far into the things I write, but I really am pretty straight forward

.

Iron_Forge · Post by **Iron_Forge** » Sun Feb 26, 2006 10:24 am

Since the decision process seems to have started...Some points I

=sw=warlord · Post by **=sw=warlord** » Sun Feb 26, 2006 11:22 am

i agree with iron forge he knows his stuff and he knows it well.
arbiters may not be the answer but more mods would be.
a arbiter is just a little avatar and title.
moderators on the other hand can change things sort them out and fix it although very few seem to be active after made a mod.

Kirk · Post by **Kirk** » Sun Feb 26, 2006 11:37 am

You don't get the point of an arbiter, =sw=warlord, they may not have all the powers of a moderator, but their purpose is to train so one day they may become a moderator.

And Iron_Forge, if Arbiters ever come around again and I have my way, arbiters will have a much greater chance of being demoted than promoted, so only the best of the best ever have a chance of being promoted fully to moderator, unlike last time where you actually had to be really bad at it to be demoted..

Ketchup_Bomb · Post by **Ketchup_Bomb** » Sun Feb 26, 2006 11:45 am

Kirk, I would elect you in a heartbeat.

Whatever happens, we are just going to have to analyze it after the fact.
Brainstorming helps, but all you can ever deduce it to is a hypothesis.
Bottom line, when it comes down to it, you just have to try and see where it goes.

I know that the HM staff isn't stupid enough to let something, that is affecting the forum in a negative fasion, last for very long.

Iron_Forge · Post by **Iron_Forge** » Sun Feb 26, 2006 12:15 pm

Kirk wrote:You don't get the point of an arbiter, =sw=warlord, they may not have all the powers of a moderator, but their purpose is to train so one day they may become a moderator.

And Iron_Forge, if Arbiters ever come around again and I have my way, arbiters will have a much greater chance of being demoted than promoted, so only the best of the best ever have a chance of being promoted fully to moderator, unlike last time where you actually had to be really bad at it to be demoted..

Well, they should have to be really good to even make arbiter...I don't see the point of moderators in training...You're either good enough to be a moderator, or you're not...And if there's even a remote chance that you need a "trial" period to see if someones worthy, then they're not...All good intentions aside, I think we both know the kind of users who'll end up as arbiters...

On a side note...Why do moderators (or arbiters) even need to be called that?..Or get emblems, or colored names...Can't you do just as good a job of cleaning up things without anyone knowing you're doing it?..

Thats not to say we should just have hidden arbiters...I'm against arbiters...If we need to add a moderator or two to take up the slack from the obvious overworked dozen or so administration we have now, so be it...But, I just can't grasp the concept of having all these moderators, JA's, and admins, and not being able to handle the userload...I'm not even sure the ratio of reports (non sig related, since moderators can't deal with sigs) closed per day to moderators is even 1:1...Is it?..I'd like to see the math...

Snave · Post by **Snave** » Sun Feb 26, 2006 1:02 pm

After reading what everyone has contributed, it seems there defiantly needs to be a fairly large overhaul of everybody with moderating power on the forum. I do not think it is fair to leave the majority of moderating on this board down to a select few, there seem to be a lot of people content with sitting back and letting other people do the work.. Everyone knows that the problems only got worse when halo 2 modding really took of. This will only get worse when halo 2 for pc is released if things continue as they are.

I believe Grenadiac needs to take a good long look at the current staff, and make a decision as to who stays and who needs to go..

=sw=warlord · Post by **=sw=warlord** » Sun Feb 26, 2006 1:17 pm

i did mention this sorta thing to gren and he completly disregarded it as if he didnt care....
oh well bye bye halomods.com

INSANEdrive · Post by **INSANEdrive** » Sun Feb 26, 2006 5:23 pm

Prophets=Admin.
Brutes= Junior Admin.
Elite=Moderator
Arbiter = Junior Moderator

...Maybe

Kirk · Post by **Kirk** » Sun Feb 26, 2006 5:24 pm

If anything I'd want to be a Heretic, since that's what I really am.

INSANEdrive · Post by **INSANEdrive** » Sun Feb 26, 2006 6:22 pm

Kirk wrote:If anything I'd want to be a Heretic, since that's what I really am.

No... I think Heretics would be People who say there going to leave Halomods... than come back

You Just Happen to Be a Heretic Brute (Possable...)

GreyAtom · Post by **GreyAtom** » Sun Feb 26, 2006 6:51 pm

INSANEdrive wrote:Prophets=Admin.
Brutes= Junior Admin.
Elite=Moderator
Arbiter = Junior Moderator

...Maybe

Seems like Arbiter should be switched with Elite. It only makes sence, since the Arbiter is "specialer" than the Elites.

jks · Post by **jks** » Sun Feb 26, 2006 8:37 pm

Iron_Forge, not everyone is like you where you would accept the burden of moderatorship just because its a job and needs to get done. The majority of people need that respect boost that comes with a badge, title and others to make them feel better, it fuels their ego, if you will. My analogy of dangling a carrot on a horse makes the most sense in this case. Also the badge serves as a reminder that they hold rank and should not screw around. Plus the users know who moderators are and can ask them questions.

Aequitas · Post by **Aequitas** » Mon Feb 27, 2006 5:08 am

When did he say he would accept the burden? I sure as hell wouldn't want the burden, hehe.. I think the point is that moderating is a responsibility that should only be given to those willing and able to accept it. Moderators shouldn't just be regular forum-goers entitled with the power to move and delete stuff, especially ones that just want their ego fueled. I don't have a problem with rewarding moderators for doing a good job so they feel appreciated, but those who are only in it for the reward shouldn't be there in the first place..

I like the idea of not showing who moderators are, but there would still need to be some visible authority to settle disputes. Maybe moderators could have the option to post as themselves (without any symbols of authority) or simply as "Moderator" where they would appear as a generic authority to general users (but other moderators/admin would see their real identity to avoid abuse). As far as being able to contact them, together with reports and "Complaints and Suggestions" that shouldn't be a problem.