Suggestion Bring back the old Mod team

[The Catboy]

When I first joined, there used to be both GMs and Mods. GMs oversaw the whole forums and the Mods oversaw sections. There also used to be 2 to 3 mods per section, which really helped control the quality of posting on the site.
I've noticed since we've gotten right of the Mods and favor of just having a GM team, the quality of the site has really gone down. I am seeing far more issues coming up with flaming, harassment, trolling, bumping spam, ect. which did happen before, but was always quickly taken care of because we had a big enough staff to do it. But recently it seems the staff here are becoming grossly overworked or simply busy in real life to really dedicate enough time to dealing with these issues. Which is why I suggest we bring back the old Mod team to really delegate those tasks and really have a greater staff presence on the forums. Something to really help make the job easier for everyone, well improving the quality of the site.

 

[evandixon]

Well you're definitely more knowledgeable in this matter and probably have a better idea of the statistics. Say, if there are 50 cases in a day and 5 mods, is 10 cases per mod too much to handle? (genuine question)

Or are the number of cases I have estimated lesser than what the real number is?

I'm not sure that cases/day is a good metric. Maybe if there were a large number of user reports to sift through, but I think most of the criticism this thread is giving is that because of the sheer number of posts, it takes a while for moderators to notice and deal with offending posts. The fact that users feel the need to repeatedly bump obvious spam doesn't help anything either. Recruiting more moderators would make it more likely a moderator will see and be able to deal with an offending post/thread.

The fact this thread is 3 hours old and the only staff member I've seen respond is a Reporter and not strictly a moderator or admin helps prove my point. (If a moderator did see it and simply chose not to respond, perhaps they're waiting for an admin or supervisor to respond since they're the only ones to can do something about it.)

However, the point of this thread is to provide suggestions for the mods to improve their moderation activities and I am not against that.

The point of this thread is that there should be more local moderators. Plenty of sane and helpful people browse the 3DS section every day and are online when stuff goes down. As long as the correct people are chosen and the permissions are set correctly, there is little harm in recruiting moderators, and as long as they behave, the situation wouldn't get any worse.

 

[Alex658]

That's exactly my first post in page one.

also against the rules is really relative. All I read was meme spamming and 4chanism.

I've seen quite a number of trashed/removed posts because we are NOT 4chan nor an image board or accept one worded posts. So yeah, maybe not explicitly against the rules, but not allowed either.

 

[raystriker]

The point of this thread is that there should be more local moderators. Plenty of sane and helpful people browse the 3DS section every day and are online when stuff goes down. As long as the correct people are chosen and the permissions are set correctly, there is little harm in recruiting moderators, and as long as they behave, the situation wouldn't get any worse.

True, it's all upto the higher ups. I would believe that the selection process would be very demanding. There's only so much one can learn about a person over the internet. Anyone can be two-faced after all.

 

[evandixon]

True, it's all upto the higher ups. I would believe that the selection process would be very demanding. There's only so much one can learn about a person over the internet. Anyone can be two-faced after all.

It sounds like they get a large number of messages, best described with this image:

Here's an excerpt from an old local moderator application from Project Pokemon that Alpha posted a while back, edited to be generic. Something similar could be made here if the higher-ups do rethink their whole no asking policy (maybe adding additional requirements like post count or age).

Criteria:
- Must be fluent in English
- Must use reasonable grammar with maximum readability within posts (you can always edit if you make a mistake)
- Must have a reasonable post count
- (Other stuff related to the specific forum)

As a moderator, you would be expected to:
- Check your email daily for updates, and have subscribed to the forums
- Look through the forums often
- Make appearances in the IRC every so often
- Warn users who deserve warnings

You will automatically lose your right if you:
- Have gotten in trouble for doing something against the rules (ie, Distribution of illegal material)
- Have had a tendency to attack certain users
- Post your application in this thread [because the instructions said to send a PM]
- Are a fan of Weedles [Yes, this was actually in there]

Your application should consist of:
- Your username
- Your timezone
- Your major project or proficiency (the single, most notable one)
- Other projects/proficiencies (may be a list)
- A short summary about yourself

 

[raystriker]

Another thing that could be done, is to appoint local subforum 'reporters'. A few very trustable members of each subforum whose job is to observe the forum and report to a mod in case of any event. These 'reporters' do not have any executive powers, just observe and report to a higher up. I think this would work great in theory and practice.

 

[evandixon]

Another thing that could be done, is to appoint local subforum 'reporters'. A few very trustable members of each subforum whose job is to observe the forum and report to a mod in case of any event. These 'reporters' do not have any executive powers, just observe and report to a higher up. I think this would work great in theory and practice.

All users have the ability to report posts, so I don't think that would help any. Basic moderator privileges like hiding posts and issuing warnings are pretty safe to hand out, as long as they're given to sane and helpful users.

 

[The Catboy]

Another thing that could be done, is to appoint local subforum 'reporters'. A few very trustable members of each subforum whose job is to observe the forum and report to a mod in case of any event. These 'reporters' do not have any executive powers, just observe and report to a higher up. I think this would work great in theory and practice.

We actually did have something like that. There was "Advanced Member" who basically had limited staff power, but couldn't access the staff forums. They were basically like the "Reporters" we have now, but more limitations. It was later changed "Content Creator."
But we haven't used those groups in years.

 

[raystriker]

All users have the ability to report posts, so I don't think that would help any. Basic moderator privileges like hiding posts and issuing warnings are pretty safe to hand out, as long as they're given to sane and helpful users.

Not report posts, report the situation i.e. summarize happenings of the events and report to the mod for judgement

 

[evandixon]

Not report posts, report the situation ie summarize the events to the mod for judgement

How would that be any different from regular reports?

 

[Castiel]

Not report posts, report the situation i.e. summarize happenings of the events and report to the mod for judgement

Still, when you report a post it asks a reason why you are reporting. You could very well summarize the situation in that little box.

 

[raystriker]

How would that be any different from regular reports?

Trusted members, providing a more detailed story.
Not to be confused with the mundane report button.
It's essentially a PM conversation between the 'reporter' and the mod.
Mod:"What has been going awry with XXX thread"
Reporter:" Member ABC has been attacking individuals unfairly on XYZ basis"
Mod:"How did it start"
Reporter:" bla bla bla..

What I'm suggesting is that this trusted volunteer 'reporter' observe the developments of the toxic thread etc from the start. When a moderator wants to take some action, they won't have to sweep through a 20 paged thread that sprung up while they were working or sleeping or whatever.

Still, when you report a post it asks a reason why you are reporting. You could very well summarize the situation in that little box.

They (the mods) simply assess the situation on the facts provided by the trusted 'reporter'. And personally read the thread if they wish to.
This way they need not rely on multiple reports by various members who want to put their argument forward.

 

[evandixon]

Trusted members, providing a more detailed story.
Not to be confused with the mundane report button.
It's essentially a PM conversation between the 'reporter' and the mod.
Mod:"What has been going awry with XXX thread"
Reporter:" Member ABC has been attacking individuals unfairly on XYZ basis"
Mod:"How did it start"
Reporter" bla bla bla..

What I'm suggesting is that this trusted volunteer 'reporter' observe the developments of the toxic thread etc from the start. When a moderator wants to take some action, they won't have to sweep through a 20 paged thread that sprung up while they were working or sleeping or whatever

If the user can be trusted with that, I think they could be trusted with basic moderator privileges.

 

[raystriker]

If the user can be trusted with that, I think they could be trusted with basic moderator privileges.

Quite possible. All comes down to what the gbatemp staff think about this 'Suggestion'.

 

[Kioku]

Sitting here, reading these ideas. I'll just say this, there has to be someone here the admins trust enough to give moderator powers. You're playing a dangerous game with "limited ability". It's not hard to fake good intentions.

 

[VinsCool]

Sitting here, reading these ideas. I'll just say this, there has to be someone here the admins trust enough to give moderator powers. You're playing a dangerous game with "limited ability". It's not hard to fake good intentions.

It's really hard to prove legitimate good intentions though.

 

[Kioku]

It's really hard to prove legitimate good intentions though.

That's what I'm saying, though. The whole point to appointing moderators isn't to give them a "trial run." It's a trust thing. As for that whole reporter thing? Wouldn't work. Wouldn't save time, and it wouldn't solve any of the prominent issues.

 

[raystriker]

That's what I'm saying, though. The whole point to appointing moderators isn't to give them a "trial run." It's a trust thing. As for that whole reporter thing? Wouldn't work. Wouldn't save time, and it wouldn't solve any of the prominent issues.

What are these prominent issues to begin with? People breaking internet courtesy rules? Or mods not having a 60 second response time (which is ridiculous), make me understand if possible

 

[Kioku]

What are these prominent issues to begin with? People breaking internet courtesy rules? Or mods not having a 60 second response time (which is ridiculous), make me understand if possible

All of the above. The lack of consistent modding on the forums. There are days where spam (vulgar or otherwise) goes untouched for up to 3 hours. The "reporter" would still have to be able to contact a moderator. The issue is that we don't have enough to look after the forums all day.

 

[Luckkill4u]

I've reported wares yesterday. Still there today lol so I guess I'll report again. I even kindly asked the temper to remove the files because they are against the rules.

I think the problem is that the Admins and Moderators are just in vacation mode. Not saying there's anything wrong with that. We just have large periods of time that there are no Moderators or Admins active. Right now we have a large influx of new members due to black Friday and Nintendo's ban wave.

It would be nice if the admins appointed a highly active member to be a moderator for the problem sub-Forums.

We have had discussed this only a few months ago and nothing came of it. I don't think finding a trust worthy member who can achieve the task. I'm sure other things are at play.

 

[Cyan]

Trusted members, providing a more detailed story.
Not to be confused with the mundane report button.
It's essentially a PM conversation between the 'reporter' and the mod.
Mod:"What has been going awry with XXX thread"
Reporter:" Member ABC has been attacking individuals unfairly on XYZ basis"
Mod:"How did it start"
Reporter:" bla bla bla..

That could be something useful, but it SHOULD be done by the user reporting the message.
currently, we have "shitposting" or "spam" or "flaming" etc., single words as report reason, and that's all. We have to read most (if not all) the thread to understand the situation and that also takes time if that's not a thread we already read and followed (being for interest, or for previous mod work).
it's rarely explaining what's wrong, just "this is wrong" but we have to take time to analyze the thread and each posts.

having a mediator is not necessarily required, we could just rely on users providing more information in their reports (but I know it's not happening!, users will always report the way they want).


We have a thread in the staff section where we started talking about next moderators, but it's been there for too long.
moderators/supervisors are suggesting some users, and we talk about them, if we think they will be a good moderator or not. a good and nice user on the forum is not always a good moderator. like said few times in this thread, it requires few different things, like being able to manage a conflicting situation, taking decisions, having enough time to dedicate to the site, time zone (if possible). and then, that user have to accept it (sometime they don't want to have more responsibilities and are fine as end users!).

Personally I don't "pick someone" and look at his posting history. We are doing the contrary : think about users we noticed for a long time doing specific actions, reporting useful post/thread to be moderated, and seeing that user "like" the site and want to be part of it. (you can tell me most people will say they like it and only want to improve it, but that's not always enough to just want it).
we have so many users that we could oversee and miss some of you who could be helpful, but I don't know if it's a good idea to just ask publicly, or make a thread like that, where we let users sign for being "possible candidate" to watch.

I always said I miss time to do all I would like to make the site better. I try to help people and write guides, wiki, etc. but there are more thread created and hacking progress being made every day which make it very hard to dedicate my time on something specific. I end not being able to moderate as much as other staff, but I try when I'm in holidays, and I try to follow the WiiU section. Having more moderators (not global mod) could be useful, especially in 3DS/Wiiu section.
Just know there's a "work in progress" to get more moderators.

edit:
Users liking my message before reading it ! haha
maybe you won't like what I said