Good Salvation moderators, been reading new subforum with many interest. many disturbing things. have opinion interesting to share with moderators and members of site, but very difficult because been criticised for bad english language, but luck have english person helped translate Bong wang opinion in good language. Here is opinion new member:
1) administrators need to be assertive, stop being scared of screwing around, and stop being scared about the users of the site. They need to have the guts to do the right thing, and stop pandering to things such as feelings, or BS like keeping an united front and an illusion of consensus. You have been entrusted with a greater power. Use it for the good of the site instead of being worried in fostering an illusionary consensus with the lower ranks.
1.a) Learn the meaning of leadership
People will respect you for your actions, not for your rank. If people feel you are not honoring your rank, they will call for your dismissal. This is in respect for the rank which they will think you ae unfit for. The correct action would then be to earn the respect your rank commends through your actions, not infracting and banning people because you feel insecure. Most of you are in universities where there are generally short-courses available about leadership (usually given by invited military staff). Attend those courses and learn the true meaning of leadership
2) part of the regular moderators need to think about their subforum best interests instead of trying to enforce their idealized vision of what the subforums could be. Some subforums are very well managed, others are not, and this is the result of a proselitic attitude which is uncalled for. Typically the users know what is the best tone that is warranted for each subforum. Hear them out.
3) stop revising rules, making new rules, or thinking about new rules.
In the past, the site has worked without much hassle with a given set of rules. You are having problems because the rules are not being well applied, and because staff is afraid to exert their best judgment and resorting to common-sense. Rules were very effective in the past, when they were applied with proper discretion. This is no longer true not because of a problem with the rules, but because proper discretion is no longer applied.
moddesks are riddled with kafkian situations fostered by the blind application of rules. this has to stop. Urgently.
3.a) stop being paralyzed by the fear of not being consistent. Trust your gut instead and you will end up being consistent by default.
3.b) try to bring the best members of MTGS onboard, but be careful to chose those who have the capacity of having proper social interactions, both IRL and on an internet medium. Too many staff members lack these capabilities, and it is the administrators task to phase them out to more tech oriented tasks and replacing them with more socially capable new blood.
4) the userbase deserves more respect.
4.1) administrators shouldn't tell users: If you redo X you will be automatically suspended: it is overtly confrontational and creates a deep rift. Users which think have legitimate claims will feel inclined to disrespect the request, leading to unnecessary suspensions and more bad blood.
4.2) stop using derogatory terms to users who frequent the CI subforum, both publicly and privately in the mod lounge. Treating people who air grievance, legitimate or not, as "CI Warriors" is both antagonistic and derogatory to much of the people who just wish to better the site. This has to stop. Now
4.3) Not everyone disagreeing with the staff is automatically trolling. These days, staff members of the higher echelons are so scared to respond to dissenting opinions that they prefer infracting them for trolling. Stop this please. It again creates a rift.
5) Open CI for all users again. Shutting down the subforum for people under 10 posts is idiotic because it encourages gimmicking and mindless ++ for accessing the subforum, and it precludes newcomers from learning about policy discussion and what should be expected from forum dwellers. Stop acting cowardly. If people troll CI act in accordance through all the enforcement means you have at your disposal. You have the power. Don't act like CI warriors are going to steal your lunchbox if you have the guts to reopen the subforum. This will be beneficial for newcomers who are presently clueless about forum rules and policies.
Hope these ideas help staff getting that much needed wake-up call.
MTGS is in need of radical, radical changes.
many thanks to good MTGS moderators, hope Bong Wang good help for site peaceful relationship. Very nice.
These would be stronger with actual examples. I have never really understood these types of threads here; I've been here the better part of a year and have never seen cause for the types of accusations that the Mods apparently have to put up with.
Bong Wang is about as genuine as a three-dollar bill. I'd wager he's one of the members who took the huff during the N_S fallout and now wants to crawl back on here talking about "consistency" and "respect" - all the hallmarks of somebody with an internet entitlement problem.
The mods on this site are doing a fine job. Long may it continue.
Just because you haven't had issues doesn't mean they don't exist. 99% of users don't know anything that happens in CI, but that doesn't mean the issues are any less real or relevant.
And to be fair, at any given time, most mods are probably doing fine.
*this is a phone post, so sorry if some words are out of place, autocorrect is a harsh mistress.
Speaking for myself:
1) I agree, but it's not just admins. All levels of staff could stand to be more assertive and not be so reluctant to put their foot down when the need arises.
2) What users want isn't always best either. I've had many people complain when I've issued warnings or infractions for them posting about how a card it's'retarded' our how they 'got raped' at FNM. Usually citing how 'everyone does it' our something similar.
Moderators are commonly regulars of the communities they oversee, so they do have a good idea of the directions to take in order to improve them, and while community input is important, as in 1), sometimes the foot need to come down.
3) The characteristic of changing with the times and improving rather than resting on laurels is, IMHO, very important. Constantly wondering 'how can this be done better' has helped give rise to rules modifications such as the appeal system for bans and suspensions (before that a ban was permanent without any chance for return), the
simplification of the main rules, and some forum-specific rules, the shortening of distention lengths for repeat offenders, the refinement of our solicitation rules and many others. It also helps us cement just what we intend the rules to mean, to protect against misapplication, both by moderators and by users trying to rules lawyer their way out of trouble.
4) .1- I disagree whole heartedly. Part of being more assertive is not letting abusive users continue their tirades. Such ultimatums are issued rarely and are only considered as a last resort, once a user has been listened to, and addressed. Respect goes both ways, when an answer is handed down, banging on about it is disrespectful, disruptive, and an example of wholly inappropriate behaviour. Which leads into;
.2 I agree, derogatory terms have no place in civil conversation. It would be nice to have everyone getting along without demeaning labels and accusations like bias, corrupt, warrior, lapdog, etc.
.3 - Put bluntly, we don't. I find it insulting that you insinuate we do.
In CI it it's generally harder to get warned or infrared simply due to the nature of the forum being that of a listening ground. But, as in 1) being more assertive means smacking people across the head if they give to much guff.
5) I think CI had been much better off since the filter was applied. It's helped us preemptively catch disruptive gimmicks made to troll.
I think the filter only really encourages gimmick spam if the user is already banned or suspended, in which case, they shouldn't be in CI in the first place.
All or current rules and user-relevant policy can be found in the publicly available rules documents.
I'd also appreciate it if you didn't use derogatory terms to describe other users, it is disrespectful and is frequently against our rules on flaming.
So that's my personal take on that, take it for what you will
Bong Wang thinks problems with moderation not get resolved by shooting messenger
Bong Wang polite yet sincere earnest advice. discussions focused in userbase for too long this not constructive and conductive to reform and improvement site relations.
I honestly hate reading these threads with how the staff could be better and seeing people say that the staff is doing a fine job then saying nothing else or in the case of zindabad, accusations of trolling.
Is the staff doing a good job? Maybe. Does that mean they can't improve?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Originally Posted by Arcadic View Post
scumbag
Want Higher Level Card Evaluation? Visit Diestoremoval.com
*
2) What users want isn't always best either. I've had many people complain when I've issued warnings or infractions for them posting about how a card it's'retarded' our how they 'got raped' at FNM. Usually citing how 'everyone does it' our something similar.
Moderators are commonly regulars of the communities they oversee, so they do have a good idea of the directions to take in order to improve them, and while community input is important, as in 1), sometimes the foot need to come down.
I think #2 is more directed at what happened recently (few months ago?) in water cooler talk that nearly killed it entirely -- new crop of mods took over and basically said "we don't care what it was before, this is what its going to be" and revised all the rules and started handing out heavy infractions for stuff that shoudl never have been infracted at all.
User base got upset, lashed back (myself among them), and things got messy.
Things are settled and fine now (don't want to drag that specter back up), but the issue was a direct result of the new mods deciding that the water cooler talk should be something other than what it was and unilaterally changing it without seeking feedback or opinions from the actual users.
What you are talking about is different because the bounds of what is appropriate and what language can be used are established and consistent on this site -- it's not a change to enforce them.
Votan hit the nail on the head; And as far as there being issues with the staff doing their job? The only issues are other people making issues and themselves being issues.
There are no issues with the way staff and administration are doing their job.
Incorrect on 2 reasons:
1) The basic reason - there is always room for improvements. Be it small or large. Sometimes its as small as to help PR or large to warrent an inquiry of the way the staff as a whole does the job or approaches the job mentally.
2) The abysmal way they pissed on many long term members of this site and attempt to back pedal from it after it turned into "kicking the hornets nest when oocupied". To this day there is no satisfactory end to it and there will never be one. Also the fact that the professionalism from the same people that kicked the hornets nest is so poor its ironic when those people are the ones that act like they are the pinacles of professionalism.
I'll leave it at that before I go into ripping someones head off and saying unsightly while doing it. Thinsg arent going to change and its very clear on that. Sad really. Just very sad. More so when others could be very good people and choose a path that makes them bad.
2) The abysmal way they pissed on many long term members of this site and attempt to back pedal from it after it turned into "kicking the hornets nest when oocupied". To this day there is no satisfactory end to it and there will never be one. Also the fact that the professionalism from the same people that kicked the hornets nest is so poor its ironic when those people are the ones that act like they are the pinacles of professionalism.
Be grateful you were extended an olive branch. If the staff had been more "professional", this thread would be locked and closed and they would have second thoughts about whatever concessions they gave right now.
I think #2 is more directed at what happened recently (few months ago?) in water cooler talk that nearly killed it entirely -- new crop of mods took over and basically said "we don't care what it was before, this is what its going to be" and revised all the rules and started handing out heavy infractions for stuff that shoudl never have been infracted at all.
User base got upset, lashed back (myself among them), and things got messy.
Things are settled and fine now (don't want to drag that specter back up), but the issue was a direct result of the new mods deciding that the water cooler talk should be something other than what it was and unilaterally changing it without seeking feedback or opinions from the actual users.
What you are talking about is different because the bounds of what is appropriate and what language can be used are established and consistent on this site -- it's not a change to enforce them.
Maybe, but that example is not only an exception rather than the norm, but has long since been resolved (by 4 months now). So, if that's the case, then the criticism makes little sense.
But I do agree that that topic is one that doesn't need more discussion.
many thanks to good MTGS moderators, hope Bong Wang good help for site peaceful relationship. Very nice.
I advise you to keep at it! >:D
Keep up the good work, Mods.
When in doubt, call a judge.
Objectivist here. Hit me up to talk philosophy.
The mods on this site are doing a fine job. Long may it continue.
"...a talisman against all evil, so long as you obey me."
My 360 Commons Cube
Your favorite MTG website
My helpdesk should you need me.
/barn all of this. Mods are doing a fine job and I've never had an issue with any I've spoken with. So keep it up.
—Lazav
_______________________________________________
Mafia Stats
Summary:
Total Win %: 40%
Total Scum Win %: 60%
Total Town Win %: 20%
Total Neutral Win %: 0%
And to be fair, at any given time, most mods are probably doing fine.
My 360 Commons Cube
Your favorite MTG website
Speaking for myself:
1) I agree, but it's not just admins. All levels of staff could stand to be more assertive and not be so reluctant to put their foot down when the need arises.
2) What users want isn't always best either. I've had many people complain when I've issued warnings or infractions for them posting about how a card it's'retarded' our how they 'got raped' at FNM. Usually citing how 'everyone does it' our something similar.
Moderators are commonly regulars of the communities they oversee, so they do have a good idea of the directions to take in order to improve them, and while community input is important, as in 1), sometimes the foot need to come down.
3) The characteristic of changing with the times and improving rather than resting on laurels is, IMHO, very important. Constantly wondering 'how can this be done better' has helped give rise to rules modifications such as the appeal system for bans and suspensions (before that a ban was permanent without any chance for return), the
simplification of the main rules, and some forum-specific rules, the shortening of distention lengths for repeat offenders, the refinement of our solicitation rules and many others. It also helps us cement just what we intend the rules to mean, to protect against misapplication, both by moderators and by users trying to rules lawyer their way out of trouble.
4) .1- I disagree whole heartedly. Part of being more assertive is not letting abusive users continue their tirades. Such ultimatums are issued rarely and are only considered as a last resort, once a user has been listened to, and addressed. Respect goes both ways, when an answer is handed down, banging on about it is disrespectful, disruptive, and an example of wholly inappropriate behaviour. Which leads into;
.2 I agree, derogatory terms have no place in civil conversation. It would be nice to have everyone getting along without demeaning labels and accusations like bias, corrupt, warrior, lapdog, etc.
.3 - Put bluntly, we don't. I find it insulting that you insinuate we do.
In CI it it's generally harder to get warned or infrared simply due to the nature of the forum being that of a listening ground. But, as in 1) being more assertive means smacking people across the head if they give to much guff.
5) I think CI had been much better off since the filter was applied. It's helped us preemptively catch disruptive gimmicks made to troll.
I think the filter only really encourages gimmick spam if the user is already banned or suspended, in which case, they shouldn't be in CI in the first place.
All or current rules and user-relevant policy can be found in the publicly available rules documents.
I'd also appreciate it if you didn't use derogatory terms to describe other users, it is disrespectful and is frequently against our rules on flaming.
So that's my personal take on that, take it for what you will
Bong Wang polite yet sincere earnest advice. discussions focused in userbase for too long this not constructive and conductive to reform and improvement site relations.
Is the staff doing a good job? Maybe. Does that mean they can't improve?
scumbag
Want Higher Level Card Evaluation? Visit Diestoremoval.com
I think #2 is more directed at what happened recently (few months ago?) in water cooler talk that nearly killed it entirely -- new crop of mods took over and basically said "we don't care what it was before, this is what its going to be" and revised all the rules and started handing out heavy infractions for stuff that shoudl never have been infracted at all.
User base got upset, lashed back (myself among them), and things got messy.
Things are settled and fine now (don't want to drag that specter back up), but the issue was a direct result of the new mods deciding that the water cooler talk should be something other than what it was and unilaterally changing it without seeking feedback or opinions from the actual users.
What you are talking about is different because the bounds of what is appropriate and what language can be used are established and consistent on this site -- it's not a change to enforce them.
I agree with this statement.
Really? Good for you. It's a bummer that there are people who aren't really happy with the way things ended up being for them.
Quick! Summon another votan!
My YouTube Channel
(Also known as Xenphire)
No room for improvement?
Incorrect on 2 reasons:
1) The basic reason - there is always room for improvements. Be it small or large. Sometimes its as small as to help PR or large to warrent an inquiry of the way the staff as a whole does the job or approaches the job mentally.
2) The abysmal way they pissed on many long term members of this site and attempt to back pedal from it after it turned into "kicking the hornets nest when oocupied". To this day there is no satisfactory end to it and there will never be one. Also the fact that the professionalism from the same people that kicked the hornets nest is so poor its ironic when those people are the ones that act like they are the pinacles of professionalism.
I'll leave it at that before I go into ripping someones head off and saying unsightly while doing it. Thinsg arent going to change and its very clear on that. Sad really. Just very sad. More so when others could be very good people and choose a path that makes them bad.
Maybe, but that example is not only an exception rather than the norm, but has long since been resolved (by 4 months now). So, if that's the case, then the criticism makes little sense.
But I do agree that that topic is one that doesn't need more discussion.