Why would we put something into effect when the system we have now works fine? Why are you so eager to change everything? Seriously..some things are fine the way they are. There's no problem with what we have now. We have our late night people and we have our early people and we have our day people..etc. etc. There's rarely a time when not one single mod is on. Besides, usually if the mods aren't on, the members aren't on too much either since we are all people and all have other things to do, like sleep and school.

^EXACTLY. Everything doesn't have to change. It's not like all hell is breaking loose and the members are all out of control and the system we have now is failing.

yes it is, if you have too much of some thing its deffinately prone to cause problems later down the road. why have 5 cookies when you're full with 2?


we use what works...when there is an obvious lack of mods online new ones will be hired. right now do you honestly notice not enough mods online?

yeah, which is why they hire more people


you can't just be like "oh...we want this many mods" and suddenly that many qualified people turn up(for example we needed more myspace mods BADLY and still weren't able to find any one qualified and trustworthy enough for the job. ), just be smart about it and thats it...


are their lives really effecting their perfomance THAT much? i dont think so...


leeway for what? it seems pretty lax to me, and i've heard the mods complain more about having lives in this section because apparantly they aren't online enough? it really seems like thats what is being implied

well, i'm not really familiar with the way mods are hired,so can i ask

do you just hire everyone you think would be a good mod, or is there a limit?

Didn't you read the topic?

There was a limit of 4 more People because..we already had a lot of people. Point is, that number of people should be able to cover the Community forums (which I think they do pretty well) and if not, they are fired and we hire more.

There was other numbers for the other positions, but I don't remember.

i didn't read the hiring topic.

well, why not hire all who it's decided would make a good mod? first off, it'd give some extra buffer if some mods quit, and you wouldn't have to turn away capable people who might not apply next time.

i don't see what's bad about having extra mods.

and it means you have to hire less, and go through the selection process less, and there's always the chance they won't apply the next time.

Well then those people who wont apply will replaced by people that will. Simple as that.

Sure there will be times when all qualifed applicants may not be hired, thats life, and it happens everywhere you go. They can try again next time. Why not hire all the qualifed staff? Well once again that leads to the problem of overstock. Like Heather said, why have 4 cookies when you're full with 2. There is no need to hire more than we need. Right now, the forums are very well moderated, so what would be the need of having 5 to 10 additonal staff members just hanging out. If it is determined that there is a need for more staff, due moderators stepping down, more forums etc, then that would be the time to beef up staff.

mods aren't paid, right?

there's no physical space limitation...
so why exactly should be there a limitation?

can someone tell me what troubles that would cause?

Modding is a privelege given to a select few. We don't want just everyone to be mods because then it's not a privelege. If we have a lot of mods, some mods won't even get the chance to mod anything and feel like they don't need to come. We'll then have to fire mods, in turn hiring more anyway. We only want to have as much mods as are needed and we want to make sure we only take the top ones, not just anyone who might be a good mod. We need to make sure we only get the top people in our system.

Talk about the mess of having 50 people staff. Pretty soon most of the members that actively post would all have modding powers. I mean you want no limit right? Might as well make everyone a mod in that case.

oh, well, if you want to keep modship something special, why didn't you say so in the first place?

here was i, thinking about what would be the most efficient...

alright katie, this is supposed to be a discussion. yeah, you oppose everything he says, but think about it this way. if you didnt just get modded, im sure your views would be different. not that you being on staff is a bad thing, but you just seem to be degrading against the whole discussion and what we as a committee think should be changed. agreed, there will be different opinions, but im not really seeing where you're coming from. justin and everyone else is just trying to prove a point. theyre not saying that was should add all members who apply to staff, its just a generalization that maybe we need more staff. no, cB will not fall apart if this isnt done, but its just to keep cB running.

granted, not 50 mods are needed, but maybe a couple more here in there will keep us going and growing.

I assumed it was implied. It would be chaos with too many mods.

i'm really not seeing why it'd be chaos with 5 extra mods...

There's nothing wrong with having five extra mods if we find any qualified candidates. You said something about having nothing to lose if we had 50 mods. If you meant 5 instead of 50, you should have said that.

No, 5 extra mods would not equal chaos. But you were throwing out larger numbers...

ah, but i meant 50 also.

logistics? mayhaps a problem. the mod system would have to be reorganized a bit, with a more developed hierarchy and specific jobs.

but of course, you're not going to find 50 qualified people.

i think if you hire all that are qualified, you don't have to hire as much, and that would provide a buffer amount of mods, and would reduce the need for so many selection times.

^
thats a good point. im not just saying that because i ran, but it also decreases a persons chance of getting turned down. now thats not a very logical reason, but it would also help in running more smoothly with time zones and everything. i just think maybe adding 4-5 more would be sufficient.

well, not really a set number.

just every time your hiring, hire everyone who's qualified.

which leaves you with excess mods, which means it will take longer to dwindle down, which means you have to hire less often.

But responsibility is a quality, not a duty that the job entails.

Spencer, just as you said, this is a discussion, so do you think you could also consider our opinions? We're not opposing every single thing you say, but we oppose what we oppose and that is that. You're not the only one who's right. It's just opinions. Even if I wasn't a mod, I wouldnt want to just hire everyone qualified.

You mentioned the fact that just cause you applied isn't why you're saying this..have you ever thought that maybe you weren't as qualified as you thought? Not everyone is qualified. We're not gonna just hire everyone with potential. We want to hire people that prove themselves that they are almost guaranteed to do a good job. We do not want a large number of mods. We only hire the most qualified, not just anyone who may do well.

it appears we have reached an impass of views. one of mods as a privilaged elite peacekeeping force, the other of mods as serving group for peacekeeping.

it doesn't look like we'll convince each other, so why don't we just ignore it?

don't address the number of mods.

Well, I do agree we shouldn't have had a set number of people to hire, just hire those we really thought stood out, but it wasn't my choice to say whether we had one or not. That was Jusun.

Ok, now that the number of mods business is out of the way (since we were getting no where with that), whats the next order of business? You know what, until I just looked at the topic title: modding: what does the job entail, I didnt know what the heck the purpose of this thread was, we've gotten that much off topic; but I think the basics of the jobs of a mod has been pretty much covered or no?

sammi, i didnt say anything about me being as qualified. all i said was i just never get where shes coming from. i was just trying to prove that justin saying we should add 50 mods is just a suggestion. he really doesnt mean to add 50 mods and all that, hes just trying to prove that having 50 mods isnt a problem. yes, i also agree 50 mods is too much, but like i said earlier, 4-5 more wont hurt.

^ You cant just add 4-5 mod more if there arent 4-5 more that are qualified. And even if there are, its still a bit much, imo. Ughhh....wait I think what Justin suggested was best, lets get off the numbers issue.

im not signed in, but its spencer.

so i guess they do have to be qualified. i dont know. lets just get off the number issue as stated and move on to what this is really about.

Job description of People Staff: Overview from I've read from the thread
1. Maintain order of the boards
2. Includes moving, closing, merging, splitting, and warning members, and making sure the forum rules are followed.
3. Responsible and mature
4. Practices good judgement
5. Friendly and welcoming - Some may argue that this not necessarily a requirement for moderators in general, however, at createblog we have people staff moderators, so being good with people, welcoming, and helpful is a major plus.
6. Interact with the community
7. Includes moving, closing, merging, splitting, and warning members, and making sure the forum rules are followed.
8. Be taking a job as a moderator, you agree to be active around the community, give input on things that would make createblog better, and lend a helping hand when needed.

add more if you want......

perhaps representing the views/problems of members in disucssions backstage?

Well, that's not specific to only People. That's everyone.

i think most those 'duties' are just things to make mods the nice squad.

good qualities to look for, but not a duty.

i think...

maintain order of the boards is the only job needed.

Spencer,
Yah, ur right, this is a discussion. Justin has his opinions, and I have mine. I'm not trying to oppose to everything he says. I just happen to think differently on alot of the things he was saying. To say that my views would be different if I just didn't get modded is very insulting. I'm not degrading against the whole discussion, and i'm not going "against" the committee in any way. I think there are things that do need to be changed. I'm sorry you don't see where i'm coming from, you don't exactly have to see eye to eye with me on this subject. You sound like ur saying i'm trying to go against what everyone is saying. "Justin and everyone is trying to pove a point"...yes, i know. I'm trying to put in my point too. I really regret even saying the phrase, "Cb..falling..apart". Your point was that you thought generally there should be more staff. My point was generally that i think the staff numbers are just fine. AND NO, i'm not saying that because i just got modded. That has nothing to do with it at all. That really was low of you to say that about my views and opinions. And just so you know, i do respect Justin and his views and everyone elses, but that doesn't mean i have to agree. I'm not the kind of person that just sits back and agrees with everyone when really inside i don't think it's a good idea.
So i'm sorry, really i am.

someone with mod powers close this thread and open a new one.

it's too far off topic.

or how about we just get back on topic form kiera's post



i like these rules, its basically the summary of what a people staffer is and i can't think of any thing else to add

I agree with Keira's post. I can't think of anything else to add either

most of the attitude3 ones are necessary to a degree for design staff as well, but they are still worth including

i think the representing thing shoul dgo in, but if no onme else agrees, fine

Well, I think that's sort of a known unwritten rule.

i guess someone deleted my post. im sorry i offended you. i was just mad that this wasnt going anywhere.

my apologies as well.

thats fine, but then do we need to include 'practices good judgement' by the same reasoning?

and spencer, we are going somewhere... slowly but surely. have faith, everyone

No, I suppose that's pretty much implied as well..

Let's not include things that don't really have to be included as a rule..I think we're all competent enough to realize we're supposed to use good judgement and act responsibly and whatnot.

Yes, I agree; we should keep the list of duties to a minimum, so as to be as simple as possible.

i said that because everyone was off topic and not doing anything but fighting about whats right and whats wrong.


do we have that or have we just not really decided anything yet?

i think the only duty should be to maintain order in the forums.

a nit picky point:

in kiera's rules, shouldn't number six really come directly after number 1, as it basically clarifies what was meant?

^ I wasnt trying to write them in a certain order, but yeah it should. *editted*