Do you have suggestions, complaints, or compliments as to how the moderator staff is performing? Voice your opinions here.

Make this thread helpful for the mods.

Mods are members, also. So member bashing is not allowed, as always. Don't make it a personal vendetta, please. Keep the bashing at 0%, please.

Any moderator has the right to close and unpin this thread at the signs of bashing, pointlessness, and/or any other guideline breaker.

I do hope this works out. I want to stress that this is not the place for personal attacks. If you really have to, keep it in the PM system between you and the mod. This thread is here to help mods work better with members.

So...your thoughts?


PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING

To avoid redundancy and to leave room for valid comments, posts consist of concerns/suggestions that have been addressed will be deleted. Please do not post something someone already brought up because your post will be considered as spam. The only exception to this rule is compliments.

Also, please do not make this thread into a full scale discussion. Its main purpose is for members to evaluate moderator performance. If your question/concern has been answer, cease to post here until you have another concern. Thank you.


Historical Threads
Moderator Performance V.1

// Update - Moderator Performance Threads will be 50 pages in length.

The moderating team needs to answer criticisms in a more effective manner.

agree, and not be so biased all the time.

^ Example?

Just because you haven't been satisfied with the responses, doesn't mean that the way the problem has been addressed has been ineffective.

No, I don't think that's it.

Shocking.

You're not adding anything to this thread.

Whatever. I was just seeking to observe that if you're looking for fault, you'll be able to find it anywhere. But really, your concerns aren't really giving me anything to worry about, so forgive me fo rnot getting all worked up.

But you're right, this is, I think, going to be fairly pointless. Consider the high road taken.

Good, now send one of your buddies over here to answer my questions.

Ok, please elaborate so that we can better improve the moderating team and improve your experience at createBlog.

Or as Mic from the Ring of Blogging would say it:

You can check back in the warning level thread.

also the mods aren't responding in a timely manner

because we don't see the point anymore.

WOW. Amazing criticism. Applause for you, my dear.

Why do you think that is? I think they've said what they wanted to say.

Then I don't see the point in being a good member if the mods aren't going to entertain my questions.

You have until midnight EST to respond.

Well hold on. I still think James brought up something worth noting.

I think it was already stated that Kaycee should've been more clear when giving the verbal warning. A PM should be sent and it should be stated in the thread. It was more than just spamming. Isn't that what this is all about?

If not, forgive me. I slept at 7AM this morning.

Well, James is questioning why the verbal warning is still being held against him even though the verbal warning itself has already been confirmed inadequate.

And according to the Official createBlog By-Laws, a verbal warning must be precise and clear. So then if Kaycee's verbal warning wasn't so, should it still be counted as a verbal warning?

Because if not, then James should not have had his warning level raised, but rather, should only have a verbal warning (or arguably, nothing).

OH. Is that what those 4 pages are about?

James, when/where was your verbal warning given?

Technically, no. But that's where we are right now.

I think it was in the anonymous thread, but I can't even be a hundred percent sure it was directed at me! If it was somewhere else, then I dunno.

Anonymous Shoutouts?

Was/were the reason(s) stated in the PM, then?

Here:
Whether a PM was sent or not, I don't know.

James, here you go: I did not give out a verbal warning via PM. That was a mistake of mine, and I'm sorry. I also was not clear with what reason you were being warned. I did not send out a PM because just two minutes after I issued the verbal warning, you had posted again with the same kind of post you'd been warned not to do and I proceeded with raising your warning level instead of going back to verbally warn you via PM. Again, I should've PM'd you. That is very, very true.

I still believe, however, that that verbal warning still has credibility and should still stand as so. The post that James made after being verbally warned in the thread would've received a verbal warning. Then the same thing would've happened, with just one post over.

That changes things A LOT. I was under the impression that a PM was sent for the verbal warning. It was the content (or lack thereof) that was questioned.

If that's the case, then his warning level really needs to be lowered to that of just a verbal warning.