Moderator Promotion and Demotion Options

[*mzkandi*]

This is the thread where we will discuss moderator promotion and demotion. The promotion aspects includes being promoted from a regular staff positon to head staff and head staff promotion to admin.

As far as demotion of a moderator, what is everyones take on it? Sure inactivey, abusing moderatoring powers, etc. are aspects of it but are there any other issues that need to be covered?

------------------------------------

As far as promotions to admin status is involved, Micron (Jusun) has said that he prefers to promote one admin that is more on the technical side and one that is a little more on the soical side. I think this is good because it covers all the aspects of cB.

So discuss.

[racoons > you]

i agree with Jusun's idea about the two-admin-two-sides-of-CB-role

inactivity is the most important reason why a mod should be demoted. we have heard about the activity checks run backstage to keep tabs on mods doing their duties, being active backstage etc, but little about how often these take place, what criteria they cover exactly... perhaps we should make a regular time frame when they are taken... say, every two months?

[*disco infiltrator*]

The reason they're taken randomly is to test when people are really on and not just when people check in every 2 months because they know there's one coming.

[racoons > you]

mmm. true.

well then, perhaps we should say something like 'at least 5 of such checks are to be carried out in such-and-such a time period (a year? i dunno how often they are taken now)'

that way, we know staff are being held to account, but they dont know exactly when they are coming, and dont try and mod especially for the occaison

[heyyfrankie]

i haven't been on in a while but whenever i was actually able to get online 2 months ago, i noticed that there are a few moderators that i dont' feel deserve to be mods anymore. not only because of inactivity on the boards but also because they rarely post backstage if AT ALL. Some of them are those who like...used to be on ALL OF THE TIME but now they just pop in from time to time and perhaps close a topic here and there. there are many others who could be doing and would do a better job then they are doing right now.

[*disco infiltrator*]

I'm sure that happens now. There doesn't need to be laws for how much that happens, IMO - admins do it when they feel they need to. (Heads can too *poke*)

[racoons > you]

it doesnt have to CHANGE what is happening now. it just needs to formalize it. that is the point of the bylaws. to cover all aspects of CB life

[*disco infiltrator*]

Yes, and I said I don't feel any law needs to be made about this.

Did I say anything about change?

edit;;
I actually don't think there needs to be CB laws made about what goes on Backstage at all, any aspect of it.

[racoons > you]

shocking.

does that include modding the new mods, then?

[heyyfrankie]

I'm sure that happens now. There doesn't need to be laws for how much that happens, IMO - admins do it when they feel they need to. (Heads can too *poke*)

wait...heads and admins can do what?

[racoons > you]

run checks to see the number of moderator functions carried out by each staff member

[heyyfrankie]

^ i can do that? uh.....are you sure.
i don't think so.

[racoons > you]

actually, i dont think you can. i messed about with the feature on GenF, and i'm pretty sure it requries Admin CP access

[*incoherent*]

i think its only admins and advisors that can access it, but i dont think head staff can.

[heyyfrankie]

^ & ^x2 yeah. just checked and i can't do that. *shrug*

uh...i guess i can be honest. i think that we need three admins (cB is a big place!). whenever we had kim, kathleen and jusun, things went fine so it's not like having 3 of them is a bad thing. i think that either eve or mona needs to be made an admin and sammi (disco infiltrator) needs to be made head staff. i really think that she deserves it. she's been like...EVERY KIND OF MODERATOR.

[*incoherent*]

lol frankie weve been discussing that.
http://www.createblog.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=105976

and that would be cool to have sammi on head staff. i think she does deserve it.

[racoons > you]

i agree that eve or mona should be promoted perhaps both.

[*disco infiltrator*]

^ Aw, honey. (to Frankie)

Modding people up doesn't go on just Backstage though, does it James? That's something dealing with the entire community, affecting the whole community. And that's dealing also with members who are Official Members beforehand. That doesn't go on solely Backstage. When exactly we have roll-calls doesn't directly affect you, does it? No, it affects the mods who are back there and the ones who aren't.

Oh, and I meant Heads can also initiate roll-calls Backstage to make sure we're active. A little topic going "you must post here by a week from today" or something. That's how we check. If someone doesn't post in there by the date told..that's a problem.

[heyyfrankie]

who are you calling honey?

[*disco infiltrator*]

YOU! Honeybumpkins!

Ok, I'm done now.

[heyyfrankie]

[*disco infiltrator*]

Ah, guys, let's not turn this into a spam-fest for me.....though it is greatly appreciated.

Back on topic!

[racoons > you]

but who the mods are and whether or not they are active does affect members. if you arent doing your jobs, then it is us who get the effects. and mods and admins are not more or less needing of guidelines to govern the way they function.

and i didnt say we needed to know exactly when roll calls take place, or the result of every roll call. just that we ough to be assured that the mods are being monitored on a regulr basis. writing that down does that

[*disco infiltrator*]

Well yea, I just think Backstage things should be handled Backstage. We do have our own set of rules back there. We could just ask for a law to be made there if everyone back there thinks we need it.

[racoons > you]

but the point of the bylaws was to bring ALL off CB together, to govern ALL aspects of CB life. that includes backstage.

jusun himself has said that improved transparency will strengthen the community

[*disco infiltrator*]

Yes I know. But if you do find inactive mods, then you can PM an Admin/Head about it. How many times we run roll-calls has nothing to do with people who don't participate in them. Yes, the activity of a mod affects you, but there's really no solid way to make actual LAWS about the activity mod, seeing as there could be very different case-by-case situations for each person.

[racoons > you]

i said improved transparency. not 'let's get rid of backstage and have direct democracy on every issue'.

it will still be up to admins/heads to ensure that these rules ar enforced. including them in teh bylaws means that members have a degre eof insight as to how the site is run, and that it is being done so effectively

[racoons > you]

But if you do find inactive mods, then you can PM an Admin/Head about it

lovely in theory, but if ever a mod is pointed out as being noticably absent by multiple members in the mod performance thread, we are jus totld they have lives and not to worry about it

why would one member pming an admin make the slightest bit more impact?

[*disco infiltrator*]

Well, even if it's just this issue, I don't think there needs to be a law about it at all. Admins can handle it. They do it whenever they think it needs to be done. That may end up to be 10 times a year, it may end up to be 2. We don't know. If everyone seems to be active, why do one just to fill a quota?

[racoons > you]

so that members can be confident that mods are being consistently held to account.

[*disco infiltrator*]

But we just told you it happens and how it does. That should tell you. If you think someone or multiple people are not being active, you could PM a mod and ask when the last roll call was. If it's too far back, you PM an Admin/Head and ask for one to be made now.

[racoons > you]

yes, yes.

you've told me exactly how it happens and that it does happen. i have no reason whatsoever to believe you.

writing it down gives faith that it is happening, and that im not being bullshitted.

as for pming an admin/head, a member would be told that the concern was appreciated, mods have lives, and that admins will decide when a mod is inactive enough to be demodded. isnt that what you would say if i pmed you about an activity concern?

[racoons > you]

ooh this is odd.

i can see my post, but even when i refresh, it is still showing sammi as the last person to hae posted

[*Azarel*]

^ Try clearing your cache.

[racoons > you]

*is embarrassed that he doesnt know what cache means*

[*disco infiltrator*]

On your browser...

Tools > Internet Options > Delete Temporary Files

I believe.

[racoons > you]

indeed. ah well, it is fixed now... thanks, anna.

back to the topic

[*mzkandi*]

Ok, one the main reasons for admin demotion is inactivity, how long is it to be considered inactive? And how does one go about petitioning that an admin be demodded? I much prefer that an admin should know they are not active enough and voluntarily resign from their postion rather than some sort of petition for demotion (most likely among mods) to take place. Whatever the process is, the issue of inactivity should apply for all staff postions.

As far as actual promotion, well the high ups judgement call on who they think is best fit for the positon plays a major role so its not like we can set actual requirements for that, whomever that deem the best fit for the postion will get it (this concerns promotion to head staff and admin positons).

[*disco infiltrator*]

Well I think Admins/Heads should take notice if someone is reasonably inactive and confront them about it themselves either telling them to improve or be demoted.

[*mzkandi*]

^
I agree....as much as a hate to admit it, and I believe Frankie brought it up somewhere, a few mods activeness and overall modness I call into question sometimes especially when there are people willing to take their job and be much better at it :/

[*disco infiltrator*]

There's more than a couple that I question myself...

[demolished]

If any mod had their internet cut off, computer damages, … and had been inactive for a month. Do they lose their moderator power? Should we hire substitute mods ?

[*incoherent*]

If any mod had their internet cut off, computer damages,  … and had been inactive for a month. Do they lose their moderator power? Should we hire substitute mods ?

i dont think so. frankie had problems mostly over the summer, but there are enough mods to cover the loss of one person for the time being.

[coconutter]

Besides, it would be totally out of the way to set up a system that makes someone a mod for a certain amount of time, or to take away their moding privlages when they come back, I think you guys have enough mods to cover for that one person, also.

[Retrogressive]

I agree, I think inactivity for around a month and a half minus any computer problems of that sort is enough for the people to petition for de-modding. But I think the mods should really be the ones who notice their fellow staff member's activeness or abscence.

-Also as a side note, I feel as if by-laws is bringing the backstage happenings more into light to the rest of CB. But I to do not believe that everything should be brought into the light. Somethings can only be decided by the admins and mods.

[*incoherent*]

^
its kind of late to be letting us know that now since were almost finished...and jusun left it opened so the community, like you, could leave input.

and besides, there are head staff on the bylaws committee...the bylaws were set up so the community could have a say so in what happens and not just leave it to the admins. there was also no limit to what could and couldnt be brought up.

[Retrogressive]

I know that's my bad. I was skittish around by-laws and only reading for a while because I'm not on the committee or an official member. Thank you for yet again pointing that out Spencer.

[*incoherent*]

I know that's my bad. I was skittish around by-laws and only reading for a while because I'm not on the committee or an official member. Thank you for yet again pointing that out Spencer.

what? what am i pointing out?

[demolished]

I know that's my bad. I was skittish around by-laws and only reading for a while because I'm not on the committee or an official member. Thank you for yet again pointing that out Spencer.

It doesn’t matter whether you're an official member, committee or not. Suggestions are always appreciate in feedback.

[*mzkandi*]

Ok, so does anyone have any further feedback on moderator promotions and demotions?

[KissMe2408]

^I think we're all set.

[xosteffanator]

Just wondering....why was reili demoded(sp?)?
She's a really good mod and always helps out
(sorry if this is "bumping" a topic)
oh i see she's design staff now