Admins Options

[*incoherent*]

Alright, so I really hate to bring them into this, but I was talking to Justin about it and he seemed to agree. Yeah, they have lives, but it seems like they go for weeks at a time without coming here. It's been almost a week for both of them. What if something important comes up? Justin made a point about having 8 admins. Yeah, it seems outrageous, but what if only 3 were active. Here's how he states it.

have a minimum of active admins...

don't have provisions for removing admins, have provisions for adding more.

it doesn't matter if there are 8 admins if only 3 are active.

your opinions?

[KissMe2408]

8 administrators? A bit too much i think...there is no need for 8. Too many chefs in the kitchen you know.
At the most i think 4 would be sufficient...
but 8? nah...
and the adminstrators do come here, they actually can be very active, but they are doing "backstage" work. they aren't posting in the forums or anything, but they are working the back of createblog to make sure things go smoothly up front, and i think they are the only ones that can resize signatures and accept members to official member status, and all that. So they can spend 1 hour doing all this stuff backstage, but you wouldn't know it.
lol basically, i think 3 or 4 is plenty of administrators...no need for 8

[sadolakced acid]

well, then demote inactive admin to headstaff.

[*mzkandi*]

Three to Four admins wouldnt be that bad, it would cover more bases -shrug-
8 admins is way too much though.

[*disco infiltrator*]

I just think we should choose people who are active to be in the top positions.

Doesn't that make more sense, and seems so much easier?

Sure, these people used to be very active and involved, but they're not now. If the head honchos aren't ever going to be there, why should they be the deciding factor in big decisions that affect the entire community? People who are more integrated should make those decisions.

[demolished]

I can be the admin for weekends because; I stay home for the whole day. (I’m available during noon, night, midnight, and late night). I’m an owl =]. We do need a few admin that actually stays up late to moderate the forums.


Anyways, 7-8 is good enough. I don’t think many moderators/admin are available at around 11:45pm-1:30am (midnight-ish). I mean, we need at least 1-2 moderators/admin that are available during late nights. That’s the time when most spamming occurs in the forum. I remember seeing 3 pages of spam in the feedback forum. Those spammers claim to “raid” CreateBlog (That’s what they say). The next morning, spam topics disappear.

edit.

I’m confused w/ the admin and moderator’s job.
Skip this post.

[*mzkandi*]

I can be the admin for weekends because; I stay home for the whole day. (I’m available during noon, night, midnight, and late night). I’m an owl =]. We do need a few admin that actually stays up late to moderate the forums.

Ummmm.....you cant just become an admin. You to already be on staff

Anyways, 7-8 is good enough. I don’t think many moderators/admin are available at around 11:45pm-1:30am (midnight-ish). I mean, we need at least 1-2 moderators/admin that are available during late nights. That’s the time when most spamming occurs in the forum. I remember seeing 3 pages of spam in the feedback forum. Those spammers claim to “raid” CreateBlog (That’s what they say). The next morning, spam topics disappear.

Like I said before 8 admins is silly. Yes, we do need more active admins but lets not get ridiculous with it. Considering that People staff do most of the moderating and Admins mostly supervise and work behind the scenes.

[*incoherent*]

so 8 is just a number justin used to prove a point. he's not saying HEY CB WE NEED 8 ADMINS. hes saying that if 8 admins are needed, then so be it if only 3 are active. the 5 others wont be doing anything. hes not saying that jusun needs to go out and find 6 other admins.

[racoons > you]

if we up the current number of admins to 3, as was the case when i first got here, and they were all active, then we can just promote and demote between head staff and admin as necessary

i mean, there are current head staff who would be better sutied to th eadmin job than are people who are inactive for long periods, how ever valid the reasons

i mean, are either roxy or christina actually aware that by laws ar ebeing written?

[*mzkandi*]

so 8 is just a number justin used to prove a point. he's not saying HEY CB WE NEED 8 ADMINS. hes saying that if 8 admins are needed, then so be it if only 3 are active. the 5 others wont be doing anything. hes not saying that jusun needs to go out and find 6 other admins.

How can he assume they wont all be active or if any would be active at all? Exactly...he cant. Even though I get what he is trying to say even though it doesnt really make much sense to promote people only to assume more than half wont be active.

[*Guest*]

well then appoint those that are active


edit://
this was me.

This post has been edited by incoherent: Oct 14 2005, 02:02 PM

[racoons > you]

^
well, yeah

How can he assume they wont all be active or if any would be active at all? Exactly...he cant. Even though I get what he is trying to say even though it doesnt really make much sense to promote people only to assume more than half wont be active.

we can assume that if we appointed several really activ emembers of staff to admin status, they would continue to be active

but yeah, it doesnt make sense to assume whoever we appoint will suddenly drift away...

[*incoherent*]

^
thats the point that justin was trying to prove.

[Heathasm]

i think an increase in admin would be a good idea...but only 4
the admin we have now do their jobs, though. they just aren't online as much any more. they know what has to be done on cb due to their experience as a member and as a forum mod, so its not easy to pick qualified people for that particular job

[Spirited Away]

How can he assume they wont all be active or if any would be active at all? Exactly...he cant. Even though I get what he is trying to say even though it doesnt really make much sense to promote people only to assume more than half wont be active.

I think there should be some kind of procedure for admins to deal with inactivity then, such as 1) checking in with cB at least so-and-so many times a week, 2) appointing a temp admin if he/she goes away for a while... etc. Since admins' words are the last in adding new staff members, it is crucial that they know what goes on around cB, and that can only happen if he/she is actually around and participating in cB business.

I know admins probably come by cB whenever they have the chance, but maybe, just maybe, a quota needs to be placed on the number of visits and participation? Though this is a violation of sorts, it would lessen, if not eliminate the problem of inactivity.

[*disco infiltrator*]

A quota does need to be put in place.
I was told several of the admins/heads were not even aware we were hiring when we did and didn't participate in the decision-making. So why are they the biggest deciding factor if they're not even here to make the decision? Nothing against them but..it was going on for a week or so.

I think all we need is 4 and just..don't put inactive people in the spot.

Having a life is one thing, but not even stopping by for weeks at a time is another. Everyone has time to at least stop by for even 10 minutes a day. I know this. I can sneak on for hours at a time even though I'm grounded, it's not that hard to stop by once in a while..

[Spirited Away]

Having a life is one thing, but not even stopping by for weeks at a time is another. Everyone has time to at least stop by for even 10 minutes a day. I know this. I can sneak on for hours at a time even though I'm grounded, it's not that hard to stop by once in a while..

Though I agree with everything, I do feel a tad uncomfortable if we were to require admins to stop by at least once a day. If once and a while means at least four times a week for 30 mins each time as a start, then that would work with me.

[*disco infiltrator*]

Well I don't think we need to make a time set..

Make it like an actual job. Put in a certain amount of hours of work per week. But it just seems so automated....Just say stop by an approximate amount of time, and it can fluxuate due to some weeks being busier than others...

They don't have to stop by once a day, I'm just saying it's not that hard to most of the time.

[sadolakced acid]

as far as by-laws go, i don't think we should set a time.

i think the by-laws should read " admin should be reasonablly active, as determined by the mods", or something like that.

[*disco infiltrator*]

Yea, me too. I don't like the set amount of time.....

We're not machines, we're people. Createblog is to have fun.

[Spirited Away]

Yea, me too. I don't like the set amount of time.....
We're not machines, we're people. Createblog is to have fun.

And though I agree with both of you, we're now back to the problem of arbitrariness, unless "reasonably active" can be defined. To me, it is reasonable to visit cB three times a week and be active, but that may or may not be the same definition as the next person, then what?

[*disco infiltrator*]

Well yes, but I think we all agree that not stopping by for weeks at a time is unreasonable. We can all judge when someone is too inactive.

[sadolakced acid]

i think twice a week is lenient enough...

[Spirited Away]

Okay, so then when someone doesn't come to cB in weeks, should he/she be allowed to appoint a sub?

[*disco infiltrator*]

If they're going on vacation or something, sure, why not? It gives them a way to be on leave without hurting the community and it gives the sub a chance to prove themselves.

However, when someone is continuously missing due to just not having enough time for CB and whatnot, they should not be in a high position at all.

[sadolakced acid]

weeks is usually planned, and so they should appoint a sub...

i think subs should be appointed before an admin has to go away. if they don't, and are gone for two weeks (14 days), then a sub is appointed form them by _________.


something like that?

[demolished]

Haha. Does that describe krnxswat? <--resource

weeks is usually planned, and so they should appoint a sub...

i think subs should be appointed before an admin has to go away.  if they don't, and are gone for two weeks (14 days),  then a sub is appointed form them by _________.
something like that?

I was thinking of that too! I think they should be appointed by their owner because the owner should know better when to lend their powers. I mean, they can log onto cB for a couple of seconds, lend them the power, and then sign off.

I’m assuming it’s not very hard to do it.

If they don’t do it or forgot about it, at least there's someone who’s active. (It depends on the amount of administrations.)

Not always..

and uh........krnxswat was removed from his position, was he not?

Yep.

edit.

[*disco infiltrator*]

Not always..

and uh........krnxswat was removed from his position, was he not?

[*Guest*]

as far as by-laws go, i don't think we should set a time.

i think the by-laws should read " admin should be reasonablly active, as determined by the mods", or something like that.

people have different opinions on what 'reasonably active' is... bylaws should be specific to avoid confusion and/or room for discussion

[*Guest*]

weeks is usually planned, and so they should appoint a sub...

i think subs should be appointed before an admin has to go away.  if they don't, and are gone for two weeks (14 days),  then a sub is appointed form them by _________.
something like that?

i think that would be even more tedious
its not like theres a magic "sub" button you can click to give admin powers to a sub for a certain period of time

besides not everyone can be a admin just because they're active...
a admins job isn't being super active in the forums, they need to do backend stuff among other things

[Spirited Away]

besides not everyone can be a admin just because they're active...
a admins job isn't being super active in the forums, they need to do backend stuff among other things

We have not mentioned a need for admins to be "super active", we are just interested in admins being relatively active. When it comes to hiring new staff, admins must know how deserving each applicant is for the position since they have the last word on appointing new staff. To be able to know such things, they have to be relatively active to take notice.

[Heathasm]

i think that would be even more tedious
its not like theres a magic "sub" button you can click to give admin powers to a sub for a certain period of time

besides not everyone can be a admin just because they're active...
a admins job isn't being super active in the forums, they need to do backend stuff among other things

well..an admin can give powers to the sub, its not that hard to do-if that were to happen. if an admin does go away for weeks at a time a sub would be completely appropriate (but only with the number of admin we have now...if we had 4 or more i dont think it would be necessary)

people have different opinions on what 'reasonably active' is... bylaws should be specific to avoid confusion and/or room for discussion

ok...if an admin is not active for two whole weeks without a leave of absence

[demolished]

Are you guys forgetting about my post?

I was a mod in another invision free forum.
i think it's possible to lend someone the power.

Haha. Does that describe krnxswat? <--resource
I was thinking of that too! I think they should be appointed by their owner because the owner should know better when to lend their powers. I mean, they can log onto cB for a couple of seconds, lend them the power, and then sign off.

I’m assuming it’s not very hard to do it. 

If they don’t do it or forgot about it, at least there's someone who’s active. (It depends on the amount of administrations.)
Yep.

edit.

[Spirited Away]

Are you guys forgetting about my post?

I was a mod in another invision free forum.
i think it's possible to lend someone the power.

We're not discussing whether or not it's possible by technical standards, we're discussing if it's possible in a sensible way.

[KissMe2408]

Do you guys really think it is necessary/good idea to be "lending" administrative powers to people. I mean, if the administrator is away for 3 weeks or something, then there are still the other administrator(s) there to help out. I don't think there is a need to "lend". I can understand by-laws for choosing staff members, but i think this whole administrative thing is kinda pushing it.
About being active, yes they need to be active; but remember they have lives outside of CB. i don't think there needs to be a number or a limit about how much time they spend, they are responsible enough to be promoted to that position, so i think they can manage their time wisely.

[Spirited Away]

Well, lending admin powers to "people" don't sound quite as right as lending powers to a head staff who is active while the admin is away.

Not that I doesn't understand the whole "lives outside of cB" thing because it has been drilled in enough, but the point is that they need to be active to know who they're choosing to be on staff. If that's not an important factor, then I don't really have a side on this topic.

[KissMe2408]

Well, lending admin powers to "people" don't sound quite as right as lending powers to a head staff who is active while the admin is away.

Not that I don't understand the whole "lives outside of cB" thing because it has been drilled in enough, but the point is that they need to be active to know who they're choosing to be on staff. If that's not an important factor, then there's I don't really have a side on this topic.

Still, i don't like the whole "lending" powers to even head staff. That def could get messy. And are all the administrators going to be away at the same time?

Yah the administrators do need to be active. i mean there is no arguement with that. But what i'm saying is, is that there is no need to make a law about it. You know?

[Spirited Away]

And are all the administrators going to be away at the same time?

Wouldn't be the first time. Meaning yes, it happened before.

Yah the administrators do need to be active. i mean there is no arguement with that. But what i'm saying is, is that there is no need to make a law about it. You know?

So... if admins 'need' to be active and lets say that they're not and there's no law that requires them to be active? What is the point of 'needing' to be active when there's nothing to fault your inactivity?

[KissMe2408]

Wouldn't be the first time. Meaning yes, it happened before.
So... if admins 'need' to be active and lets say that they're not and there's no law that requires them to be active? What is the point of 'needing' to be active when there's nothing to fault your inactivity? 

^There doesn't have to be a "law". The administrators already know the guidelines of being active, and they obviously have the responisibility to do this. God forbid they are inactive, does that mean they will be kicked off because they were inactive for a while? What if there is a reason that they are inactive, are you giong to make laws on what is reasonable and not? because you might as well if we're try to bind everything with laws. I'm all for guidence and laws, but there comes a point where it is too much. If an admin is inactive for that long backstage i'm sure that something would be worked out. You say that the admins were all inactive in the past, and cb didn't fall apart and all hell didn't break loose.

[Heathasm]

Yah the administrators do need to be active. i mean there is no arguement with that. But what i'm saying is, is that there is no need to make a law about it. You know?

at this current point at time...looking at the activeness of the admins, yes.
every one needs a bit of strictness. like i said..if they are going to be the administrators on a forum then they can be active at least once in a twoo weeks passing period from the last time they were on

[*disco infiltrator*]

Ok, I hate to bring this all into it, but you really don't think Christina and Roxy could have at least stopped by at least once for the modding process?

That's the point. If these people are the head honchos and make the decisions, then they need to be active enough to know what's going on and they have to be familiar with the members. I'm sorry, but I don't think just not being on for weeks at a time with no real explanation than "I have a life and I'm busy" is suitable. I understand having a life, but it is not hard to stop by once in a while.

[racoons > you]

do we define active to be posting in the actual community forums, or just backstage?

because like sammi said with the process of hiring, the shouldnt be the deciding factor if they dont actually interact with the members themselves. i mean, yes you can read the posts without posting yourself, but it would b enic eif the admins actually got to know them directly.

[Heathasm]

they should be active in any of the forums, but not JUST backstage when they are trying to be "active"

[racoons > you]

^

that's what i meant

thank you.

you make good summaries.

[*mzkandi*]

they should be active in any of the forums, but not JUST backstage when they are trying to be "active"

Ok, are talking about our current admins? If we are, then why dont we as mods bring this problem to them now. I'm mean its like we have ever told them we had a problem with their lack of activeness around the community. And I agree that admins need to be active in around and about the community, not just backstage. They should as be familiar with members as well and take part on such important things as hiring. I mean after all, that is what they have been entrusted to do.

[racoons > you]

well, i was talking about any admin in general, but yeah, it does apply to the current ones

actually, christina posted in the lounge recently, bu tbefore that i hadnt seen her or roxy for aaaaaaaaaaages.

do they even know we have new staff?

[*mzkandi*]

I know, I was online yesterday when Roxy was on. I mean do they know about this thread. What do they have to say about it? I'm pretty sure they know they aren't active enough.

[Heathasm]

well it wouldnt hurt for us all to discuss with them about it cause im sort of wondering why they were absent for so long

[KissMe2408]

yah i've seen Christina posting around backstage, and Roxy has posted in Pictures from her birthday and stuff.
But i agree with Keira, it might be better if we just bring this up with them

[Spirited Away]

You say that the admins were all inactive in the past, and cb didn't fall apart and all hell didn't break loose.

Okay, you'd really going to wait for Hell to break loose before getting help from someone? Seriously, I was around for two major spam fests and it wasn't fun when mods didn't have any powers over it and we had to wait for an admin to do what was needed to be done. cB didn't fall apart, but moderators were definitely NOT okay with hanging around and feeling helpless. I know it is unfair of me to say that you have to experience it to know since you've just been hired, but I did experience it and I was rightly frustrated. I wasn't the only one who felt that way either and all you need to do is look through backstage to find out.

And please don't tell me that cB don't fall apart when admins aren't here. That's not the point, obviously. The point, since the begining of this thread is that admins should be active so they'd make the right choices in hiring and to help when help is needed not wait til cB falls apart to help. That's all.

Roxanne and Christina are great when they're here. When they're not though, I feel that someone else should have the power to lend a helping hands to mods.

[demolished]

^
Wow, you're awesome!

This is all yours.


and more yummy goodies.
http://www.cooksrecipes.com/recipe_pics_3/...s_food_cake.jpg

[KissMe2408]

Okay, you'd really going to wait for Hell to break loose before getting help from someone? Seriously, I was around for two major spam fests and it wasn't fun when mods didn't have any powers over it and we had to wait for an admin to do what was needed to be done. cB didn't fall apart, but moderators were definitely NOT okay with hanging around and feeling helpless. I know it is unfair of me to say that you have to experience it to know since you've just been hired, but I did experience it and I was rightly frustrated. I wasn't the only one who felt that way either and all you need to do is look through backstage to find out.

And please don't tell me that cB don't fall apart when admins aren't here. That's not the point, obviously. The point, since the begining of this thread is that admins should be active so they'd make the right choices in hiring and to help when help is needed not wait til cB falls apart to help. That's all.

Roxanne and Christina are great when they're here. When they're not though, I feel that someone else should have the power to lend a helping hands to mods.

^Did I say "wait?" anywhere in my post. What i was saying was that we came to that "worst case scenario" where the admins weren't active, and CB didn't "fall apart". Why i even brought that up in the first place was to underline the point that we don't need a law about every single thing. Does that make sense? Yah i agree admins should be active...duh. i think we ALL agree on that. And now we are getting intouch with the admins about this subject, so something IS being done. ok, but what i'm saying is there is no need to break down every little thing and make rules about it.
I'm sorry you had an inconvience when those 2 major spamathons broke loose, but ur job as a mod is to deal with this stuff right? If you guys are feeling so strongly about all of this then why don't you add more admins. (not 8 you crazies, like another admin or 2)
And yah i think both our points is that admins should be active, i was just telling ya'll to chill about the admins and not do the sky is falling routine.
ok, so now we've brought this up backstage to the admins attention, ok.
but man, there shouldn't have to be such laws on every single thing. I mean everything about this site doesn't need to be changed. Relax, u know.

[Spirited Away]

^Did I say "wait?" anywhere in my post.

Then what's the point of saying "You say that the admins were all inactive in the past, and cb didn't fall apart and all hell didn't break loose"? I said "wait" as admins stepping in after damage is done. Did you not understand the context of the question?

And now we are getting intouch with the admins about this subject, so something IS being done. ok, but what i'm saying is there is no need to break down every little thing and make rules about it.
I'm sorry you had an inconvience when those 2 major spamathons broke loose, but ur job as a mod is to deal with this stuff right? If you guys are feeling so strongly about all of this then why don't you add more admins. (not 8 you crazies, like another admin or 2)
And yah i think both our points is that admins should be active, i was just telling ya'll to chill about the admins and not do the sky is falling routine.
ok, so now we've brought this up backstage to the admins attention, ok.

Again, this isn't about cB falling apart, it's about working as a team and being there when another team member needs you, it's about knowing who is going to be brought onto the team. No, I wasn't inconvenienced or put out, I felt helpless and frustrated because I was helpless. Two different things. I knew my job well and others have said I was a good staff person so I understand that I have to "deal with this stuff". Please don't demean me like that. I dealt with it as best as I could and so did the other staff, but being able to "deal with it" does not mean I cannot have an opinion. My point is that we don't even need so many admins, we could have active head staff to temporarily take admin roles while admins are away. That's all. No one is saying the admins aren't doing their jobs because that is NOT the case. They're doing wonderfully.

[KissMe2408]

Then what's the point of saying "You say that the admins were all inactive in the past, and cb didn't fall apart and all hell didn't break loose"? I said "wait" as admins stepping in after damage is done. Did you not understand the context of the question?
Again, this isn't about cB falling apart, it's about working as a team and being there when another team member needs you, it's about knowing who is going to be brought onto the team. No, I wasn't inconvenienced or put out, I felt helpless and frustrated because I was helpless. Two different things. I knew my job well and others have said I was a good staff person so I understand that I have to "deal with this stuff". Please don't demean me like that. I dealt with it as best as I could and so did the other staff, but being able to "deal with it" does not mean I cannot have an opinion. My point is that we don't even need so many admins, we could have active head staff to temporarily take admin roles while admins are away. That's all. No one is saying the admins aren't doing their jobs because that is NOT the case. They're doing wonderfully.

^Obviously everyone doesn't think the admins are doing "wonderfully", because if that were the case everyone wouldn't be all, " the admins aren't active enough", "were they around for the voting?", "do they know we have bylaws? blah blah"
Again, again, again....i'm NOT talking about cb falling apart either, i just used that to talk about a point i was making in another post. I know it's about working as a team, trust me i do. I think you are reading into it wrong. Oh, and don't get offended by anything i said, i wasn't "demeaning" you like that. I'm sure you dealt with it the best you could, and of course i know you have ur own opinion. i'm not saying anything against that. Do you think it would work lending powers to head staff? you don't think it would get messy?
All my point was that people need to take a deep breath and relax about these laws. I think we are just talking about two different things

[*mzkandi*]

I dont think giving temp admin powers to head staff would be so messy. I mean there already qualfied for their postion and who handle the powers given to them responsibly. Afterall, head staff is next in line to being an admin so it would kind of be a way of testing how they would handle themselves as an admin. One of the reasons Jusun increased the head staff positions from to 2 to 4 was for competiton between the head staff for an admin spot. One thing he pointed out was that just because you're a head staff member doesnt automatically mean you become an admin. Of course I think one of the best ways to deal with this issue is to increase the admins we have but you always need a back up plan just in case. The thing I am cofused about is how would head staff be given their temp powers, this may have be discussed earlier.

[Heathasm]

maybe the back-up admin would be better than adding more admin. because if we add more admin we need to add more headstaff o.o.

well, i really like the idea of having headstaff take over as admin when the reg admin go away for a while. its not like it would be happenign all the time either

[*incoherent*]

^
but it seems like they are constantly away. now, lets not get mad because of what i just stated, im just stating a fact. this bickering is getting old. what if an admin takes an unexpected leave? would the head staff take over for them after a week? 2 weeks? you have to think about that as well if they are just going to "fill in" for the time being.

[*Fae*]

^Obviously everyone doesn't think the admins are doing "wonderfully", because if that were the case everyone wouldn't be all, " the admins aren't active enough", "were they around for the voting?", "do they know we have bylaws? blah blah"
Again, again, again....i'm NOT talking about cb falling apart either, i just used that to talk about a point i was making in another post. I know it's about working as a team, trust me i do. I think you are reading into it wrong. Oh, and don't get offended by anything i said, i wasn't "demeaning" you like that. I'm sure you dealt with it the best you could, and of course i know you have ur own opinion. i'm not saying anything against that. Do you think it would work lending powers to head staff? you don't think it would get messy?
All my point was that people need to take a deep breath and relax about these laws. I think we are just talking about two different things

1) Um, attendence is a given; that's all we've been discussing all along. I do think they're doing wonderfully because I noticed Admin related jobs are kept up, but I also already addressed the problem of inactivity since my very first post in this thread.

2) I understand your original point because I quoted you and responded. Your point was that cB doesn't fall apart when Admins aren't here, my refuter is that cB needs Admins regardless if our community is falling apart or not.

3) How was I supposed to "read into it" when you have to tell me that my job was to "deal with [the spam fests]" as a moderator? a) It's the same as telling me not to complain because it's my job to "deal" and b) you have to tell me what my job was even though I was a mod at one time? Sorry for being defensive, but that's exactly how I "read into it".

4) No, I don't think it would be messy. I think it's a generally safe idea and that's why I'm supporting it. However, I am, too, confused how to go about giving temp powers. That's going into technical details and a lot us don't have a clue. I think it would work in that whether temporary or actual, we'd see admins more.

5) Relax about these laws? As in these laws are no big deal? As in, it's a waste of time to think too much into these laws? So, what's the point of this forum again? I know a lot of people think everything is fine the way they are, but it doesn't hurt to discuss it in full detail. That's why this forum is here. If it's not a big deal, then... we're all wasting our time folks.

This post has been edited by Spirited Away: Oct 17 2005, 03:05 PM

[Heathasm]

^
but it seems like they are constantly away. now, lets not get mad because of what i just stated, im just stating a fact. this bickering is getting old. what if an admin takes an unexpected leave? would the head staff take over for them after a week? 2 weeks? you have to think about that as well if they are just going to "fill in" for the time being.

no, head staff can't just take the powers of an admin. the admin would have to GIVE it to the headstaff when they know they are going to be away from cb for more than 2 weeks. admin don't need to be taking unexpected absences that last more than 2 weeks at all...which is why there should be a rule. they have the most responsibility over the forum so i see no reason to be lenient about that in the future and to make a 2 week rule for activeness-thats not a hard thing to do at all.

even with a rule like that an admin might not be online when a spam parade happens, it would be more likely they would be online. however, next time we decide to choose more mods, admin will deffinately be there and have a say in the selection; as well as whenever new changes and suggestions are awaiting their input

[KissMe2408]

What a crappy day. I'm going outside and am just gonna run out this day, ok, but first here...l

let's start with 5

5) No, i'm not saying the laws aren't a big deal. If i thought they weren't a big deal or unnecessary then wouldn't be here posting about them would I. Nor is it a "waste of time" to be thinking of them. You are putting words in my mouth. What i'm saying with relax is that there doesn't have to be laws on every little thing in createblog...ah.

4)that's what i'm saying. Technically, wouldn't it be messy? i'm sure the head staff could do the job...but how would that work? No clue how it could be done, although it probably could.

3)oh god, ok. i'm not in the mood or mindset to even answer that. When you are given a responisibilty or a job to perform, usually things go wrong. people spam, things happen...it's part of the job. Taking that job basically says you are aware that things can go wrong and you are capable of handling a situation.

2)i agree with ur refuter.

1)ok. case closed.

Cool. Goodbye. I'm going to the dance studio or i'm running.

[Spirited Away]

3) ...okay, now we're getting somewhere. Indeed moderators are capable of handling most situations. The situations I referred to required admin assistance. Thus... the feeling of helplessness. Yea? What part of that don't you understand from me?

4) You weren't specifying technical matters, I only meant to say I was as confounded as Kiera who actually implied technical details. How would you or anyone aside from admins, Jusun, and/or those who have administrated other forums know if it would be messy? It could be just a simple transfer of power by adding the head staff to the admin group, but we don't know that.

5) I'm not putting words in your mouth, I am only implying things from what you're writing. For the last few posts, you've said for us to "relax". From what I understand, you haven't specify which part you want us to relax on until now. There needn't be law on every little thing, but what we're discussing isn't a "little" thing, as you know. Therefore, I assumed you said "relax" because the matter at hand isn't important to you. It isn't a relaxing matter, so I don't understand why you kept on telling everyone to relax on it. Now that I know you mean to say cB don't need laws on everything, I agree, but cB do need active admins and laws may be able to help with that.

[*disco infiltrator*]

Just wanted to mention..

Not only is the activity of the Admins and Heads a problem, but .. Jusun needs to be here more too. He is the big man of this here CB family, and he makes all the decisions. Everything we do is left up to him. However, I've only seen him do behind-the-scenes stuff, which is great that he is here for that seeing as we didn't have him at all before, but for stuff like hiring and promoting, he needs to be here more so he can know the people he's putting up higher in the chain.

[Heathasm]

half of our heads are having comp problems >_> toby says shes been around but not posting really and mona has been active as always.

[KissMe2408]

3) ...okay, now we're getting somewhere. Indeed moderators are capable of handling most situations. The situations I referred to required admin assistance. Thus... the feeling of helplessness.  Yea? What part of that don't you understand from me? 

4) You weren't specifying technical matters, I only meant to say I was as confounded as Kiera who actually implied technical details. How would you or anyone aside from admins, Jusun, and/or those who have administrated other forums know if it would be messy? It could be just a simple transfer of power by adding the head staff to the admin group, but we don't know that.

5) I'm not putting words in your mouth, I am only implying things from what you're writing. For the last few posts, you've said for us to "relax". From what I understand, you haven't specify which part you want us to relax on until now. There needn't be law on every little thing, but what we're discussing isn't a "little" thing,  as you know. Therefore, I assumed you said "relax" because the matter at hand isn't important to you. It isn't a relaxing matter, so I don't understand why you kept on telling everyone to relax on it. Now that I know you mean to say cB don't need laws on everything, I agree, but cB do need active admins and laws may be able to help with that.

3)i understand
4)yah i dont know if it would work or not, i was asking if it would be messy. it could be just a simple transfer. That would be great if it was. For once, something in life being simple. I'm all for it if that's the case.
5)ok next time i will be more elaborate. yes i agree with active admins, and active everything ok.
cool, case closed. i'm going to run into a wall and go to bed. night all

[*disco infiltrator*]

Like what Heather said..Heads can't just take up the powers of Admins. And..the absences that the Admins have had have (mostly) been unplanned. Even a week of complete absence can be a detrement to the community. I don't think that would work out.

[*incoherent*]

it seems that roxy has become more active, but christina...thats a different story. i dont know if she planned it this time, but shes been gone for 3-4 days. hopefully she comes back soon.

[*Guest*]

I think we need less that 8 admins and more than 2. If you're an admin, you should be more active than any other mod!

[*incoherent*]

^
bit late.

but yeah, we dont need 8 but 1-2 more wont hurt. we discussed this earlier with sammi moving up to head staff and toby or mona going to admin, but thats not our decision.

[BrokenDream]

i agree. just_dream hasn't been on very much. she has still has to make regular members into official members. and still some official designers too.


most admins need to be on more.
and it's funny because more official members/people staff/other mods are more active then admins. and.. the one's that didn't get the job are like online more often then the admins...

[*Guest*]

^ Exactly. I think Eve should be promoted to administator. Is there going to be a vote?

[*Guest*]

I actually think Mona should be promoted to admin.

Eve hasn't been too active lately, and Mona is more active in general. She's always been active, never fail. So atleast we'd know we'd have an active admin..not promoting another inactive admin.

Though I doubt...anything we say in here will have any overall influence. Micron/Higher Power as the ultimate say.

[Rachel]

Ahahah. Do you think just because you're making the by laws that you can decide on admins?

This is still in the hands of Jusun and the other admins.

[Ps, I am guessing that this is Incoherent/Spencer because you seem to be the one posting as guest in most of these discussions.]


edit, you just added another post, but still. How do you know that Eve hasn't been active lately? Think about back stage bud.

[*disco infiltrator*]

^ You mean Jusun?....not Justin?

[Rachel]

^Why yes I do. Whee for typos.

[*Guest*]

no some of the posts come from me, but anyways -- Eve has done a lot, she's submited good layouts for the xanga community, and she needs to accend, not always stay as head staff, she deserves it.

[*mzkandi*]

^ Thats where the competetion among head staff for an admin spot comes in. They are all qualified but not everyone can get it.

[*Guest*]

in my opinion, i think admins should have to become official designers first!

[*mzkandi*]

^Whats makes you think that.

[*Guest*]

well i can't explain it cause i have not much reasons. BUT being head staff/admin allows you to reject skins, right? And i think if you're in that level, you should be an official designer. If someone can emphasize on what I mean, then do so!

[BrokenDream]

in my opinion, i think admins should have to become official designers first!

why official designers? not all admins know how to make layouts.

[*Guest*]

well i can't explain it cause i have not much reasons. BUT being head staff/admin allows you to reject skins, right? And i think if you're in that level, you should be an official designer. If someone can emphasize on what I mean, then do so!

well i think he means its not fair for those rejecting skins when there not even an official designer -- like let see.. your not even one to make skins and you rejet another. See like he said, its complicated to explain in terms.

[demolished]

in my opinion, i think admins should have to become official designers first!

What? No. And ... why?
Well, at least we have some admin that have the ability to make layouts. Of course, html knowledge too.

Plus, if anyone has complaints/suggestions, there's always a feedback forum.

[*incoherent*]

[Ps, I am guessing that this is Incoherent/Spencer because you seem to be the one posting as guest in most of these discussions.]

rachel, the guest person is not me. ive been signed in the whole time...

why would i bring up what we already discussed?

i go through when i get home though and say if it was me that posted as the guest because i cant sign in for some reason when im on the computers in the art room at school and i think ive only posted as a guest once...

[*Guest*]

not unless you are people staff, i guess.

[*incoherent*]

^
why dont you just say who you are so not everyone and their mom thinks its me?

[*Guest*]

its not him guys, i just dont want to blow cover. anyways, I'm not even official member

[*incoherent*]

^
no seriously, just say who you are because people are still going to think its me.

can anyone see his ip and prove its not me?

[*Guest*]

why official designers? not all admins know how to make layouts.

well when you're admin, you reserve the right to reject skins. But you didn't even make skins, so why should you be able to rejects skins when you never went through what it means to be an official designer.

[*disco infiltrator*]

People can post anonymously if they want. It lets them say their opinions full out without being personally persecuted for them. They should have some sort of code name though.....


Guys, make up a code name for yourself so we know when a different Guest has posted.

Spencer, it's fine, we know it's not you. You said it's not. We believe you.

[Rachel]

^
no seriously, just say who you are because people are still going to think its me.

can anyone see his ip and prove its not me?

Dude, not a big deal. It was a simple misunderstanding. There is no need for the kid to "blow his cover". If he has something to say, and doesn't want people to know it is him, let him speak.

[*incoherent*]

Guys, make up a code name for yourself so we know when a different Guest has posted.

doesnt that give away who they are though?

Dude, not a big deal. It was a simple misunderstanding. There is no need for the kid to "blow his cover". If he has something to say, and doesn't want people to know it is him, let him speak.

im sorry. i just didnt want everyone thinking it was me and then bugging out because they didnt agree with what he has to say on the matter and then putting all the blame on me.

[*Guest*]

Fine, why are you guys so interested in who I am. I want to remain secret cause some people might kick my ass because they hate my opinion. Codename: Snoe Cone.

[*mona lisa*]

doesnt that give away who they are though?

You don't have to give your username...

[demolished]

But ... I’m getting confused . Just type a letter. That's it.

After this discussing is completed, you don’t have to use the same account in another thread.

[*disco infiltrator*]

K, Snoe Cone, put

Snoe Cone: blahblah

in front of all your posts.

Same with everyone else with your codenames.

[*Guest*]

Dude, not a big deal. It was a simple misunderstanding. There is no need for the kid to "blow his cover". If he has something to say, and doesn't want people to know it is him, let him speak.

Thank you.

doesnt that give away who they are though?

im sorry. i just didnt want everyone thinking it was me and then bugging out because they didnt believe what he was saying and then putting all the blame on me.

Do not blame him, and how does it give away my identity, but anyways, this is for staff discussion only!

[*incoherent*]

You don't have to give your username...

oh, i thought she meant that everyone post a code name for when the post anonymously so we know who they are, but i guess she meant for a person posting as a guess to just post a code name so we know when a new ones posts. alright, gotcha.

Do not blame him, and how does it give away my identity, but anyways, this is for staff discussion only!

i missunderstood.

since when was this staff discussion only?

[*Guest*]

Snoe Cone: no, I mean it has to do with it, i mean admins are apart of staff still/

[*incoherent*]

oh, alright. i guess back on topic we go.

[*Guest*]

snoe cone:well anyways.. even though you're active, thats great. But when you spend time helping the community by making great skins, it might take up your time to be active, plus you have to be considerate of current issues.