Moderator Reviews. Options

[*Azarel*]

People who want the position for the title. We periodically review our staff performance, and in the past, those who applied for the sake of having a nifty title never did that well...

This comes up in the chat a lot, when we talk about mods that are active and inactive, etc. Last night, we toyed with the idea of having the mods be reviewed every once in a while, after all, that's what Jusun says that you guys do, right? (Cited above.) I don't exactly know how the current staff members are reviewed, whether it be public to the community or not, but I don't think it's happened in a while. I also think that maybe the community should have a say in some of the reviewing, because perhaps the people doing the reviewing aren't that active.

[racoons > you]

i LIKE this idea.

<33.

i dont know if the community should have a direct say in the reviews, but the after the reviews are finished, i think they ought to be made public

[*mzkandi*]

The cB community is rather to larger to say "we" as a community should have a say in the reviewing. Its would only be a select few members and its not fair to say that these members that speak on the matter share the views of everyone on cB.

On the matter of rather the reviews should be made public, I dont think its any of our business. Its pretty obivous who may or may be not that active. I dont know, thats just me though.

[xquizit]

We have tools for reviewing moderating performance to determine who has and hasn't been active.

I'm not sure if having the community review our mods' performances may be such a great idea because there are actions that our mods perform that you may overlook. For instance, the acceptance/rejection of skins/scripts/tutorials, etc., the regular reviewing and maintenance of our skins database, sharing ideas/suggestions with other moderators about the forums, interacting with members to make them feel welcome, etc. Moderating doesn't only consist of closing/moving/merging topics or posting often. There are many things that go on behind the scenes that regular members will not be aware of.

[The-Mach-Hare]

i agree with roxy...although part of the public, im not sure much would care to have a say so in it

[sadolakced acid]

how about... memebers can request review of a moderator, if they give evidence to suggest the moderator may not be doing thier job correctly.

the result of the review would then be made public , with an explination of the reasoning behind the result.

[*mona lisa*]

I don't exactly know how the current staff members are reviewed, whether it be public to the community or not, but I don't think it's happened in a while.

Why do you think it hasn't happened in a while?

[sammi rules you]

we have a process of reviewing ourselves, and every once in a while, we do "rollcalls" or something to that effect to ensure that mods are still active. however, if you guys feel someone is not doing their job correctly, you can PM either the mod or an admin/headstaff or both. whatever suits you.

[heyyfrankie]

I'm not sure if having the community review our mods' performances may be such a great idea because there are actions that our mods perform that you may overlook. For instance, the acceptance/rejection of skins/scripts/tutorials, etc., the regular reviewing and maintenance of our skins database, sharing ideas/suggestions with other moderators about the forums, interacting with members to make them feel welcome, etc. Moderating doesn't only consist of closing/moving/merging topics or posting often. There are many things that go on behind the scenes that regular members will not be aware of.

^ def!
whenever i was just a member, i had no idea about all of that stuff (above). but yes, there are many more things going on than just posting and closing topics.

[souldreamers]

We have tools for reviewing moderating performance to determine who has and hasn't been active.

I'm not sure if having the community review our mods' performances may be such a great idea because there are actions that our mods perform that you may overlook. For instance, the acceptance/rejection of skins/scripts/tutorials, etc., the regular reviewing and maintenance of our skins database, sharing ideas/suggestions with other moderators about the forums, interacting with members to make them feel welcome, etc. Moderating doesn't only consist of closing/moving/merging topics or posting often. There are many things that go on behind the scenes that regular members will not be aware of.

^ I agree.

I just got back from a one month break. Moderators notify Admins when they'll be away for a certain period of time. Members will not know about this and possibly assume that the Moderator is inactive.. not doing their job. I don't post as much as most mods.. I usually work on the stuff that Roxy mentioned.

[sammi rules you]

^ same here. i'm more of an ideas kinda person.

[sadolakced acid]

^ I agree.

I just got back from a one month break.  Moderators notify Admins when they'll be away for a certain period of time.  Members will not know about this and possibly assume that the Moderator is inactive.. not doing their job.  I don't post as much as most mods.. I usually work on the stuff that Roxy mentioned.

maybe members could be notified some way as well?

it wouldn't be too hard- a thread with all the mods listed and thier status beside it:

on leave- expected back _____.
AWOL
on duty

[*mona lisa*]

Why would the members want to know that? If that mod is not there, there are other mods to do the job.

[racoons > you]

so they dont assume the mod is inactive and therefore a bad mod.

obviously not just if they're away for a weekend or something, but especially with summer and vacations coming up, it might be nice to see whose away for a week or two

[*mona lisa*]

The admins know that if a mod is very inactive, they'll have to demod them. If you think that a mod is not doing their job properly or are inactive or whatever, then can't you just PM an admin?

[Heathasm]

it might be a fun thing to do, but its absolutely not necessary at all because there are always mods around to mod the forums o_o same ones every time or not. and the admins are deffinately up-to-date with people who need to be demoted or promoted

[sammi rules you]

why do members need to know? if you don't see someone post anywhere for a little while, you can probably assume that they're not here right now. and if you think they're a bad mod and inactive, i guess you can bring that up with them or an admin.

[avalon*]

I agree with what Sammi just said. If you really have a problem with a mod being away (which isn't really necessary because we mods need breaks just like everyone else) then you can talk to the admin about it if it's necessary.

[sadolakced acid]

well, we like to know things. even if we don't really need ot know it, if it won't hurt anything, why not let us know?

[Heathasm]

probably because the whole of cb doesnt need to be part of the staff team and start doing the things they do one thing at a time?

[Spirited Away]

well, we like to know things.   even if we don't really need ot know it, if it won't hurt anything, why not let us know?

If you can ask why not, then we can just ask why should we?

Though I think the idea of reviewing a moderator is a good way for memebers to voice opinions and whatnot, I do see a lot of holes. This would be a perfect bash moderator fest. A lot of you are mature enough to use the review for what it's for: constructive criticism, but then there are alot of immature members who will use it to make others feel bad. And then, if we only have "mature" members write the reviews, it wouldn't be 'fair' to everyone else.

Now then, it doesn't make sense for moderators to report to members on when or why they're going away from cB. A lot of times, it's alright if everyone knows, but sometimes, the reason could be a sensitive one. I would abhor having to explain to someone who has no business knowing why I have to leave cB for a long period of time. Again, members do not need to know my business with other moderators and Micron. I'm sure all mods feel the same.

If I have to report to members when or why I need to leave for a time every time, I'm going to be a bitch about it or ask to be demoted to member status again.

[racoons > you]

probably because the whole of cb doesnt need to be part of the staff team and start doing the things they do one thing at a time?

that doesnt really make sense... why would knowing a mod was away mean that members were turning into mods?

Though I think the idea of reviewing a moderator is a good way for memebers to voice opinions and whatnot, I do see a lot of holes. This would be a perfect bash moderator fest. A lot of you are mature enough to use the review for what it's for: constructive criticism, but then there are alot of immature members who will use it to make others feel bad. And then, if we only have "mature" members write the reviews, it wouldn't be 'fair' to everyone else.

well, we could have it available to members witha certain post count, say 1250 (thats what it takes to become a mod, if i remember correctly, so if a person has enough posts to BE a mod, then why not enough to review one)

but i take your point about mod-bashing... but why not let people give it a try. if someone abuses it, then dont alowthem to do it again... i dont really see why the possibility of some people abusing a system means that it should be denied those who will use it responsibly

[Heathasm]

that doesnt really make sense... why would knowing a mod was away mean that members were turning into mods?

i was talking about letting the members know when mods are gone...its not you guys' job to keep track of that and also give reviews...lmao. its also the way it is because of what fae said

[Spirited Away]

well, we could have it available to members witha certain post count, say 1250 (thats what it takes to become a mod, if i remember correctly, so if a person has enough posts to BE a mod, then why not enough to review one)
but i take your point about mod-bashing... but why not let people give it a try. if someone abuses it, then dont alowthem to do it again... i dont really see why the possibility of some people abusing a system means that it should be denied those who will use it responsibly

There are members with post counts with 5k+ whose maturity are questionable. Having enough post counts to be a mod doesn't mean he/she is mod material nor does it mean he/she is mature.

If someone does abuse it and we ban them from reviewing ever again, what would be the use? The bashing is already done, and the hurt would be there still after punishing the member.

I think the idea is similar to the "Moderator Performance" thread. The only problem in there is, when a person criticize a moderator, he/she just says something really vague and without naming anyone. That's kind of silly, actually. If you want to say something about a mod, just say it to him/her. And that thread, I surmise, had something to do with a good moderator who stepped down.

Anyway, I think reviews are.... fine since we're already using it in a way with the Performance thread, but they MUST leave out attendance.

[racoons > you]

ooh true.. id forgotten about jeff... that was unfortunate.