Hiring Process Discussion Options

[*incoherent*]

^ Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. The most obivious issue for discussion would be hiring. So why not make a seperate thread so we can all start brain storming ideas. We can also make seperate threads for other things we would like to discuss.

alright, so kiera makes a good point as quoted above. hiring is what everyone disagrees on. lets discuss what we think here.

[sadolakced acid]

anyone who cares enough to vote.

that's just a suggestion, you can modify it however you want.

[Heathasm]

i think that endorsments are a good idea. some people will endorse their friends for the soul reason of being friends with the person, but it is easy to detect. . . i just think that we should encourage, when asking for applications, the fact that when getting an endorsment it would be alot more helpful to their chances to get an endorsment from someone that genuinely thinks they should get the position according to their posts on CB.

i also think that mod selection should be left up to mods and members 45/45 according to lists, not polls (i just dont like the idea of polls) and left up for a week as well as being advertised to ALL of the section on CB, so that it will be more likely for all the groups on cb to get involved

[*tweeak*]

But the fact remains that pretty much all of them are trite and say the same thing. As hard as I tried not to, I know mine were, even though I really did support the people

[sadolakced acid]

endorsements are useless. i mean, what, is someone going to give a bad endorsement or outright refuse to give one?

some might, but you wouldn't know then, would you.

[BrokenDream]

I believe that endorsements can be a good idea and a bad idea. the good thing is that, that person is speaking out the opinion about whether or not that person who is applying should be staff. the bad thing is what if it's not true?

people that deserve to be mods need to:
be helpful.
be active.
be friendly.
be mature.

and others. I am not saying that the current mods aren't doing a great job. they are doing great. I tried to apply for People Staff, and I tried everything I could do. I have been friendly, been active, and showed some examples of helping out.

[Heathasm]

i think that it shows motivation. . . they at least have three people motivated enough to endorse them, and themselves have the motivation to ask for them. i think it cuts down on useless applications as well

and others. I am not saying that the current mods aren't doing a great job. they are doing great. flowers.gif I tried to apply for People Staff, and I tried everything I could do. I have been friendly, been active, and showed some examples of helping out.

i think that every one applied was friendly polite and helpful-i think that the endorsments helped filter it to that point-and the best were picked

[sadolakced acid]

did anyone NOT get endorsements?

do you know how many endorsements basick got?

i rest my case.

[Heathasm]

the quantity of the endorsments had nothing to do with it...the fact that he overdid it so much was :\
and i'm not saying endorsments are EVERYTHING, i just believe they are a good addition that was added to the whole process for the reasons i stated before.

//edit
and bassick wasn't completely inept to become a mod. he was very active and contributed to the community, which is why he got all of the endorsments. and i think the endorsments sort of come into play in those aspects-which leads to why there is a limit to the number of endorsments and how much they should sway the outcome

[*mzkandi*]

Well maybe written out endorsements shouldnt be allowed anymore. I'm thinking mod support is great for a candadite, after all, we are mods and we have a general idea of who would make great candadites. However, the problem of friends endorsing friends does come into play and does creates sort of some bias .

[sadolakced acid]

^ but who else are you going to ask to endorse you? someone who hates you?

[*incoherent*]

^  but who else are you going to ask to endorse you?  someone who hates you?

thats true. i think endorsements should just be outlawed. the mods have to pick who they like anyways, so why endorse someone if they are just going to pick them anyways?

[KissMe2408]

ok...ok...

ENDORSEMENTS
Most of you thought endorsements were a bad thing, and you had many good points. But, what I do like about endorsements is that it shows we take this seriously, and it makes a nice part of the application. Instead of just writing your application, you have to actually do something else and INTERACT with people to get an endorsement. Now, i dont know about 3. But i like the idea of atleast 1 staff member, and 1 official member. If you ask me it makes the hiring more official, and makes a better application.
REQUIREMENTS TO BECOME A MOD
(1)The member needs to be active. And not just active in the lounge and entertainment, but active in the whole community (especially people staff)
(2)The member should be a member for atleast 6 months. It will show their dedication and they should be familiar with the rules and forums.
(3)When it comes to Createblog Drama...eh...man...they need to be mature. let's just put it like that. They need to be mature and respectful. Those qualities are so important when you are looking to hire someone.
(4)I recommend the member should have over 1,500 posts in the 6 months they were here. Is that fair? or should the post count be higher? i think it's a nice platform, and thats how it was last time , no?
(5)They need to know how to use the search button lol
(6)As a mod you are SERVING the community. Look at it as stepping down, NOT stepping up. Being a mod is hard work and it's a JOB. You need to take it serious. This is not for people who are on some power craze.
(7)Mods need to be helpful, respectful, kind, mature, and open minded.

hmmm....

[sadolakced acid]

to me, endorsements are pretty much pointless. most applicants already interact- they'd have a nil postcount if they didn't. there's no way to make endorsements what your ideal is. they will always just be favors done for friends.




i personally see no problem in a mod who's only active in a select area.

as for the join limit, it's too long. the post count limit, also too large.

put the limit at one month and 250 posts. i mean, the limits don't really weed out bad people, it just chops off a random segment. and because there is going to be some sentient being selecting these- i don't think it'd hurt to drastically reduce requirements.

as far as maturity- don't judge that. it's too subjective. the overall presentation of the application can be judged, but simply asking opinions on an applicant's maturity is too open to bias. and respectful? judge sole based on the application.



the search button, useful as it is, shouldn't be a requirement for modship. i don't see the point.

i've yet to see anyone on a power craze. and, to be truthful, most applicants are at least power hungry.

and the kind, respectful, open minded stuff... that'd make a nice mod, but not necesarily a good mod...


basically what i'm saying is scrap most requirements. like endorsements, they're redundant.

limit with at least 1 month and 250 posts, but that's all.

and even that is simply an arbitrary number.

[KissMe2408]

You think a one month requirement would be sufficient? A person can join createblog and post like crazy and be active and helpful for one month...maybe two...and then start to lose interest and fade away. and now you are down one mod. I mean you have seen it happen around here. People post for about 1 or 2 months and then they forget about this site. It might not have to be as long as 6 months, but atleast longer then 1!

As for endorsements, it would be fine with or without them. I personally think it makes a better application. Although the whole "popularity, friend" theme does come between it, i think endorsements are ultimately good. It also gets more of the members involved. but either way i am fine, although i think ultimately it is good to get the members more involved.

If someone is picked to be part of the people staff, it is their responsibility to see over the entire community that they have been entrusted with. they can't simply just stick to the anime section or the lounge. they need to be pretty active around the entire community. They need to see the entire picture instead of just a piece.

As for post count and how long the member has been here...again, it shows dedication. The ppd is important.

about maturity and respect: i was just saying that as a mod they have to be responsible. They have to respect the community and the members, and they have to be mature in a way that everytime someone picks a fight they don't go warning people and what not. That's all i was saying. Being a mod takes responsibility, so in that case when the staff looks over the applications and look over the members posts, they have to keep these things in mind.

And about a "good mod"...a good mod does the job well AND is respectful, kind, and openminded.
You can do the job well, but be disrespectful, bashing on the members, and picking fights all the time...that would be a bad mod in my opinion, no matter how well they did their job.

[sadolakced acid]

well, i guess we first have to establish what exactly is the job of a mod.

making new topic.

[*tweeak*]

I think something anonymous where members could voice their honest opinions on staff canidates would be a good idea. Anonymity typically ensures that people will do a better feel less restrained talking about others, since they can't get offended and start personal grudges. There would be no reason to feel like you'd have to overly compliment a friend, and we could compare IPs to see that people aren't just endoring themselves or whatnot (not check, just compare)

did anyone read this? we could set up an area where guests could post (which would be closedly monitored) or make an account specifically for people to send their opinions on others to.

[sadolakced acid]

well, having a forum much like this one for deliberations on the applicants would work fine...

[KissMe2408]

QUOTE(tweeak @ Oct 12 2005, 9:30 PM)
I think something anonymous where members could voice their honest opinions on staff canidates would be a good idea. Anonymity typically ensures that people will do a better feel less restrained talking about others, since they can't get offended and start personal grudges. There would be no reason to feel like you'd have to overly compliment a friend, and we could compare IPs to see that people aren't just endoring themselves or whatnot (not check, just compare)

^hey, i'm actually liking that idea.
i think overall it would be good, what do you guys think?
would you guys consider this?

[*incoherent*]

i agree with justin. i do think the post count can at least be raised to 500 with a 2 month minimal time span, but if you look at it, the person that will be picked nine times out of 10, will be the person who has been here longer and who has the most posts.

as for the being active in more than just a couple areas i think is stupid. i dont really like to go into the locker rooms...im more into what the lounge has to offer. you do more interacting there...and interacting seems to be a big thing that all the mods are talking about. rather than boring "my body is doing this..." type of stuff id rather read humerous stuff, seeing how i dont really go into the locker rooms. sure a better mod would visit all, but how many of them actually do?

[*mzkandi*]

You guys asked who is most likely to be considered for People Staff and its the ones that interact in the community areas most that recieve the big pluses. People staff dont just moderate one main area, we moderate all the community forums. Thats in the job descprition. We have to make ourselves accessible in all the areas. So, if you are a candadite that does that and is helpful and contributes, whats wrong with that? Nothing.
The limit of at least one month is crazy to me. Not many people know members that have been around for one month, you havent proven yourself in a grand total of 30 to 31 days, you're still considered a newbster. I would think if someone was really wanting to be on People staff they would wait until they have proven themselves longer. No rush, if you really arent power hungry you wont mind the wait.

I think something anonymous where members could voice their honest opinions on staff canidates would be a good idea. Anonymity typically ensures that people will do a better feel less restrained talking about others, since they can't get offended and start personal grudges. There would be no reason to feel like you'd have to overly compliment a friend, and we could compare IPs to see that people aren't just endoring themselves or whatnot (not check, just compare)

I like that idea.

[sadolakced acid]

which is kinda a fault, becuase then mods just pay attention to only the major forums...

but enough about that.

[racoons > you]

is there anyway of mking a poll whereby only admins/staff can view the results?

because, if so, perhaps we could do somethign whereby we take all applicationsa dn post them in a thread in the lounge with a poll with invisible results. then, the members can vote, and will no tbe influenced directly by the poll results.

this kills off any potentials who arent well known by the community who they will represent, linking back to sammi's point about staff/admins having other thigns to worry about backstage and whatnot to have a perfect idea of inter-community relations.

then, the top however-many (or possibly everyone who reaces a certain number of votes) are taken backstage, and discussed among the staff in the way in which the last hiring was handled, where the final decison is made

that way it involves the community, but staff have the final say.

did anyone read this? we could set up an area where guests could post (which would be closedly monitored) or make an account specifically for people to send their opinions on others to.

i like that idea... i think people need to be abl eto discuss the candidates frankly without people getting hurt by specific people, in manner of the dani fiasco.

(1)The member needs to be active. And not just active in the lounge and entertainment, but active in the whole community (especially people staff)
(2)The member should be a member for atleast 6 months. It will show their dedication and they should be familiar with the rules and forums.
(3)When it comes to Createblog Drama...eh...man...they need to be mature. let's just put it like that. They need to be mature and respectful. Those qualities are so important when you are looking to hire someone.
(4)I recommend the member should have over 1,500 posts in the 6 months they were here. Is that fair? or should the post count be higher? i think it's a nice platform, and thats how it was last time , no?
(5)They need to know how to use the search button lol
(6)As a mod you are SERVING the community. Look at it as stepping down, NOT stepping up. Being a mod is hard work and it's a JOB. You need to take it serious. This is not for people who are on some power craze.
(7)Mods need to be helpful, respectful, kind, mature, and open minded.

1) agreed to an extent, but it shouldnt be the be all and end all. if two people are equally qualified, then it should come down to whoever has the biggest cross sections of forums that they visit. But if someone who would be very good, bu tonly visits the lounge , entertainemnt, and maybe the locker room and pictures sometimes, they shouldn tbe rejected over someone who wont be as good at the job, but posts everywhere. i mean, a lot of subforums arent that busy, so it isnt essential that all mods are in there all the time

2) agreed fully, prevents people who have go their poss by spaming, if nothing else

3) as for drama, i dont think we should say that the people shouldn't participate at all, but rather that they should go without losing their tempers and conducting themselves well. if someone feels strongly enough about a CB issue to make a stand about it, as long as they are reasonably logical about it, i dont see why it is really a bad thing.

4) post count is fine, even if 1250 does seem slightly random

5) well, yeah, given

6) exactly. you have to be able to work with people, not try and dominate them. also, not give favoruritism to your friends

7) good summary

i've yet to see anyone on a power craze. and, to be truthful, most applicants are at least power hungry.

true. if people didnt enjoy some form of superiority, the woulnt apply.

//edit
and bassick wasn't completely inept to become a mod. he was very active and contributed to the community, which is why he got all of the endorsments. and i think the endorsments sort of come into play in those aspects-which leads to why there is a limit to the number of endorsments and how much they should sway the outcome

agreed, actually

at the time when steven actually applied to be a mod, he did actually deserve the post. it was only after that that he went all crazy sad-ass

[*disco infiltrator*]

Just to put it out there, I think I said no to endorsements for four people cause I didn't think they should be mods. One I was pretty friendly with and was expecting a yes. It's not always friendship..

We're not all corrupt, come on now..

[racoons > you]

i agree wiuth sammi.

i got turned down when i asked someone for an endorsement (not sammi)

if the people are being hired because they are impartial, then they should at least be mature enough not to be biased... i think we';re doing the mods a diservice by assuming that they are more likely to be biased than to not

[*tweeak*]

I turned down a couple of people too.