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.

[*brownsugar08*]

Wait...you're talking about disagreements on the way people are hired?

[*mzkandi*]

^Yes, there have been disagreements in the past on the way members are hired to staff. Mostly concerning more member involvement.

First off, I like the idea of endorsements and also regular member endorsements because it gets both the mods and regular members involved. I'm against community voting for reasons stated in the cb revolution thread. I think mods voting who should be staff members has some faults as well. As far as involvement of the community in hiring, I would be up for some kind of thread stating who the members think would be great and reason for why some candadites would not make good mods that would play factor in the promotion of mods. I'm still brainstorming. All of these are just opinions that I have currently and are subject to change.

[*mipadi*]

I think it would be a good basis to know what the current practice is for moderator selection, since it seems to be a complete mystery to non-staff members.

[*mzkandi*]

The way we choose mods this last hiring was by a vote. We put who we thought was the most qualified applicant and why.

The last hiring was done between head staff and admins. There was reject list, neutral list, and accept list. If you were on the accept or neutral list you became a mod. For example, if one mod put a member on one list as neutral and other staff put the same member on his reject list, he member wouldnt not become a mod. I remember Roxy saying something about. I was not a mod at that time though so there may be be more details I'm missing.

You're right about the declining part, but a applicant doesn't necessarily have to be on all 3 of our "accept" lists to be chosen. There is also a "neutral" list. As long as the member is not in any 3 of our "decline" lists, then they are eligible to become a mod. I may have said too much. I'm not sure if we're allowed to discuss the process with the regular members, but eh, you started it. 

[*incoherent*]

First off, I like the idea of endorsements and also regular member endorsements because it gets both the mods and regular members involved.

im not really for endorsements. people are just doing it now days to be nice to their friends, even if they dont think they are qualified.

[*brownsugar08*]

I'm against community voting

Me too.

In most situations, it turns out to be a popularity contest. And the most popular is not always the most qualified.

[*tweeak*]

While I understand the idea behind the endorsements, I think they're useless. People honestly just endore their friends, with little regard towards whether or not they'd actually make decent mods.

Commnuity voting = popularity contest. Horrible idea.

[*mipadi*]

Me too.

In most situations, it turns out to be a popularity contest. And the most popular is not always the most qualified.

Anything left up to a vote, however, is a matter of a popularity contest, to some extent. It could be that the mods voted on all new staff members, but then a clear argument could be that the candidates who are most popular with the moderating staff would be the winners.

Having said that, I like the idea of allowing community members to comment on candidates for staff, but I don't think the hiring process should be bound by such polling. Call it a non-binding election if you will. I would agree that generally speaking, the staff have the best knowledge of who makes the best staff, not the community as a whole.

As an example, I'm an admin on another forum. From time to time, mods step down, and we replace new ones. We sometimes put it to a vote to get feedback from the community, but the process is usually undertaken by the three admins, with heavy input from the moderating staff. We generally hold that as seasoned staffers, we know what's best for the community.

For those who read the first paragraph and last and skip everything in between, I'll sum up my post by saying that non-binding community elections are a good way to find new staffers, but the key is that they should be non-binding.

[*mzkandi*]

^ Very well said.
And I can see your point on the endorsement thing, Nicki and Spencer.

[*mipadi*]

If it's the staff that mainly picks new staff, what is the basic criteria for which staff members look in candidates?

[*brownsugar08*]

Allowing members to comment on mod selections turned out really badly, when Dani was modded.

But maybe things have changed since then. I'm not against it.

[*tweeak*]

If it's the staff that mainly picks new staff, what is the basic criteria for which staff members look in candidates?

Personally, I look for how friendly, helpful, and active a member is around the community. If they can point out that a topic needs to be moved or closed without being obnoxious, that's a major plus. Being relatively drama-free helps, too. I personally don't think we need mods who start a ton of conflict (yeah, I know, I myself have been involved, but as a habit I try not to start things)

When Dani was modded, they weren't even supposed to comment. The thread just remained open for the sake of congratulations and such

[*mipadi*]

Allowing members to comment on mod selections turned out really badly, when Dani was modded.

But maybe things have changed since then. I'm not against it.

Well, what's the argument against soliciting comments?

What it comes down to is who the moderating staff is supposed to serve. If they are to serve the cB admin, then so be it; don't solicit comments from the community, but don't use doublespeak to make it sound as though the "People Staff" is there to serve the people.

On the other hand, if the People Staff is there to serve the people, the community should at least be able to comment on the proceedings, if not vote directly.

[*mzkandi*]

I dont know about any of the other hirings but with this one we looked at some of the basic things (at least I did when I made my list)
1. Someone takes the time out to be welcoming to new members
2. Stays out cB drama
3. Contributes to the community ( feedback, helps in design forums, etc)
4. Has a member long enough to know the ropes and the rules of cB. Also fairly well known around the cB community because he/she is active, not neccasarily popular. So about more than 6 months for me.
5. Leads by example for other members to follow
6. For people staff, active in all of the community forums in a big plus. If you are helpful in finding topics that should be closed, moved etc its another big plus. Just overall helpful around the community based forums

Just some of the basics

[*mipadi*]

If they can point out that a topic needs to be moved or closed without being obnoxious, that's a major plus.

Out of curiosity, is this done on a personal or public basis? In other words, take two candidates: one posts a comment in every duplicate thread saying, "This a duplicate thread." The other doesn't post a comment in the thread, but PM's a moderator to let her know that a thread needs moved or closed. Realistically speaking (i.e. I mean in actual practice, not in theory), who would be taken more seriously by the moderating staff?

[*mzkandi*]

Honestly both, for me anyways. They are both being helpful. As long as they are not being obnoxious about it, like Nicki said. Most people who are like that do both anyways.

[*tweeak*]

it depends on the activity of the mods at the particuar point of time. That's the advantage of the _ users reading this topic, and other members online things: if there's mods on roaming the forums, there's no need to PM, but if there isn't then that's typically the way to go. It also doesn't do much good to just say that something needs to be closed. If you really want to be helpful, search and post the link.

[*brownsugar08*]

I personally would take the one that PM'ed me more seriously.

I used to do a little of both.

...it's annoying when people make a HUGE deal about a topic being in the wrong place.

PM'ing a staff memer shows that they can kindly point out a misplaced topic.

[*disco infiltrator*]

In the last one, it was said that Jusun went off a topic that was made for mods to post who they thought would be the best. I don't know how the counting went about, perhaps it was skewed, who knows. But that's what was done this time. Not too many Admin/Headstaffs even participated in the voting and whatnot because they weren't on.

Which comes to my next point:

I think mods & members should have more involvement in the modding process, not because they need more say or whatever, but because the Admins and Heads have other things to worry about and are more involved in the actual running of the site, rather than interacting with members. Thus, they don't know the people who apply as well as the other mods and members. Mods have concentrated focus on one part of the entire forum therefore eliminating the concern for the forum as a whole. Members don't even have concentration on anything. Alas, mods and members know those who apply better than Admins and Heads. To get a real feel of the potential of your applicants, you need to interact with them a fair amount.

I don't know if it's necessarily true, but due to what I heard about the last modding process, that's what I got from it since several Admins & Heads didn't even participate due to not being here for it.

[*mipadi*]

It also doesn't do much good to just say that something needs to be closed. If you really want to be helpful, search and post the link.

Ah, a good point, one which I had been going to post in the Feedback forum today. It's really tangent to this discussion, but I do think there should be a guideline, if not a strict rule, that if a mod closes a topic because it is a duplicate, then she should at least post links to existing topics. There have been a number of times I've seen a topic get closed with the words "There are existing threads on this topic," yet no link was posted. But that's an aside and not really strictly sticking to this discussion.

[*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)

Ah, a good point, one which I had been going to post in the Feedback forum today. It's really tangent to this discussion, but I do think there should be a guideline, if not a strict  rule, that if a mod closes a topic because it is a duplicate, then she should at least post links to existing topics. There have been a number of times I've seen a topic get closed with the words "There are existing threads on this topic," yet no link was posted. But that's an aside and not really strictly sticking to this discussion.

True, but if the topic had been bumped or made recnetly, I don't think it should be that necessary, as it isn't so hard to skim through a page or 2. Also, I don't want people to complain if I don't post the link. Not to say that mods should make a habit of not, and then making up excuses each time, but we don't need members being ridiculous

[*disco infiltrator*]

I think the point Nicki's trying to make is that..it's not really our job to go find those topics. It was the person's job as a topic poster to make sure there wasn't already a duplicate topic in the first place. If they want to keep posting on the subject, they can go look for themselves, seeing as it's their job in the first place.

Sure, it'd be nice if we all did that, but some of us don't have the time and are simply trying to get our job done. There's a lot for a mod to do in even a day. Being a Myspace mod, I have to check the skin database (and if there's acceptances, I have to upload the images, check the code to make sure it's not jocked, resize screenshots if they're not the right size, etc., which can all be quite enough for one day depending on the number of acceptances), check if there is any scripts submitted to accept/reject, go through Myspace Help and see if there are any topics I can answer, close, move, etc., check through Myspace Showcase and do the same....and that's only the Myspace forums. I also have the Webmaster's Corner that I moderate. Plus, I'd also like some time to use Createblog for what I really love about it - the whole community. Not only the community forums, but just to interact. Then I have to check Backstage as well.

That's just one day.
Some of us simply don't have time to search for every duplicate topic there ever was, especially if it isn't our job to do so in the first place. A common misconception is that we're here to serve the members, which is not true. We are here for help and guidance in establishing a welcoming, fun community and nothing more.



That is Sammi's rant for today.

[sadolakced acid]

hiring process, people.

make another thread for closing topics. although i think just a provision to create a rule will do in the by-laws.

hiring process.

why no emulate the original constitution's idea?

everyone gets to vote for delegates, who in turn have a 4 days to argue about the new mods (2 days public, then 2 days of private deliberations), then they vote on each individual applicant.

applicants recieving a 2/3 positive votes make it to the shortlist, which is made public.

the shortlist is then sent to a group of mods, who have 2 days to see if there's a reason each of the applicants on the short list cannot be a mod.

they then vote, and anyone with a majority in favor becomes a new mod.


something like that.

[*mzkandi*]

^I dont think it should be that overly complicated. And who is "everyone"?