The Moderation of EE Part II

Different55 · 2016-09-19 00:36:22

Ninja wrote:

minimania wrote:
dylantherabbit wrote:
Also, telling someone to kys is a reason for a permaban? Really? It's just an acronym mostly teenagers throw around. Even if he says 'kill yourself', it's still an acronym mostly teens throw around.
You don't really deserve a response here, but suicide isn't a joke
no i tell the other person an incredibly violent method that they should use to commit suicide
i don't use "kys"

what like "drink bleach and die"?

Schlog · 2016-09-19 04:09:28

Different55 wrote:

Ninja wrote:
minimania wrote:
dylantherabbit wrote:
Also, telling someone to kys is a reason for a permaban? Really? It's just an acronym mostly teenagers throw around. Even if he says 'kill yourself', it's still an acronym mostly teens throw around.
You don't really deserve a response here, but suicide isn't a joke
no i tell the other person an incredibly violent method that they should use to commit suicide
i don't use "kys"
what like "drink bleach and die"?

can't say here i'd get banned

Hostage · 2016-09-19 05:48:32

PLEASE don't demod anyone. We've already demodded enough people.

N1KF · 2016-09-19 05:52:57

Hostage wrote:

PLEASE don't demod anyone. We've already demodded enough people.

I was about to point out on how fired moderators can be replaced, but considering the size of the community here, that may be difficult.

Hostage

Abelysk · 2016-09-19 06:05:38

I can point to at least 10 contenders for moderatorship.

Processor

Hostage · 2016-09-19 06:52:49

Kefka wrote:

I can point to at least 10 contenders for moderatorship.

please do

Abelysk · 2016-09-19 07:00:18

Skullz17, Koya, Opengangs, N1KF, Zoey2070, Hummerz5, Diff55, Sensei1, Emma555, minimania

Hostage · 2016-09-19 07:03:41

Kefka wrote:

Skullz17, Koya, Opengangs, N1KF, Zoey2070, Hummerz5, Diff55, Sensei1, Emma555, minimania

like half of those people dont play ee anymore

Muftwin

TaskManager · 2016-09-19 13:58:09

Hostage wrote:

PLEASE don't demod anyone. We've already demodded enough people.

you were a proud supporter of demodding zoey, what happened?

Kefka wrote:

Skullz17, Koya, Opengangs, N1KF, Zoey2070, Hummerz5, Diff55, Sensei1, Emma555, minimania

most of these people barely play ee,
of the people on that list i'd only keep skullz17, koya and sensei1, everyone else is either not active in game or already is a moderator on forums (or doesnt fit for mod imo)
id also add marten22 to the list, he seems like a fine guy and active on forums and in game

Zumza · 2016-09-19 14:07:28

But thats exactly the same issue with @master1, @maxi123. We cant expect people to behave the same way, or to actually be able to handle the position.

ZeldaXD · 2016-09-19 14:20:40

Ninja wrote:

proc why didn't you just chatban me

Because chatbanning is not a punishment and you know it.

hummerz5 · 2016-09-19 15:09:39

At this point we've gone from "Get rid of this bad moderator!!1" to "Let's debate the merits and issues regarding finding suitable game moderators" which I guess is OK, just felt like taking a step back.

Zumza wrote:

But thats exactly the same issue with @master1, @maxi123. We cant expect people to behave the same way, or to actually be able to handle the position.

Well, you don't really know how /anyone/ will act when given the opportunity. You've raised a legitimate point, but one that applies to everyone, making things difficult. If the position needs be filled, the risk needs be taken.

First things first, before everyone starts a mob and decides who they want in power, whoever the person holding the keys to EE is needs to acknowledge this issue, then other decisions need to be made before we reach this point of discussion.

Zumza · 2016-09-19 15:28:35

hummerz5 wrote:

Zumza wrote:
But thats exactly the same issue with @master1, @maxi123. We cant expect people to behave the same way, or to actually be able to handle the position.
Well, you don't really know how /anyone/ will act when given the opportunity. You've raised a legitimate point, but one that applies to everyone, making things difficult. If the position needs be filled, the risk needs be taken.

Thats why I believe in the idea of secrets mods. A secret mod is like having an internship. Without announcing a mod directly until we are sure its right, we get rid of all the fuzz which may arise.

N1KF, Kaleb

TaskManager · 2016-09-19 15:38:00

hummerz5 wrote:

whoever the person holding the keys to EE is needs to acknowledge this issue

that being said we have 3 pages of discussion and not a single post from an admin other than processor... lol

Zumza wrote:

But thats exactly the same issue with @master1, @maxi123. We cant expect people to behave the same way, or to actually be able to handle the position.

well what to you suggest then

hummerz5

Zumza · 2016-09-19 15:57:04

maxi123 wrote:

Zumza wrote:
But thats exactly the same issue with @master1, @maxi123. We cant expect people to behave the same way, or to actually be able to handle the position.
well what to you suggest then

I just said. While theres no true way.. as hummerz5 noted. There could be preliminary tests. Perhaps making the new assigned person just a secret mod. So if its proven she/he cant handle the position she/he would be removed without community hating comments. Or psychological tests like representation of self conscience in the world: Draw a tree, if it has open branches it means is an extrovert which is good in such a position, if it has closed branches it means is an introverted person.

Jorc · 2016-09-19 18:17:27

Kefka wrote:

Skullz17, Koya, Opengangs, N1KF, Zoey2070, Hummerz5, Diff55, Sensei1, Emma555, minimania

-Who's Opengangs, I never heard of him.
And emma's nickname is incorrect, supposed to be Emma333.

Also, players are gonna become mod if they are famous,nice,respectful person.

TaskManager · 2016-09-19 19:36:10

Zumza wrote:

maxi123 wrote:
Zumza wrote:
But thats exactly the same issue with @master1, @maxi123. We cant expect people to behave the same way, or to actually be able to handle the position.
well what to you suggest then
I just said. While theres no true way.. as hummerz5 noted. There could be preliminary tests. Perhaps making the new assigned person just a secret mod. So if its proven she/he cant handle the position she/he would be removed without community hating comments. Or psychological tests like representation of self conscience in the world: Draw a tree, if it has open branches it means is an extrovert which is good in such a position, if it has closed branches it means is an introverted person.

not sure how being an introvert/extrovert affects your moderating capabilities but okay
ye i like the idea of secret mod probation period

hummerz5 · 2016-09-19 19:40:08

maxi123 wrote:

Zumza wrote:
maxi123 wrote:
Zumza wrote:
But thats exactly the same issue with @master1, @maxi123. We cant expect people to behave the same way, or to actually be able to handle the position.
well what to you suggest then
I just said. While theres no true way.. as hummerz5 noted. There could be preliminary tests. Perhaps making the new assigned person just a secret mod. So if its proven she/he cant handle the position she/he would be removed without community hating comments. Or psychological tests like representation of self conscience in the world: Draw a tree, if it has open branches it means is an extrovert which is good in such a position, if it has closed branches it means is an introverted person.
not sure how being an introvert/extrovert affects your moderating capabilities but okay
ye i like the idea of secret mod probation period

Conversely, if the community isn't aware of the secret mod, you lose out on what we're doing here and now: debating whether a mod's conduct is acceptable. We wouldn't know who's messing up. I fear the staff would put as much attention into the probation mod as they would this current situation. That is, negligible.

SmittyW · 2016-09-19 19:48:05

SmittyW wrote:

Has anyone actually reported insanity and gang? I know it sounds dumb but I'm not there to witness it. Did someone who legitimately felt harassed by them that were not zoe or n1kf report him? Because if there's report files that m1 is ignoring then that's serious but if no one else is complaining and you're following them in private worlds just to point out flaws then that's wrong. I want to know if it's the same 2-3 people ragging on them or others feel this way.

I don't see what the hubbub is if no one can answer this question. On the otherhand, if m1 is ignoring reports he should probably be demodded (Maybe 1 more chance?)

Y'all need to stop being SJWs. Leave reporting to the ones being harassed, not the bystander. Oh and if someone called you autistic and you make a report a month later or cover it up with memes no one will care.

If there's gonna be anymore mods, please PLEASE make them private. Any community I've been in turned toxic with public mods

Master1, Muftwin, skullz17, Xfrogman43

N1KF · 2016-09-19 20:19:07

SmittyW wrote:

Y'all need to stop being SJWs. Leave reporting to the ones being harassed, not the bystander. Oh and if someone called you autistic and you make a report a month later or cover it up with memes no one will care.

If that's the case, why isn't it mentioned in the rules? All the rules say is to report anything that appears to be rule-breaking. It seems odd that an entire moderator's philosophy would be based off of ideas that are contradicted directly by the rules.

If there's gonna be anymore mods, please PLEASE make them private. Any community I've been in turned toxic with public mods

I think that's a good idea. I'm in before somebody makes a joke about Benje00.

Schlog · 2016-09-19 20:22:49

ZeldaXD wrote:

Ninja wrote:
proc why didn't you just chatban me
Because chatbanning is not a punishment and you know it.

yeah it is...

skullz17 · 2016-09-19 21:19:17

Smitty is right about the harassment cases. But let's not forget about master1 allegedly allowing someone to use an alt to bypass a ban. There are no screenshots of this, but I don't think there necessarily needs to be. I just want to see both sides of the story because tbh this is the only thing that matters in this debate at this point. There's a lot of gaps in information in this topic and the only people that can really offer anything to the discussion right now are those that are involved and know the events firsthand.

N1KF

SmittyW · 2016-09-19 22:33:30

N1KF wrote:

...
If that's the case, why isn't it mentioned in the rules? All the rules say is to report anything that appears to be rule-breaking. It seems odd that an entire moderator's philosophy would be based off of ideas that are contradicted directly by the rules.

Yeah rules should be revised

MartenM wrote:

Btw are we getting any EU mods? Because I only see mods in the evening when I play (like 01:00).

We also need this

skullz17 wrote:

But let's not forget about master1 allegedly allowing someone to use an alt to bypass a ban...

People know that m1 allows insanity to play on his alt, but AFTER banning him about a billion times. Banning alts isn't easy like m1 said because there are ways to bypass it. Also insanity is his friend so he would spot him using an alt more than strangers using alts secretively. Because of this I don't see a problem letting insanity play as m1 is keeping a closer watch on his rascal friends and can shoot him down (if he does).

hummerz5 · 2016-09-19 23:43:34

SmittyW wrote:

People know that m1 allows insanity to play on his alt, but AFTER banning him about a billion times.
Banning alts isn't easy like m1 said because there are ways to bypass it.
Also insanity is his friend so he would spot him using an alt more than strangers using alts secretively.
Because of this I don't see a problem letting insanity play as m1 is keeping a closer watch on his rascal friends and can shoot him down (if he does).

So, basically
a) not moderating is OK because it's difficult
b) not moderating is OK because insanity is his friend
c) you aren't confident he moderates properly?

edit: I agree it'd be great to have more information on the setup. Some are tempted to write this off as one incident. Some even still doubt the credibility/legitimacy of this incident. I'm curious to know the wider view. That's hard because people have mentioned not getting screenshots of X incident because they thought things would be taken care of. This really is a blind discussion.

Abelysk · 2016-09-19 23:57:04

Basically, the message of this thread is: moderators can't have friends. Simple as that. With friends youll never ban your bff 4 life

Official Everybody Edits Forums

#51 2016-09-19 00:36:22

Re: The Moderation of EE Part II

#52 2016-09-19 04:09:28

Re: The Moderation of EE Part II

#53 2016-09-19 05:48:32, last edited by Hostage (2016-09-19 05:49:32)

Re: The Moderation of EE Part II

#54 2016-09-19 05:52:57

Re: The Moderation of EE Part II

#55 2016-09-19 06:05:38, last edited by Abelysk (2016-09-19 06:05:55)

Re: The Moderation of EE Part II

#56 2016-09-19 06:52:49

Re: The Moderation of EE Part II

#57 2016-09-19 07:00:18

Re: The Moderation of EE Part II

#58 2016-09-19 07:03:41

Re: The Moderation of EE Part II

#59 2016-09-19 13:58:09, last edited by TaskManager (2016-09-19 13:59:04)

Re: The Moderation of EE Part II

#60 2016-09-19 14:07:28

Re: The Moderation of EE Part II

#61 2016-09-19 14:20:40

Re: The Moderation of EE Part II

#62 2016-09-19 15:09:39

Re: The Moderation of EE Part II

#63 2016-09-19 15:28:35

Re: The Moderation of EE Part II

#64 2016-09-19 15:38:00

Re: The Moderation of EE Part II

#65 2016-09-19 15:57:04

Re: The Moderation of EE Part II

#66 2016-09-19 18:17:27

Re: The Moderation of EE Part II

#67 2016-09-19 19:36:10

Re: The Moderation of EE Part II

#68 2016-09-19 19:40:08

Re: The Moderation of EE Part II

#69 2016-09-19 19:48:05, last edited by SmittyW (2016-09-19 19:51:00)

Re: The Moderation of EE Part II

#70 2016-09-19 20:19:07, last edited by N1KF (2016-09-19 20:19:56)

Re: The Moderation of EE Part II

#71 2016-09-19 20:22:49

Re: The Moderation of EE Part II

#72 2016-09-19 21:19:17

Re: The Moderation of EE Part II

#73 2016-09-19 22:33:30

Re: The Moderation of EE Part II

#74 2016-09-19 23:43:34, last edited by hummerz5 (2016-09-19 23:45:14)

Re: The Moderation of EE Part II

#75 2016-09-19 23:57:04

Re: The Moderation of EE Part II

Board footer