Lani (2015-07-18 17:33:47)

---

Moderating isn't a job, it's just a duty. You just sit and watch and be sure everyone is behaving...sure, sometimes you have to go out of your way, but really the only "hard work" people complain about is all the crap you have to put up with to please everyone.
Also, user's can't rule break...I never really understand when people say: "Oh I'm a mod now I can't break rules." you can't break rules if you're a normal user, either...that's why we issue bans if you do. There's consequences no matter what privileges you have or not.

---

little5 (2015-07-18 17:42:36)

---

@ChampionLeake
"Why is everyone so obsessed with modship? All it is just normal users with some extra stuff.

Man. Almost half of plaza get mad if they don't get mod. Better yet, make your own website that mods yourself."
Leake.
Leake.
Don't do that.

---

@Lani
>implying mods aren't more hesitant to warning chat mods over regular users

This post has been edited one or more times, the last time was:
2015-07-18 17:43:46

---

JaronTheFireCat (2015-07-18 17:49:33)

---

Watch: someone (preferably someone we don't really agree with [Ano]) is going to manage to accumulate the right number of votes, everyone disagrees, Lani argues against everyone, mod false warns/bans, gets hated, leaves.

---

Delta (2015-07-18 19:56:57)

---

The problem with attempting to implement a democratic system into Plaza, is that some users don't take into consideration various factors that are essential to making good decisions for the group as a whole. For this exact reason, the United States runs on a representative democracy. Unfortunately, we cannot do that (for the same reason), so we have implemented a Geniocracy/Meritocracy form of system. Trying to implement democratic actions in to our system can be catatropic and potentially lead to what Jaron said (above). It's a good idea that we are attempting to unite Plaza in this sort of way, but this isn't going to always work, simply because people don't take this seriously. Even though most of us will never meet each other, don't know each other, or think of this place as a stupid place to chill and make fun of people, it's still important to keep order. If there is a next time to this sort of user-government, the input should solely be taken as advice. I understand Lani still has an opinion in the final vote, but it's crucial to understand this isn't going to work.

---

little5 (2015-07-18 20:59:54)

---

delta4mod2015

---

Lani (2015-07-18 21:13:33)

---

I'm not implementing, or evening attempting to implement, a democracy...at least, not permanently. If this works out, I'm still not going to let moderators be picked this way all the time from here on. This was a social experiment, as I said in the original post.

Because I've reserved my own choice in the matter, this is more or less a way to let users influence my decision. I'm allowing users to vote and influence, rather than ignoring everyone and going on my own instinct which could be just as wrong and the majority's.

Observing the past 3 years of Plaza, users are always going to hate on (new) mods, some mods are going to do a cruddy job at moderating, and some people are going to get butthurt and leave...it doesn't matter whether there's votes or not; ultimately someone is going to be promoted, they're either going to be good or bad, and someone else isn't going to like them.

Don't fret over how a user might be a bad moderator...the only way to truly know is if you give them the chance (not that you shouldn't try to pick a good one though). If they're a bad mod, they'll get demoted. We'll wipe our hands clean and move on. Luckily, this is an obsolete website for mostly fun and giggles...picking a bad person to be a mod isn't going to result in them ordering a nuclear attack on a defenseless country. I understand the importance of keeping this place fun and giggly, as a bad moderator would greatly stress that reality, but we can still afford take a chance.

Again, I don't want to pick a user who is going to be cruddy at moderating...but from history of Plaza, and from my own experience, you really have to take chances because there are no safe bets in a community of 40% immature children and 59% know-it-all angsty teens. It might be easier if the responsible ones were active more often...
Great mods who come on once a day for an hour or two, or "meh" mods who are on all the time? Considering there are rule breakers 24/7, I wish we could have an entirely Great Mod staff, but inevitably we need to settle for a few "meh"s.

---

Delta (2015-07-18 21:36:19)

---

I agree with everything you said @Lani , I was just trying to hint that using these methods on the long term wouldn't be a great idea. Additionally, you should try to organize the mod system to keep constant on how mods are selected, promoting fairness and order. Finally creating and establishing a organized moderation system can help provide flexibility and enforce common ground, around users and moderators. The problem with the current system is that it's too spontaneous. There is no constant to our current system. I understand this is just an experiment, but it would be better if the data collected from this experiment would go to a greater cause (instead of a "oh this didn't work, let's not do it again" and move on), such as improving the backend of the moderation system.

Edit: Regarding your "there are no safe bets" statement, there is a way to predict and take action when it comes to selecting. While this includes implementing some additional standards, it will help find better mods. All you need is data. And that data is not just data you can get from user's presence (impact on users). The crucial part that's missing from the current system, is that there needs to be a deeper comprehension of user's social interactions. Observing their social activity trends and what influences their social activity can help discover candidates. Something else is that mods are "mods" until they quit or get demoted by bad behavior. Establishing a time period for how long someone and reign as a mod (say 7 months) can help establish a flow in the system.

This post has been edited one or more times, the last time was:
2015-07-18 21:42:32

---

Lani (2015-07-18 21:49:31)

---

A detailed moderating system would certainly cut back on having "bad mods", as anyone who didn't follow the system could be considered unfit. Every now and then I toy with the idea of a more organized system, but then I always come back to the realization that you can't really organize such things like: how many warns to give for which offense(s), how long to ban for each offense, etc...because every situation and circumstance is different.
I have written up a general guideline for moderators, but I've left general room for their personal judgement when it comes to the consequences of a user's actions.
The only place I've see inconsistencies is when it comes to warning...two mods warn the same user at the same time, one mod prefers only giving one warning while the other would give two-...while neither of their methods are wrong, they conflict. I could try to think about a solution for this that doesn't involve writing a "warning reference sheet".


Edit reply to your edit: I do in fact observe behavioral patterns in users...with erman's chat log, this task is easier than before. Still, when I say "there is no safe bet", I say that because after watching behavioral patterns, I see no one who is a safe bet because of their behaviour...otherwise, we're back to the GreatMod = MehMod situation. Unfortunately it's not just about behaviour/maturity, but about their activity as well.
Nonetheless, even my judgement of someone's behaviour can be wrong as I've seen before (prior to being CM), which is why instead of looking for promising behaviour, I have to look for most promising, which is still taking a chance.

This post has been edited one or more times, the last time was:
2015-07-18 21:56:38

---

Perfect_Chaos (2015-07-19 00:02:07)

---

Is Mr.Saturn CM yet?

---

Delta (2015-07-19 02:40:19)

---

That's precisely why we need to establish a formal governing system. Referencing to my PM, mods needs to be able to do four things, Observe, Predict, Plan, and Preform. If these four steps are applied on a larger scale, we can predict when infractions are more likely to occur relative to multiple factors, both here and in real life. If we're able to pull data from multiple aspects of the site, we can compile it actively and create a plan to be there when infractions occur the most. This isn't the same day to day, that's why it's essential to organize a system to control Plaza. Utilizing this data, mods can be prepared and be present, also be on the same common ground. If drastic measures are taken now, we can create a cohesive experience in all social groups of the website.

I was observing the situation with the recent hentai spam issue, and I have seen nothing done to prevent and predict these happenings. If there were more strict regulations and guides to how moderators should preform their jobs, we can prevent these happenings. This all fits under creating a organized system for our small governmental system, including organized ways for the selection and dismissal of officials, unified and more cohesive rules and regulations for mods and users, and more. One of my favorite quotes is "In order to improve, you must collect data", and this is exactly what we need to do to be able to more proactively control Plaza. Otherwise, it's this endless circle of selecting mods, mods "moderating", and then quitting. If there was an organized way, we could perhaps say have a vote for candidates every four months, and a mod whose 4 month mod time has ended will be removed from a mod position, because their reign time has ended. Or a new community manager will reign for 8 months, before a new manager will be voted in. Simple steps can go a long ways. The issue with currently randomly selecting people is that's is unpredictable when a mod might quit, thus leading to this sort of thing. There are many more things that we can do to finally organize Plaza and establish order, yet provide freedom.

Moderators must think like designers, they must find solutions within constraints, if there are not enough constraints it's not design, it's art, abstract and unordered.

---

carlos11 (2015-07-19 07:56:52)

---

Lmao, literally wtf is Delta blabbing on about?

---