This whole situation has gotten way out of hand. I'm not just talking about Fate and Iris's old thread deleting spree and Reputation numbers being removed (then readded). I'm talking about YEARS of modbase and memberbase arguements. None of them have gotten us anywhere, and they're never going to. All they're ever going to do is create more pointless drama and tention between members and the mods. That's what's causing the real problem.
Fact is, members want a say in the things that effect them. Maybe it hasn't always been like this; but then again, the active memberbase has not only grown, but changed significantly over the years. No mod or mods are ever going to change this. So...
Do members deserve an opinion on the things that effect them? Yes.
Do they deserve an opinion on every modbase decision? No.
Basically what this is leading to is: When a decision that effects everyone on VGC comes up, should active members be allowed to voice their opinions, and those opinions have an effect on the outcome of the decision?
I have a couple of ideas of making this work...
Using the Rep System as an Example:
1) A forum-wide announcement would made about Reputation numbers, explaining the benefits and disadvantages of removing them. The announcement is basically so everyone, including those frequent only to the video game forums get a chance to know what's going on. Then a poll will be made in the community board (the announcement will contain a link to said poll).
Problem here is anyone, whether they've been here a 5 years or 5 minutes could vote. And while someone who has been here 5 years could have an opinion, someone who's been here 5 minutes could not.
2) Similar to the intelligent people forum from a couple of years ago, without actually being an intelligent people forum. We have a forum (VGC representatives or whatever) that anyone who's been here 3 months or has 100 posts or whatever could gain access to. Then just apply idea 1, but instead of the poll being in the community board, have it in this forum.
Even though the problem with idea 1 gets knocked out, it becomes more complicated.
These are just a couple of ideas I thought up. If anyone has one they think would work better, please, share.. If this poll favors a 'yes' vote, then we can decide the best way of making it work.
I clicked this thread thinking it would consist of "OKAY, STOP *****ING", but this is actually a very nice idea. Thumbs up.
Yeah, this all sounds pretty good.
Stuff like voting in new mods and blogs should stay mod only however.
Yes, and never let another chick end up being a mod!!! :D
I can create a user group for those with 100 posts.
The problem is that someone who has been here 5 minutes, or has made less than 100 posts might not be stupid. What I think we should do is just allow certain members to cast votes, having that number depend on how many moderators voted. They want a say, but by no means should they have the final say. If we allow all members that have been here over 3 months to vote, our small numbers will become worthless.
Look, I think the current problem with the way things are set up is that we are not elected by the member and therefore are not representative of them. If we are not representative of them, then we should not be the sole decision makers of major changes that'll affect them.
I vote yes.
Take note though, I only vote yes for situations such as whether rep should exist or not, if a new board should be made, if post counts should still be there, etc. Not minor issues like blogs and banning people, that should still be left up to us.
So does deleting crappy threads, regardless of how old they are, count as something that affects the entire member system?
If the members will actually take stuff seriously. I don't mind it if they can at least manage to help out VGC rather than say "But... but we lose post count. NOTHING IS WORTH THAT."
...I guess we really should include the normal (I use that term loosely) forum members in any major issues with the site, seeing as they're the ones using it and all.
Oh well, it was fun being the ones in power while it lasted... ;)
I never said I didn't care. wtf :/
And yeah, I was being serious. Remember that the only threads that were deleted sucked. If you look in General Gaming, there's a specific locked thread that I found to be a nifty read and it generated a lot of responses when it was open. I see no reason to delete it because it is a very good thread with worthy argumentative discussion in it. However, when it got out of control despite warnings, it had to be locked. I wouldn't delete good threads. That's like anti-what-I'm-supposed-to-be-doing. lol
Well, it wasn't so much you as it was Iris.
[quote=Iris]And if members really want to know what's going on, then fine. However, they aren't going to have a say in the matter. Unless you've only been here for a few months, you should be perfectly aware that the modbase exists partially for decision making, and the memberbase exists partially as an experimental group. Whether you like it or not, you have no real jurisdiction.
If there was anything they had a problem with you saying, it was this:
[quote=Fate]Before I was a moderator, I always saw good threads pushed down by crappy threads. I wished I had the power to delete them. Now I do. People I know who make good threads, like Xenos, get their threads pushed down by stupid threads. I'm not okay with this, and neither should anyone else be.
They felt the reason threads are more prominant than others are because the memberbase find them more interesting and enjoyable, so just because you liked a thread pushed down by another doesn't mean you can delete ones favored by other memebrs with nothing actually wrong with them.
I'm not accusing you of doing this, 'cause I sure haven't seen it, but this testimony is sure what that suggests.
I still like the idea of making a forum (or sub-forum in BHaSaC) specially for this. If Jesse can, it's as simple as setting it so members become senior members after 100 posts, then giving senior members and any group above that access to that forum. Of course only mods could start threads, but senior members could vote on polls and post in threads. Then, in a nutshell:
1. Thread in the mod board is made stating the idea.
2. Forum-wide Announcement is made and then a poll in this forum.
3. Senior Members and Mods vote on it in this forum. Poll goes for maybe 2 weeks.
4. After 2 weeks, whatever vote is favored gets put into action.
This way, it elliminates the problem of just anyone being able to vote, but isn't complicated.
I don't think having a ratio mods 60% and members 40% is gonna help, because it defeats the whole purpose. Mods still get the greater say. The point is everyone gets an equal say.
[quote=Kodachi]The problem is that someone who has been here 5 minutes, or has made less than 100 posts might not be stupid. What I think we should do is just allow certain members to cast votes, having that number depend on how many moderators voted. They want a say, but by no means should they have the final say. If we allow all members that have been here over 3 months to vote, our small numbers will become worthless.
Their right to vote isn't determanded by their intelligence, but by time and experience with the forum. The point is to encourage as many people as we can to vote on these polls, no matter where they're most frequent on VGC (Video Game forums, Off Topic forums, blogs, etc.). That way we get a better idea of what EVERYONE wants, not just what WE want.
[quote=Linkman]I don't think having a ratio mods 60% and members 40% is gonna help, because it defeats the whole purpose. Mods still get the greater say. The point is everyone gets an equal say.
Yeah. It's not like we're trying to give them a weapon against unfair moderation, we're trying to make it so we know what they want so we can act accordingly.
60% to 40% actually seems fair since we would be totally outnumbered otherwise. We shouldn't be doing it by "Majority of members want it, majority of mods dont." That would just end up nullifying any changes. We should just add up all the votes. For every 5 member votes, it equates to four, for every 5 mod votes, it equates to 6. And it's not like the mods are always going to agree, so it's not as if we'll just overrule them. We don't have that many active mods. I like Shin-Ras idea. We make two polls. One for the senior members to vote in, one for us to vote in. We can give our stance and defend it in both polls, but we can only vote in one. It'll be a lot more simple.
Most members would make sh[COLOR=lightgreen]i[/COLOR]tty mods, so what do they know? The other half p[COLOR=lightgreen]i[/COLOR]ss the other half and us off.
If any regular members get the vote it should just be respected members, but even then I don't think they should get them. Hell, I don't think half our mods should get it, I can't count the number of stupid decisions the modbase has made.