Necessary Moderator Application/Staff Changes

[Br00k]

Mah god sthap double posting

 

[Col_StaR]

....snip....

I see this thread's arguments as twofold: alter the approach to moderator applications regarding bans, and get rid of certain members of staff whom fit a certain criteria. I will approach each topic one at a time.

Altering the Applications Regarding Bans.
I don't think either the daycare nor the garbage man analogies are appropriate for the position in question. Rather, I prefer to see moderators as Police Officers, seeing as they uphold our community's rules and ensure that it's running effectively. As such, the question becomes, "would you trust a man to be an officer of the law, granting him certain powers over the majority of people, if he had been guilty of a crime before?" This revision grants the situation a more appropriate level of severity, but it does not change the circumstances.

In my eyes it's a matter of philosophy. Can someone who had once been found guilty of a serious crime (any offense that warrants a ban is obviously quite severe) truly be trusted to uphold the laws which they once neglected? And can people who break the law truly change their ways?

As with all philosophy, unfortunately, there is no certain answer. The Sr. Staff has gone back and forth with this argument whenever this topic is brought up, and it usually never ends certainly nor prettily. However, we agree that the MCSG community must uphold itself to the highest standard of applicant when it comes to the people who will be responsible for running it. As such, it was decided that anyone who had broken the rules severely enough to be banned is not someone whom can be trusted with the power over others. That philosophy has been held for quite some time, but it was also held with the belief of taking things by a case-by-case basis. If you believe that you are moderator material despite your past, you will need to prove yourself. If you prove that you are an outstanding person, willing and capable of the moderator position, we may overlook your sordid past and grant you the ability to apply. However, remember that this is for exceptional cases, and not everyone will have an exception made for them.

Regardless of what we've been practicing since MCSG's creation, I will bring your suggestion to the Sr. Staff to consider.

I want to note that you state that bans with no evidence can be used against you. However, MCSG policy states that all bans must have sufficient evidence before they are enacted; we also support a ban dispute system as well which will forgive such bans as well. So if you've been banned from MCSG, sufficient evidence was brought to staff to support the ban. But if you feel that you're being treated unfairly, please speak to an Admin or a Community Manager so that we may deal with the matter in private before taking it public.

Change in Staffing.
Just to reiterate, here are the words that you have used to describe, "the MCSG staff, in [your] opinion: "Arrogant, Close-Minded, Classicist (The word you're looking for is Classtic, discriminating against social classes. Classicist is a word referring to Classics)". I have no qualms about peoples' opinions, but I do not believe they should be held against the staff as a whole. With over 100 moderators, each with their own personalities, it isn't fair to generalize all of them as such.

As such, we're always on the look-out for inappropriate behavior and activity on the part of our staff. We're always on the lookout, and we're always open for tips and complaints. Usually after a stern warning and talking to, the situation is solved; if not, the player's position as a member of staff dissolves. We are aware of some flaws within individuals of staff, and we do our best to prevent it.

That being said, no one is perfect. In fact, no system is perfect either. Moderators are people as well, subject to their own flaws and weaknesses, and there's no amount of testing or training will ever change that. We do what we can to curb it, but there will always be moments of weakness that leak through. Do not let those moments stain your perception of an entire staff of people. Instead, report the problems to us, and we will handle it.

We can't just fire people on the accusation of being, "Arrogant", "Close-Minded", or, "Classtic" either. These people put effort into applying and enforcing the rules, so they cannot be simply demoted due to hear-say or personal opinions. Instead, it must be proven that these moderators are unfit for duty due to such activities. Once that is established, the individual in question is removed from staff.

To end this reply, we do pay attention to players' complaints and we do take action (that's why I, Inforcer, and Krackan are here). But you have to understand that we are not at liberty to fulfill every demand the playerbase has, especially those made on whims and opinions (as sweeping and questionably-hyperbollic as they may be). Instead, it is up to the playerbase to gather evidence, build their case, and propose solutions to the problems, and it is up to the staff to consider and fulfill such propositions to better serve the playerbase.

A fall from either the staff or the playerbase will hurt MCSG, but continued squabbles and empty arguments will be what dooms it. We're here to work together. Let's work together.

 

[slasherxtreme]

And no. You merely got another admin to tell me that, because I used speed hacks, I couldn't become a moderator. My application was 10x better than yours, and i dont even have to see yours. You people didnt look at the application, slasher. You looked at my mistakes, not my potential.

actually, I posted in the senior staff chat asking for another senior staff to review the application. The admin said he would do it so he did. I didnt specifically ask him or tell him to deny you. You can have that verified by a senior staff. We looked at the ban first because you can't become as moderator if you have been banned. Even if your application was 100 thousand times better than anyone's, it still doesn't erase that fact that you have broken the rules. Not getting moderator is part of the punishment for breaking rules.

 

[LethalCactus]

Mah god sthap double posting

Calm down skippy

 

[theman356]

I think that it really should depend on the reason for a ban. I myself have been banned before for using strong language in game and because of that I do not think if I made a app I should be accepted. Even though I have learned a lot since then I still am guilty of breaking the MCSG rules and therefore and not fit to enforce them. And I think if you were to explain your ban and the ways you have changed from that in your app the sr staff would at least consider it rather than toss your app aside because you were banned.

 

[LethalCactus]

I think that it really should depend on the reason for a ban. I myself have been banned before for using strong language in game and because of that I do not think if I made a app I should be accepted. Even though I have learned a lot since then I still am guilty of breaking the MCSG rules and therefore and not fit to enforce them. And I think if you were to explain your ban and the ways you have changed from that in your app the sr staff would at least consider it rather than toss your app aside because you were banned.

That makes sense, but i was posting this on behalf of all oppressed mcsg players

 

[theman356]

That makes sense, but i was posting this on behalf of all oppressed mcsg players

If you find a rule unfair that does not make you oppressed. Do I wish that the rule was different? Yes. Do I find it unfair? No. We cant always get what we want. That does not make us oppressed.

 

[LethalCactus]

lol I didn't say that in my text

But you said that people who have broken the rules shouldn't be trusted?

 

[slasherxtreme]

But you said that people who have broken the rules shouldn't be trusted?

He didn't say that. He said that he didn't feel he was fit to enforce rules since he has broken them.

 

[LethalCactus]

In essence, he actually did slasher. You wonder why I brought you up in my thread? Because I do not see you fit to be a staff member.

 

[TheInforcerHD]

You may be right and you have changed your ways but the chance of giving a rule breaker power over others can be dangerous (As mentioned before) . MCSG must accept the best applicants to the staff to ensure less problems. Try to take in the perspective of the staff as we only want the best for this community.

 

[theman356]

In essence, he actually did slasher. You wonder why I brought you up in my thread? Because I do not see you fit to be a staff member.

I spoke for myself and only myself when I said I would not be fit to be a moderator because I have broken rules in the past. Your situation could be completely different than mine. You could be fit to enforce the rules I just dont think I would.