The Sanctuary
Site Discussion => Help & Suggestions => Topic started by: mark311 on October 31, 2014, 11:20:15 am
-
I would like him to be the moderator of science of the damned as he has plenty of experience in paranormal phenomena. anyone else wanna vote for him?
#bling4modscienceofdamned
-
I would like him to be the moderator of science of the damned as he has plenty of experience in paranormal phenomena. anyone else wanna vote for him?
#bling4modscienceofdamned
#bling4scimodofdamned!
-
I nominate myself for the mod of SOTD as I am BallsDeep, the legendary gamer.
-
Hed make a better admin
Make arnox a mod and dingding admin
-
Guess you guys never got the memo that forums are not individually moderated, but instead, global mods police the entire site. Remind me to put you on the Carrier Pigeon Registered Express Service.
-
As Spectral said.
Although I do think that section mods, or global mods with a designated section, might be more useful than site-wide global mods. As for SotD... Spec' does by far have the most experience.
-
Although I do think that section mods, or global mods with a designated section, might be more useful than site-wide global mods.
You are right about that, because someone that is interested/has expertise in whatever the section is discussing will have more passion and purpose to keeping that particular section more relevant and topical. As it is now, when you have toxic morons that are irrational....say someone that is "anti-violent" that can dictate/direct the flow of discussion in Weapons and Combat it just makes the discourse and subject matter as a whole a complete irrelevant mess.
And no Mark, Bling should instead be perma-banned with complete and utter prejudice. He adds NOTHING to any conversation, and doesn't represent what the purpose of this website is....nor does anything positive for the future of this place if we really want it to thrive and eventually grow.
-
I vote for myself , nice copy cat thread mark... http://www.intosanctuary.com/index.php?topic=4018.0
-
Kroz, you're just dumb and naive. You've never had an experience with the paranormal, your brain just can't grasp reality.
-
Doesn't work that way, sorry.
-
Doesn't work that way, sorry.
Just out of interest is that because you don't trust the userbase (say a poll, with a clear favourite, was taken rather than a nomination) or because you don't think Bling is appropriate?
-
Doesn't work that way, sorry.
Just out of interest is that because you don't trust the userbase (say a poll, with a clear favourite, was taken rather than a nomination) or because you don't think Bling is appropriate?
Arnox's word is god here.
-
Just out of interest is that because you don't trust the userbase (say a poll, with a clear favourite, was taken rather than a nomination) or because you don't think Bling is appropriate?
I don't think Bling is appropriate and this board has too small of a userbase to support having board moderators right now.
-
Doesn't work that way, sorry.
This. Moderator elections aren't until 2016 :O
-
Heh, board moderators.
Around here, more like BORED moderators. amirite? amirite?
(http://i39.servimg.com/u/f39/14/26/98/51/dumbjo12.gif)
imrite
-
You're bringing the site down, Arnox. Ban yourself for a very long time.
-
Just out of interest is that because you don't trust the userbase (say a poll, with a clear favourite, was taken rather than a nomination) or because you don't think Bling is appropriate?
I don't think Bling is appropriate and this board has too small of a userbase to support having board moderators right now.
If the userbase reaches a point where more moderators are required, will you allow the userbase to select mods, within reason, or will they have no say in the matter?
-
You're bringing the site down, Arnox. Ban yourself for a very long time.
lol Ban me and I hax this whole site. I'll bring this site down to the ground!
If the userbase reaches a point where more moderators are required, will you allow the userbase to select mods, within reason, or will they have no say in the matter?
The current staff will have a say but that's about it.
-
If the userbase reaches a point where more moderators are required, will you allow the userbase to select mods, within reason, or will they have no say in the matter?
The current staff will have a say but that's about it.
Why limit the discussion to the staff?
-
You're bringing the site down, Arnox. Ban yourself for a very long time.
lol Ban me and I hax this whole site. I'll bring this site down to the ground!
lol You rage-banned me because you lost your temper. Don't forget that, big boy.
-
I vote for myself , nice copy cat thread mark... http://www.intosanctuary.com/index.php?topic=4018.0
It's a copy cat thread that seriously got out of hand lol
-
Why limit the discussion to the staff?
Because this is not a democracy.
lol You rage-banned me because you lost your temper. Don't forget that, big boy.
Nope. I've never banned anyone purely out of emotion.
-
If the userbase reaches a point where more moderators are required, will you allow the userbase to select mods, within reason, or will they have no say in the matter?
The current staff will have a say but that's about it.
Why limit the discussion to the staff?
Because they have a better eye for who is a objectively good poster than the regular users who would want people like sploo in a mod position.
-
Keep lying to yourself. I can justify lots of shit with my own made up rules, too.
You banned me because you couldn't handle the heat. Fact.
inb4spamallammadindong.
-
If the userbase reaches a point where more moderators are required, will you allow the userbase to select mods, within reason, or will they have no say in the matter?
The current staff will have a say but that's about it.
Why limit the discussion to the staff?
Because they have a better eye for who is a objectively good poster than the regular users who would want people like sploo in a mod position.
Has anyone conducted a userbase poll that indicated Sploo, or a user like him, would be the primary mod nominee?
Why limit the discussion to the staff?
Because this is not a democracy.
So you'd ignore a valid, userbase-selected, candidate purely on a matter of principle?
-
If the userbase reaches a point where more moderators are required, will you allow the userbase to select mods, within reason, or will they have no say in the matter?
The current staff will have a say but that's about it.
Why limit the discussion to the staff?
Because they have a better eye for who is a objectively good poster than the regular users who would want people like sploo in a mod position.
Arnox is a 22 year old mormon virgin and he's somehow wiser and more objective than the rest of the userbase because...?
equanimity....?
Idiosyncrasy , Rocklin and MoaningLisa... yea well....
-
So you'd ignore a valid, userbase-selected, candidate purely on a matter of principle?
If someone's been a quality poster, I'll notice it. Or the staff will. Either one.
-
So you'd ignore a valid, userbase-selected, candidate purely on a matter of principle?
If someone's been a quality poster, I'll notice it. Or the staff will. Either one.
You are delusional.
-
So you'd ignore a valid, userbase-selected, candidate purely on a matter of principle?
If someone's been a quality poster, I'll notice it. Or the staff will. Either one.
You have no idea what a moderator is supposed to do
What you're describing is a mod the actually moderates a particular sub-forum to ensure proper flow of topics
Global mods arw supposed to clean up the shit
The only thing the mods here do is ban people for stupid shit...ergo, they are not moderator, they are ban-happy banners
-
Why limit the discussion to the staff?
Because this is not a democracy.
lol You rage-banned me because you lost your temper. Don't forget that, big boy.
Nope. I've never banned anyone purely out of emotion.
Retarded could technically be considered an emotion
-
If someone's been a quality poster, I'll notice it. Or the staff will. Either one.
Your continuous refusal to resolve or even address the problems that Zek/Equanamity brings to the table says otherwise.
-
Retarded could technically be considered an emotion
No its a state of being. One can "feel" retarded but that feeling is really only shame mixed with stupidity and not actual retardation.
-
So you'd ignore a valid, userbase-selected, candidate purely on a matter of principle?
If someone's been a quality poster, I'll notice it. Or the staff will. Either one.
So too, presumably, will the userbase. And as you are well aware, the userbase would not have selected Equanimity. Drama aside, she is poster of very average quality. Which suggests the decision will not ultimately come down to a question of quality, but to whom you personally approve of. And you have already demonstrated a very stringent attitude towards people's character re: being modded, that is at odds with the attitudes of the userbase. From this disparity stems the drama which you find so tiresome. The political conclusion would be to allow the userbase to select, again, within reason, their own mods. If that mod fails and is removed, it is a failure of the userbase, not you. They would then have little ground on which to stand against you, if you replaced a failed user-mod with your selection.
Do you think this a fair and reasoned statement?
I've finally finished them. Now, keep in mind, these aren't the new rules YET. This is the time now to discuss them before we put them in for good.
but you got all mad cause we didn't want to use yours
You're darn right I was! I put a lot of work into that logo. :suspect:
Besides that though, pretty much everyone in that thread said they didn't want a logo at all. Pretty clear to me what everyone wanted.
Why limit the discussion to the staff?
Because this is not a democracy.
And this is contradictory; you've demonstrated a willingness to both canvass peoples' opinions and abide by the will of the majority, yet state Sanctuary is not a democracy. Could you please clarify this? Is Sanctuary a part-time dictatorship, part-time democracy, or something else, specifically when it comes to selecting mods?
I'm not looking for a particular answer, only that the answer is consistent with your actions.
-
Kroz, you're just dumb and naive. You've never had an experience with the paranormal, your brain just can't grasp reality.
lol I know im dumb and naïve that's why I like the paranormal. oohh.. I see what you kinda did there..
-
Kroz, you're just dumb and naive. You've never had an experience with the paranormal, your brain just can't grasp reality.
lol I know im dumb and naïve that's why I like the paranormal. oohh.. I see what you kinda did there..
:tup:
-
encounters of the 1st kind
ebcounter of the second time
and encounters of the third kind
-
anyone here seen the movie return of the rise of the dawn of planet of the apes part six?
-
So too, presumably, will the userbase. And as you are well aware, the userbase would not have selected Equanimity. Drama aside, she is poster of very average quality. Which suggests the decision will not ultimately come down to a question of quality, but to whom you personally approve of. And you have already demonstrated a very stringent attitude towards people's character re: being modded, that is at odds with the attitudes of the userbase. From this disparity stems the drama which you find so tiresome. The political conclusion would be to allow the userbase to select, again, within reason, their own mods. If that mod fails and is removed, it is a failure of the userbase, not you. They would then have little ground on which to stand against you, if you replaced a failed user-mod with your selection.
Do you think this a fair and reasoned statement?
I've finally finished them. Now, keep in mind, these aren't the new rules YET. This is the time now to discuss them before we put them in for good.
but you got all mad cause we didn't want to use yours
You're darn right I was! I put a lot of work into that logo. :suspect:
Besides that though, pretty much everyone in that thread said they didn't want a logo at all. Pretty clear to me what everyone wanted.
Why limit the discussion to the staff?
Because this is not a democracy.
And this is contradictory; you've demonstrated a willingness to both canvass peoples' opinions and abide by the will of the majority, yet state Sanctuary is not a democracy. Could you please clarify this? Is Sanctuary a part-time dictatorship, part-time democracy, or something else, specifically when it comes to selecting mods?
I'm not looking for a particular answer, only that the answer is consistent with your actions.
This is actually a great post. I approve.
Ultimately though, having the userbase select their own mods and hoping they're smart enough to choose the right ones seems very inefficient to me. Sure it avoids drama but the staff's decisions aren't based around what will cause the least drama. Also, sometimes a userbase can be so divided on who they feel would make a good mod that they may never actually be able to make a decision by themselves. Then we're back to where we were. Having the staff choose.
As to this site being a democracy, I admit for some decisions, I like to involve the community completely. For more important decisions though, I like to keep it confined to staff.
-
I nominate Bling for mod for the trashcan
-
What about a user vote with the admin having the right to veto?