As we celebrate our one week (yay!) anniversary the time has come to talk about moderators.
No, not that you guys need them, you are all behaving rather well. Thank you. But as the initial euphoria wears down, which it hasn't yet, and the real world rears its ugly head, which it has, Gary and I will start to need your help so we can have some downtime.
What does a moderator do? Well, nothing really. They help keep an eye out. They help with questions. They are the Subs of the boards.
Anyway, this is what I am going to propose on how we will select our moderators.
First we will have no more than 3 mods per board. Also, the Creator areas will have mods determined by the individual creators and will not be assigned by us. The Planetary Chance Machine, Encylopedia Galatica and Science HQ will not have a moderator.
There will be a term limit. Moderators will serve for a period of 6 months. Half a year like they did once upon a time in the Legion.
And there will be a nomination period. Initially as well as when times comes for a change in the guard. All registered users may nominate one person for a moderator position in each section. The top 10 nominations will then be entered in a vote in The Planetary Chance Machine with the top 3 becoming mods.
The nomination period will last for one week with the vote for the final 3 lasting one more week. This should allow everyone a chance to vote. Just because you are nominated doesn't mean you have to accept. I will notify by PM or e-mail the top nominations and give them the chance to back out before the election.
I would prefer you not abuse your alt ID's as I do not even pretend to know them all. In other words, please do not stuff the ballot boxes.
Now before I begin the process, I would like some feedback on the process. Is it too much? Not enough? Let me hear your suggestions. Not to say that I will follow them but I always appreciate feedback.
[ July 13, 2003, 08:58 PM: Message edited by: Lightning Lad ]
Posted by DrakeB3003 on :
Holy crap -- I just flashed back to high school elections! .... sorry, carry on...
Btw, I appreciate that you're including us in this process -- it sorta brings back the fun of Legion elections and since we can't have them in the comic... Posted by Eryk Davis Ester on :
The process as you've proposed sounds good to me!
Posted by Kid Prime on :
Well, as another member of the 5 highest post club weighing in , I think everything you've detailed thus far sounds good.
Posted by Lightning Lad on :
Thanks for your input Drake, KP and Eryk. I've added one change to the process posted above. Simply put, you don't have to accept the nomination if you don't want to be a mod. I wouldn't want to force anyone to participate in the board in a way they wouldn't want to.
[ July 13, 2003, 08:57 PM: Message edited by: Lightning Lad ]
Posted by Reep on :
I think a consideration for moderators must be at least a moderate technical background or familiarity, of which I and my lapdog Nardo do not really possess.
So posters who feel in a similar position, or simply under time constraints may feel it best to remove their name from the start.
As for 6 months, I don't know about these things, but it's seems long. Perhaps combos of 3 and 6 month commitments might add flexibility.
Perhaps also standards of tolerance could be spelled out for moderators, or discussed at least, so there's a common understanding and not board by board variable tolerances and emotivity by moderators.
I guess with so many boards and possible moderators, there should be some discussed and understood standards, but not a formal "Legion constitution" which would suck out a lot of the fun here.
Posted by DrakeB3003 on :
quote:Originally posted by Lightning Lad: As we celebrate our one week (yay!) anniversary the time has come to talk about moderators.
Sprock me -- it's only been a week?? I think I might need to step outside more... Posted by Kid Prime on :
I was actually thinking the same as I read that... actually, I've had a pretty full week (this included!)
Posted by Danny Blaine on :
I'm new here, but I plan to stay involved with things. So I am good with any and all of your proposal.
I look forward to watching the election.
It really will remind me of the days of the leader elections (how I miss those).
Posted by Kid Prime on :
But with all the moderator elections going on, how are we ever going to find time to have Legion World Leader and Deputy Leader elections??? :-)
Posted by Lightning Lad on :
quote:Originally posted by Reep: I think a consideration for moderators must be at least a moderate technical background or familiarity, of which I and my lapdog Nardo do not really possess.
So posters who feel in a similar position, or simply under time constraints may feel it best to remove their name from the start.
We could keep an updated list here of those who would prefer not to be considered for the moderator position. That should be easy enough to do.
quote:As for 6 months, I don't know about these things, but it's seems long. Perhaps combos of 3 and 6 month commitments might add flexibility.
I considered starting it out at 3 months but went with 6 to begin with just so Gary and I can have some breathing time between elections. We can address this again after the first term comes to an end and see what members think.
quote:Perhaps also standards of tolerance could be spelled out for moderators, or discussed at least, so there's a common understanding and not board by board variable tolerances and emotivity by moderators.
I guess with so many boards and possible moderators, there should be some discussed and understood standards, but not a formal "Legion constitution" which would suck out a lot of the fun here.
This one is tougher. Especially since I fully agree with your last statement Reep. I do not want this board strict but then I don't want it as un-policed as Rob's place. Basically when everyone signed up they agreed to a few things like not posting that picture here, not allowing certain ID's, that kind of thing.
I don't want to be a cop. I don't want the fun sucked out of this board. But I (and Gary if I may speak for him) do not want a repeat of the fall of the LSH-HQ. I will put my foot down if I have to just to keep this board fun and free for everyone.
So I think that the mods would not have to go to the extremes that we did over there. Gary and I are more responsible (to our board is all I'm saying here) and it will most likely not come down to a moderator to make the decision that we did at that time.
There shouldn't be a difference in the way one board is moderated over another as there shouldn't be any extremes to consider. A mod will be able to headline a thread (no more than 3 per board), unheadline a thread and perhaps move one to another board. I really don't see a need to close any threads or delete posts.
Gary, can you think of anything to add?
Posted by Nightcrawler on :
Nope. Nada.
You seem to have eloquently stated everything, as usual LL! Thanks! Posted by Star Boy on :
As a mod on the Lonely Planet message board, I understand a lot of the problems that'll creep in if you don't watch out.
My one piece of advice: If posters seem to think they're being 'censored' by the removal of posts/threads, tell them to get over it. I'd rather mods went the occasional cut & prune rather than the board becoming covered in crap.
On the LP board, we have a branch called "Your Choice" where the usual terms & conditions of the message board are relaxed somewhat. This gave us the option of herding troublesome posters to "Your Choice" when they went overboard, rather than banning them from the outset.
Just some lunchtime ramblings... Posted by He Who Wanders on :
I certainly think there should be guidelines for moderators. Maybe an IQ test. A crisis management course requirement.
How do boards normally select moderators? Is it just anybody who volunteers? Is it someone with ownership of the board? What are the requirements that, say, someone like Rob has to have to moderate the DC boards? They could serve as guides for us, not only in selecting moderators but also in determining whether or not we want to run.
These questions are important to me because, in all honesty, I don't feel that some of those selected to be mods on RDB were ready for the task. Perhaps they did not know what to expect. Perhaps they had the wrong temperment for the job (it happens). I'm not pointing fingers, but I do feel these questions need to be considered before we start holding elections again.
Posted by Reep on :
Before I get to my point, let me echo HWW about moderator qualifications. It has to be more than popularity. Popularity has no connection to competency.
Look at me.
It might be good if those nominated provide a short post on their MB background, especially if they had prior Mod service. (Any real problems in past Mod positions should be mentioned.)
I'm not saying there should be any politicking [anyone who did would very suspect and wouldn't get my vote], just that a brief statement of qualifications (which most candidates provide in any election) would be a good idea.
My other point is that I think the main thing to be "standardized" for Mods is "what is spamming?" We have a clear extreme example with the flood spam of "the" picture. What needs to be discussed is, as always, the middle ground. Clearly the flood spam was wrong, but what about the pest spaming that preceeded it? At what point do friendly warnings start? At what point do they stop being friendly? When is action taken?
Math is not the answer. Rarely is. "With X amount of spam, this then happens by the Mods." The focus isn't quantity at the beginning, but the quality of the posts, they're nature and tone.
So I think a brief discussion topic with the founders and several Mods about a few likely hypothetical situations would be of benefit so that everyone's on the same page (as well as the membership.) There really doesn't need to be an extensive "What If" minutia exploration, because all the imagined possibilities will never occur anyway.
As I said, it's just getting everybody on the same page. It's not creating and memorizing an unnecessary rulebook.
It's one of those situations were you learn something and pretty much forget about it after that.
Kinda like most stuff on message boards.
[ July 14, 2003, 12:14 AM: Message edited by: Reep ]
Posted by Kid Prime on :
I think one thing people may be forgetting is that the moderators, when chosen, are NOT going to have carte blanche to do (or do not) whatever the hell they feel like on these boards. I think Scott put it best when he said that the mods are going to be here to sub in for he and Gary and help them out, especially when they are unavailable. This is Scott and Gary's board, and they have complete control over every aspect of its operation. They are nice enough to ask our opinons about what we want to see and do around here, but when it comes down to it, it's their kingdom. Electing a few moderators isn't going to change that.
I would imagine if an elected moderator were to start going nuts and deleting posts every time someone said the word "Dick Grayson," well, they wouldn't be a moderator for very long. By the same token, if a mod wasn't doing his or her job and their area was so riddled with spam and trash that it looked like downtown Baghdad (not that that would happen, since Scott and Gary are taking better care of this place than that,) they wouldn't be a mod for very long either. And it wouldn't take an impeachment hearing, either. It would be as simple as a mouseclick from Scott and/or Gary and a quick "thanks for playing" e-mail or PM.
These guys made this place for us, it's their sandbox, and whatever they say goes. Having fun electing some mods isn't going to change that. I have faith in Lightning Lad and Nightcrawler to continue being the awesome founders they have been thus far.
Now, having said that, YES, by all means, make an educated choice in nominating people to fill these positions. Think about how they have handled themselves in moderating other boards, flame wars, and other posting situations in the past. Make a good choice.
I'm not saying any of the concerns in the last few posts are baseless, I'm just trying to alleivate those concerns somewhat by reminding everyone that the guys at the top running this place know what they are doing, and if they think it will be a fun and productive thing to have general elections for moderators, then I have faith in their judgement.
(I'm going to ask Nighty for an Optimus Prime smiley for Christmas.) Posted by Greybird on :
What Scott outlined for moderator elections seems entirely reasonable. No schema will ever be the "best," as any community has too many diverse personalities and interests to satisfy everyone.
All we can ask is: Would this election setup be workable? Would it be likely to bring us mods that will do the needed jobs and not trample on peaceful discussion?
I'd say that this schema would do both. It has several virtues:
~ Moderators are chosen per discussion board, not system-wide, and not where they aren't needed. (Creator boards, polls, reference area, system queries where the founders "moderate" anyway.)
~ Six-month terms are long enough to be productive and not be dealing constantly with mechanics. They're short enough to rotate many talents in a year. (I'd suggest making clear that one member could only have a single mod term per year.)
~ Mods would not be deleting posts, but largely doing acts to facilitate discussion.
~ If one mod was less technically adept, it would be limited in its effects to one board, and two others would be available there to take up the slack.
I would make only a few general points about the mods' scope:
"Spamming" or disruption of peaceful discussion need some qualitative definitions from the start. They don't have to be intricate, but they'd benefit from some discussion.
It would be easier in dealing with future disruptors -- and they will come -- to make it clear in advance (at one's signup) that any personally abusive or disruptive posts will be transferred by the mods to a separate holding area. And that these will not be deleted until after one of the two founders has passed upon them.
At the same time, it would be a boon to many users -- especially those with children or slow Net connections -- to allow the mods to remove images from posts, whether thus transferred or not. Text would not be allowed to be touched, except by the post's author. (These points would also be made clear at signup.)
Images can and do have their own severe problems, as we found with the mess on Rob's board.
~ Spamming them does slow down Net connections, as does repeating them in a quoted-message exchange. (This has even been done in LW already, though it's been far more amusing than abusive.)
~ Not shrinking an image to reasonable dimensions screws up message threads' appearance and readability. (This has also been done at LW, but not out of disruptive motives.)
~ Those posting adult/erotic or similar images -- and Legion-related ones do exist! -- are using material that is far harder than text to shield from younger children, unless a parent turns off all browser images.
Moreover, all images have to be hosted externally -- whether it's with Scott's own generosity, other private Webspaces, or a service such as MyWebpage at Netscape. A mod's deleting of a UBB "IMG" link does not delete the image itself, unlike with text.
Those were my major concerns: minimal definitions in advance, clarity of procedures, and a stronger rein on images due to their unique difficulties.
Posted by Kid Prime on :
This doesn't have much to do with moderators, but I have to agree with Greybird and say that folks who reply to an image post should be nice and delete the image out of it so that we don't have a repeated image on a thread slowing up those of us with slow internet connections.
Back to the moderation discussion!!!
Posted by Lightning Lad on :
This discussion has been very educational, at least for me, and I thank you all for sharing your opinions and thoughts.
When Rob offered (I did not ask) for me to be a mod at his place I accepted it. It was before he created the HQ and it was in the Comics area. He was not very forthcoming with any regulations for his mods, even then when I had told him upfront my message board experience was very slim (just the old DCMB) and I had no idea of what a moderator really does. But he was okay with that and let me have the job anyway. Not that my example there should be used as an example anywhere, just throwing that out.
I really do not want to have a lot of policing or regulation set up from the get go. Some points mentioned are quite valid and while I will not give a final answer until Gary and I have had time to fully discuss this, I will touch on a few of those that stuck in my mind. Forgive me if I don't quote the original author. I'm doing this more from memory because I'm at work and don't want to take a whole lot of time with this post right now.
Mods should have some tech experience. While this may help I really don't except some of the people I would consider a good mod to have to be programming geniuses. With 3 mods per board at least one should be semi-literate with how one operates. And I've already stated, I had no such background although I work with creating intranet content. I believe most if not all posters here have shown enough savvy to qualify as a moderator in my book. And Gary and I are here to help out if need be.
We should have a no holds barred area of the boards. I do not know if Gary considered this when he created Legion World or not. I think that with our relaxed atmosphere and number of boards available one of this type would be unnecessary. We already have a couple of spots (Mission Monitor Board and Totally Off-Topic!) where you can test board abilities and post on anything. If the general consensus is that we need an adult section (which I don't mind) or a place for posters to work out frustrations without hurting or involving others, Gary and I can decide to establish such a place.
Pictures. This one, like the number of posts per page, will always be a hot topic while we have posters, myself included, stuck with a dial up service. I believe Gary has stated already that we would like to limit image size to no more than 150K. An image that size at a full dial up speed of 56k will take roughly 20 to 30 seconds to download. That is quite a bit of time but time I think we can all deal with on a mb. But if someone were to reply with a quote and carry the same image it doesn't add more time as the image will be cached. It does create a lot of used up screen space though and I think that images need not be carried over in quoted comments. This is something that a moderator will be able to make a call on should posters complain about large images. Just the image, nothing more, can be excised from a post. In no way should any moderator be changing someone else's typewritten content. And I think this should apply to large images only. Ones like the image currently in the Who's Lighting Your Fire? thread are fine since the image size is about 12k.
As to adult oriented images, which I don't think any have been posted here yet, I do know Legion related ones existed. Hell some of the images that Tebra sells on eBay are a little adult even if the women are clothed. I hope that we don't have to worry about this but should it happen we will set up an area, probably the afore-mentioned no holds barred section, where you may post these Legion related images. I do not believe we need any non-Legion related adult images at all. If you want them, you can continue to visit Rob's place or the millions of other websites that have them.
Should anyone need a place to host an image or an image resized to post to a thread so it will fit better, do not hesitate to ask me for help. We have some room here to store images and I will gladly host any image at my site as well. If you cannot resize yourself then send them my way. I do not mind.
What is going to be considered spamming. This is a tougher question I really hesitate in answering. As I have already stated here and before, I do not want a police state, I don't want to spend my time playing cop and I don't want anyone here to feel restricted in their freedom to post. But should you post personally hateful or abusive comments about fellow board members (or creators who may be lurking) they will not be tolerated. That is not to say you cannot post a verbally challenging comment where you invite open discussion on why you hate how so and so posts or how Mr. X draws the Legion. I speak specifically of the intentional flaming of an individual. It is not needed here and should be addressed privately with the person(s) in question. Everyone, from Gary and myself on down, should feel free to bring any posts to our attention that they feel someone has personally attacked them in. We all make fun of each other and ourselves and sometimes will forget to nudge, nudge, wink, wink when such a post is made so it may be unintentional in nature but you should not feel threatened in anyway. This is Legion World. We are Legion. We are Family. Families can have disagreeances and do so regularly. Just ask Grey. But at the end of the day we should all come together and sip some Silver Ale or Kono juice and be friends.
Okay, got off track for a second. Besides the above mentioned abuse, I would also consider the intentional continual posting of an image that has been previously removed or a polite request has been made to not use as spam. We all know what I mean here. And it does not necessarily mean that image. Some images are fine for a post or two. But to see a full page of nothing but said image is a little much. Moderators can and will be encouraged if they feel the need to keep the peace, remove any such image. Again, just the image. The changing of another's post will not be tolerated by any individual, myself and Gary included. This isn't 1984 and Big Brother is only a show on CBS. I don't want to rewrite history and I expect everyone to respect that.
This has not happened as of yet and I hope (knock on wood) it doesn't. But should someone post links to outside sites that our not Legion related or for fun, I would consider that spamming as well. Okay, no adult site links please. I hope that is clear enough. I don't want you all to stop sharing your experiences and funny stories but I also don't want someone signing up just so they can promote their latest penis enlargement cream or their hot young (insert relative here). I get enough of this crap in my inbox no matter what AT&T states their spamming policy is. I don't want to come here and see the same thing.
I hope this helps address some of the concerns raised here. Once again, thanks to everyone who has taken the time to reply to my initial post and share their thoughts and comments. I'm going to let the discussion continue here for another few days to let others who have not spoken up have a chance. This coming weekend, should real life allow, I will begin a series of posts in each applicable board to start asking for moderator nominations.
Take care and continue to have fun.
Scott
Posted by Princess Crujectra on :
I don't think too big a fuss really needs to be made about moderating. As a rule, the LMBP (which really includes most, if not all, of the people that post here) have never really been a group that required much in the way of moderation. For the most part, we have usually moderated ourselves before even posting. The most that I would expect our moderators would need to do is the occasional tidying up that sometimes can occur (accidentally double posting, posting on the wrong thread, little things like that).
As far as length of office terms, 6 months seems adequate, although I disagree with the idea that no one should be elected to moderator status more than once a year. To be honest, the list of people both willing and able to do the job is probably not going to be a long one, and I think limiting ourselves in that way will only make the posts that much harder to fill.
My only sugestion might be to attempt to have the co-moderators be from different time zones, to to have them with different normal posting hours. No one can be here 24 hours a day, and if we had a "day shift" and "night shift" moderator, then the board would be better covered if the need arises. It's what I do with the LMBP YahooGroup. In addition to myself, I have one moderator from Europe, whose online time starts shortly after I've gone to bed. That way if a situation arises while I'm sleeping, there's someone there to handle it. Just a thought Posted by Eryk Davis Ester on :
Have I mentioned that I do not want to be a moderator?
Posted by Lightning Lad on :
quote:Originally posted by Eryk Davis Ester: Have I mentioned that I do not want to be a moderator?
You have but you have not said if you were serious or not. If you are serious then we'll place you on the list for those not wanting to be moderators.
Posted by Eryk Davis Ester on :
I think I WILL sit out the first round of elections, at least until I see how much work it actually ends up being.
Posted by Lightning Lad on :
Okay Eryk, I'll make a note of that.
And Princess I'm not ignoring your input, I just don't have time to give it the thought it deserves right now. When I get home from work in a few hours I'll post a response.
Posted by Princess Crujectra on :
quote:Originally posted by Lightning Lad: And Princess I'm not ignoring your input, I just don't have time to give it the thought it deserves right now. When I get home from work in a few hours I'll post a response.
No biggie... I don't feel slighted. I just like to participate Posted by Fat Cramer on :
Re; what's allowed and not - What about commercial promotion - selling something, Legion-related or not?
I don't have a firm opinion on this, and I don't have anything for sale - but I know it has been a problem on some other (not comics-related) MBs. At what point does the mod draw the line? My husband moderates a sailing group and his policy was to just prohibit any commercial promotion - a bit severe, but it was easier (and less time-consuming) than trying to judge the merits of each case.
There have been links to eBay sales for Legion-related items on other Legion boards - I find this interesting and useful, but it hasn't been too frequent either. Just raising this as a point to consider or discuss.
Posted by Blockade Boy on :
quote:Originally posted by Lightning Lad: If you cannot resize yourself then send them my way. I do not mind.
MMMmmmmmm!....nope, best to leave that one alone.
Posted by Lightning Lad on :
quote:Originally posted by Fat Cramer: Re; what's allowed and not - What about commercial promotion - selling something, Legion-related or not?
I don't have a firm opinion on this, and I don't have anything for sale - but I know it has been a problem on some other (not comics-related) MBs. At what point does the mod draw the line? My husband moderates a sailing group and his policy was to just prohibit any commercial promotion - a bit severe, but it was easier (and less time-consuming) than trying to judge the merits of each case.
There have been links to eBay sales for Legion-related items on other Legion boards - I find this interesting and useful, but it hasn't been too frequent either. Just raising this as a point to consider or discuss.
If you are selling homemade Legion (or any comic) related material then the answer would be no. DC really frowns on sites that have sales of items of their liscensed characters and they have been known to step in and shut down sites that promote this.
As to posting links to eBay, that is okay. eBay is the responsible part there and we are just providing links for our enjoyment.
If you guys want to set up a trading forum for comics and figures or whatever, we could do that. As long as it is explained up front that the site (or Gary and myself in particular) are not responsible/liable for sales or trades and are in no way profiting for said sales then we are safe.
Does that sound agreeable?
Posted by Nightcrawler on :
Very. Thanks, Scott.
My two cents…
In regards to what is spamming, spamming to me is posting the same topic over and over again with no regards to stimulating discussion. It’s posting a totally unrelated picture in a thread just to get attention and a negative reaction from your fellow posters. In both cases, I would hope that we the Administrators and Moderators would delete all but one of the threads and delete the post containing the picture or the picture within the post.
Examples of what’s NOT spam would be Lash, TD, FC and EDE doing post-a-thons as they usually stimulate discussions and rarely repeat themselves – Kid Prime, Greybird, rhino and Boy with Ultra Powers including pictures in their threads, since they are in threads pertaining to their subject matter (not cluttering anyone else’s conversations).
Now then, the topic of moving threads to a ‘holding area’ was raised. I don’t like that idea as I feel it would further clutter this MB (we already have fun & off-topic forums). I’d prefer that a Moderator would lock the offending thread and bring it to the attention of Scott and me. At which point, we’ll determine what to do with it and either unlock, move, or delete the thread ourselves.
Posted by Lightning Lad on :
All well and good with me Gary. I agree that locking any threads that mods may find offending and letting us know so a determination as to its fate can be made is the best course to take.
And finally to answer Princess Cru's input. While I like the idea of having a global set of moderators I'm not sure that it would be feasible at this early stage. I can only think of a couple off the top of my head that might except a nomination and that would be asking them to moderate more than one forum, if they were nominated for that forum. Once we grow a bit more in membership this would be a good goal to accomplish. For now, you'll have to settle with me being on line, day and night. I'm usually around from the time I get to work in the morning (5:30 am Mountain) until 2:30 pm and them from around 5:00 pm until Midnight (sometimes later).
I'm sticking with the 6 month term limits for now but am still mulling the limit of one term a year. It is another one that the factor of membership size and willing participants has a major effect on. For the start, I'll probably allow a mod to serve two terms in one year.
Again, thanks to everyone for their input. And if you know of someone who doesn't want to be considered or you don't want to be considered, please comment here about that. I'll put the names of those not wanting to participate in each of the nomination threads when I start them.
Posted by Fat Cramer on :
Since you asked, I'll state that I don't want to be a moderator. Not entirely to avoid responsiblity, but my computer is quirky and I can't always/reliably access some threads or boards.
Posted by Nightcrawler on :
That's a shame, FC. I think you and EDE would make excellent Moderators. I hope you both reconsider. The Moderator gig is for fun. Don't let all of this serious mumbo-jumbo scare you guys off. Also, your computer can't be anymore wacky than the one I'm using.
This message board was meant to be fun. I think some of you guys are taking things a little too seriously. Leave those tedious details to Lightning Lad .
Discaimer to the above statement: I really appreciate you guys caring enough to provide us with feedback. Thanks.
Posted by Lightning Lad on :
I, too, am sorry you do not want to be a moderator at this time Fat Cramer. But that does not mean you can't change your mind later on.
And I apologize if I seem to be sucking the fun out of this. I just want to be sure, especially on this issue, that everyone gets a chance to be heard.
Posted by Greybird on :
"Sucking the fun out"? Don't worry, amigo mio, you're not. It's better to thrash through some of these matters in advance, if possible. It prevents a lot of non-fun coming down later.
Posted by Kid Prime on :
I would just likr to go on record as stating that I think both Fat Cramer and EDE would do an excellent job as well.
Posted by Fat Cramer on :
Oh sure, KP. You don't think I see through your plans for the Transformer takeover of Legion World? You just want a wussy moderator like me to make it easy for you.
See, I'm already off topic. Back on topic:
As Grey stated, much better that things be settled, to the extent possible, up front. Good fences make good neighbours.
Posted by Faraway Lad on :
quote:Originally posted by Kid Prime: But with all the moderator elections going on, how are we ever going to find time to have Legion World Leader and Deputy Leader elections??? :-)
Elections?? Elections?? I say damn this experiment with democracy. Put Lightning Lad and Nightcrawler in as King Emperor's or tyrant/dictator. Pish with this listening to the plebs
Actually being serious for a min. Whilst I am all in favour of getting people in to help take some of the pressure off these two guys, Do we really need that many people as Mods. I dont know much about the mechanics of moderating (which i guess lets me out of the job) but unless there are, as was suggested, some guidlines will it not become a case of too many cooks?
Not serious concerns because I am happy to go with the flow. just random thoughts
Posted by Eryk Davis Ester on :
quote:Originally posted by Kid Prime: I would just likr to go on record as stating that I think both Fat Cramer and EDE would do an excellent job as well.
Thanks KP (and Nighty, too!), but really the whole Legion HQ thing scared me off from the moderator job for the time being. It turned out to be a MUCH bigger deal than I was expecting, and, while I've no doubt that these boards would be much easier, I don't want to take the chance of committing myself to more than I really can handle.
[ July 16, 2003, 10:41 PM: Message edited by: Eryk Davis Ester ]
Posted by MLLASH on :
Just now saw and read this thread!
Put me on the list of DON'T WANT TO BE A MODERATOR please!
What was really just a sweet gesture over at LHQ (being elected a Mod) became a 'net nightmare of monolithic proportions and I (as well as the other Mods) was caught between the "Why aren't you DOING something" and the "What the hell are you DOING?" rock and hard place. It was a Lose-Lose situation, and I don't like those.
I agree with Cru, the LMB has always been an excellent self-moderated forum and I am sure that will continue.
But I agree that Scott & Gary need others to help out and give them down-time, and there may come a time when LEGION WORLD may need defendng from 'net hooligans. There should be others who have the power to do that. Scott & Gary can't be everywhere.
Posted by Thriftshop Debutante on :
What Lash said.
Posted by Dave on :
Would board wide mods elected for a 6 month period be better than 1/3 of the registered users being mods be better?
Elect 3 - 5 board wide mods, and loosely assign areas to watch.
Or
Elect 1 mod for each forum, and up to 3 board mods.
At anothe board I moderate at, I've been a board mod, and it seems to be a little better for me than being a forum mod...I've done both, and have been an admin there...it gives you the ability to move/fix things when you see them, and provides more even coverage if one mod is away for a while.
Just some thoughts...
Posted by Kid Prime on :
I have to say that I think I agree with Dave/Dev on the number of mods, unless perhaps we are going to allow people, if voted in, to be mods on more than one board. That might cut down the numbers a bit.
Posted by Stu on :
I think being a moderator would be fun...
Posted by Lightning Lad on :
Well my weekend got pissed away and I didn't get a chance to even start this process. I'm going to give it another week for some more discussion and maybe get some more members in the group.
And I don't see a problem with letting someone moderate in more than one forum, as long as we don't have the same moderators in all forums.
Posted by Nightcrawler on :
Don't worry Scott, I don't think that this is a pressing issue.
Besides, as you stated, we have some more recruiting to do. Posted by MLLASH on :
quote:Originally posted by Stu: I think being a moderator would be fun...
Everything's fun until it bites a chunk of your ass off....
Posted by Stu on :
quote:Originally posted by MLLASH:
quote:Originally posted by Stu: I think being a moderator would be fun...
Everything's fun until it bites a chunk of your ass off....
There'll be no ass-biting in this forum, no sir.*
*Not unless specifically requested, that is.
Posted by Nightcrawler on :
Some of you may notice that we have moderators now. Those individuals have been drafted by me with Scott's consent. I have a few others who I'd like to give the title to as well, but for various reasons have decided not to.
I believe that we will still hold elections as most of the forums will have three advisors assigned to it. It's only a matter of time. Posted by Eryk Davis Ester on :
So what can moderators do?
Posted by Nightcrawler on :
Headline topics that they think should be headlined.
Delete duplicate topics.
Edit or delete excessive dupliclate posts.
Move any topic that seems totally unappropriate from their forum to the appropriate one.
Close topics that get out of hand, such as legitimate flame wars and such.
Remove any obvious spam from their forum.
Help any newbies out with features or problems while the founders are away.
Keep the founders aware of any questionable activities by the posters in their forums.
Just be the nice and wonderful posters that we know and love you as.
Posted by DrakeB3003 on :
quote:Originally posted by Nightcrawler:
Keep the founders aware of any questionable activities by the posters in their forums.
You mean as opposed to the usual questionable activities? Posted by DrakeB3003 on :
quote:Originally posted by Nightcrawler: Some of you may notice that we have moderators now.
Just curious -- how would anyone notice that? Is there a list or something?
Posted by Lightning Lad on :
quote:Originally posted by DrakeB3003:
quote:Originally posted by Nightcrawler: Some of you may notice that we have moderators now.
Just curious -- how would anyone notice that? Is there a list or something?
At the top of each forum it says "Moderated by:" and the name of the moderator. Take a look in the General Comic Books forum, upper left hand corner.
Posted by Nightcrawler on :
Scott and I haven't had to moderate much of anything around here. You guys can think of this as a useless title and don't worry too much about it.
I'm just trying to make up for the 30% post count loss you'll all be experiencing soon. Posted by Varalent on :
Gee, thanks so much! Now I know what Tenzil felt like. Well. all I can say is I hope I don't have to do a thing. Here's hoping!
Posted by Greybird on :
I'm sorry, but I find this development both disorienting and confusing.
The thread thus far had suggested strongly that you were going to have moderator elections. And now, you've decided to appoint them instead, but you'll still have elections?
I don't see much point in trying to do both. The entirely reasonable assumption in any election, now, is that you the founders are asking that the mods you've already chosen be elected. Or that you're saying, at least, that the two of you prefer these people to serve. Many voters will defer to your apparent wishes, simply out of the esteem we have for you. This, ironically, in turn makes an election rather pointless.
If you're choosing mods on talent, or friendship, or evident personality, or any other reason, that's always been your prerogative, and ought to be. And it's probably more useful, from what I've seen, in running a forum of this size.
If appointing moderators is how you want to do it, though, I would urge that you stick with it -- now that you've started to do so -- and not hold out the possibility of elections. That mixes up too many considerations, on the part of the founders (or on what's presumed of your motives) and on the part of the potential voters.
Posted by Nightcrawler on :
Okay, since you want me to elaborate a bit, here goes. This is in no way scientific. It basically comes down to a feeling I was having today. Like something bad was going to happen and neither Scott nor I would be here to help deal with it.
Sure enough, my computer crashed just as I was trying to discuss the moderator topic with Scott today. I was offline for several hours trying to get my computer to boot up for more than 5 seconds.
I'm an atheist, so I normally don't believe in omens. But, this one got me thinking and the result is a few posters were made advisors. The list of candidates is about as large as the number of posters here. Why some people weren't chosen and others were is about as scientific as the reason for the change in policy.
I still like the idea of some sort of election for the empty slots, but maybe we will or maybe we won't, I guess we'll find out together.
Posted by Princess Crujectra on :
I don't think there is anything wrong with appointing moderators, if only for the time being. As you said, your computer problems this weekend simply reinforced the need to have backups in place in case you were unable to be here. However, that doesn't mean that the people who are now moderators can't be replaced when or if you decide to have elections. They are simply there to fill the need until something different can be done.
Besides which, I really don't think there will be much that the moderators will have to do. We have a fairly responsible group of posters here, and I think that they will more or less moderate themselves. The most I see us doing is, as you say, deleting duplicate posts if someone asks or something along those lines.
Posted by Blockade Boy on :
Well I suppose we could have dressed up the appointments in the veil of an election. Worked for the US' first election.
I'd vote for
Princess Crujectra, Kid Prime Arachne, Eryk Davis Ester He Who Wanders Omni Craig Outdoor Miner, Varalent Mystery Lad SteveLightle no one DrakeB3003
Posted by Princess Crujectra on :
Works for me, so long as I get to hang out with Kid Prime. He has the most interesting toys Posted by Portfolio Boy on :
quote:Originally posted by Nightcrawler: Sure enough, my computer crashed just as I was trying to discuss the moderator topic with Scott today. I was offline for several hours trying to get my computer to boot up for more than 5 seconds.
You didn't crash, you've got a worm. We've been taking calls on this crap hot 'n heavy since about 3pm.
Posted by DrakeB3003 on :
quote:Originally posted by Portfolio Boy:
quote:Originally posted by Nightcrawler: Sure enough, my computer crashed just as I was trying to discuss the moderator topic with Scott today. I was offline for several hours trying to get my computer to boot up for more than 5 seconds.
You didn't crash, you've got a worm. We've been taking calls on this crap hot 'n heavy since about 3pm.
You too? I posted this on another thread, but I had that "RPC service terminated unexpectedly" thing then my computer has to reboot itself. The tech guy I called had me d/l something and so far, so good. He also told me he'd been flooded with calls today, but this has actually happened twice before the past couple days. Then today it was constant.
I'm sure you're busy explaining this all day PB, but when you have time can you let us know what this worm is and what happened? (assuming you or anyone even has a clue)
Posted by Princess Crujectra on :
I was getting it too when I got home tonight. I was getting the RPC error, and I managed to stay on the computer long enough to look it up in the help topics. I said it had something to do with a problem connecting with the host to check for new emails. So, I called my provider's support team, and got a recording that this was a Windows problem, and they gave me the link on my ISP's site to tell me how to fix the problem. I think it has something to do with firewalls.
Basically, I had to go into Control Panel and select Network and Internet Connection Wizard. Then I had to click the link to Setup or Change my connection. Then I just had to set it up that my computer connected directly to the internet, and select which setup included my modem. Now, don't quote me on this, cuz I THINK that's all I had to do, but I'm not for sure. My advice if you're having this problem is to call your internet service provider and ask for direction.
Knock wood, it seems to be working so far, but I'll tell ya it made me nervous because I know NOTHING about computers, and I'm always scared to death that I'm going to do something wrong and mess up the computer more.
I hope this fixed it... Posted by Kid Prime on :
Princess, there's a patch available for download that will prevent your system from being corrupted. If you haven't gotten it yet, please do. The URL is over on Sanity's thread about this topic.
Oh, and you can play with my toys anytime. Just take good care of them. Posted by Portfolio Boy on :
quote:Originally posted by DrakeB3003: I'm sure you're busy explaining this all day PB, but when you have time can you let us know what this worm is and what happened? (assuming you or anyone even has a clue)
Before I left work my explaining was mostly of the variety of "it is a known issue effecting your Windows operating syste, and our technitions are working on a resolution."
Which, of course, was tech support code for "Dude, it's not a problem with our service so quite yelling at me and oh, by the way, if you freaks would stop calling I could get back to me websurfing and Legion World posting."
And here is the Dept. of Homeland Security Warning from July 30th that none of us knew about.... D'OH!
Posted by Poverty Lad on :
While I'm happy my OS (Windows Me) apparently is unaffected by this, I haveta ask-- does anybody know why?
Not to look a gift horse in the mouth, but why NT, 2000 and XP, but not Me-- which I thought was derived from Win2000? Posted by Sanity or Madness? on :
quote:Originally posted by Poverty Lad: While I'm happy my OS (Windows Me) apparently is unaffected by this, I haveta ask-- does anybody know why?
Not to look a gift horse in the mouth, but why NT, 2000 and XP, but not Me-- which I thought was derived from Win2000?
ME's basically 98 with direct access to DOS ripped out (its still at the OS core). NT, which 2000 and XP are based on (2000's NT5, XP's NT5.1) isn't DOS-based at all.
Posted by Poverty Lad on :
Cool, thanks. G'night, SoM ! Posted by Portfolio Boy on :
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Chameleon Boy]](graemlins/ChameleonBoy.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Phantom Girl]](graemlins/PhantomGirl.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
That's a shame, FC. I think you and EDE would make excellent Moderators. I hope you both reconsider. The Moderator gig is for fun. Don't let all of this serious mumbo-jumbo scare you guys off. Also, your computer can't be anymore wacky than the one I'm using.
![[Evil]](graemlins/devil.gif)
![[Invisible Kid]](graemlins/InvisibleKid.gif)