Harmonic's Speel on the Forums' Future

[Harmonic Revelations 8,835]

So, let me start out by saying that I love these forums, these forums have one of the most varied and lovely communities out there, but now let me continue and say that it has some serious problems. Problems that need to be addressed.

Let me also start out by saying that I will never give up on this community, I will continue participating in and helping this community until I have been put in the ground. So don't worry about this by thinking that it is that type of posts. This is more like a long string of feedback.

The first thing I'd like to mention is that for the longevity of the forums, the "Address problems when we feel like it" model of operation will not work out in the long run. Don't laugh or think that's some kind of joke or poking fun at the forums, that kind of thing actually works on a small scale, but as the forum grows, more systematic moderation will be required to simply keep up with the amount of content being produced. I would recommend making some kind of system where there is at least one moderator always online, maybe by hiring moderator from varied time zones this will work out.

Another thing I've noticed is that the Administration does not seem to take the recent problems with the forums' public image very seriously. That is unfortunate, because unless we take steps to enhance that public image, the forums will simply become more and more hated, and users will keep leaving. I recommend we fix this by hiring some kind of section of site-staff meant specifically to address problems with public image. They could do trivial things that in the long run will make the forums look better publicity wise.

This solution might not seem necessary, but think about it, do you know how many more users, would, for example, stay on the website if we had staff members that helped them at home by doing things like replying to their welcoming plaza posts, handling issues with name changing so that the Admins do not have to. I would think they'd be a step from between Poniverse staff and moderation. You might think of this as trivial but keep in mind that this would help the mods and Admins by freeing up their time that they would have spent on trivial things like this.

Some recommended titles might be things like "Community Representative" or something similar that gives people the idea that these users represent the things that the forums are really about.

On to the next problem, inconsistencies in rule enforcement. It should not be set up in such a way that several minor infractions could lead to permanent bans. An example would be making it so that the most ban time a minor offense like backseat moderation or pointless/off topic could only add up to a week ban maximum, while excessive vulgarity could add up to a month maximum, and so on. You might say that users could abuse this, but here's the thing, I don't mean that it could never end up perma banning a user, I simply mean that the severity and intent of an action should be considered. Somebody well-intentioned should not be banned permanently for the site because they simply don't understand what they're doing.

In addition,this would help silence those who say things like "It's so easy to get permabanned here", and again, this would help the forums' public image. We should only be perma-banning long time-repeat offenders if they commit minor violations and permabanning extreme things like those who post NSFW content or trolls, etc.


The last problem I would like to address is the staff-selection process. The problem is that only staff have a say on somebody's promotion into the staff. The reason this system will fail in the long run is that it means that if it gets to a point where there are a lot of bad mods/admins, no good mods/admins will get added. In the long run, a better alternative would be user-nomination by other members, and then the staff would vote on these nominations.

That way, the public could express their support for a user's promotion, but the staff would still have the ultimate say in the matter. There should be some kind of fail-safe in case of staff corruption where if the general user consent is that this user should be promoted, they will be forced to at least acknowledge the vote by getting a notification. This way they will know if it's a good time to make a final decision.

 

That way, the staff will not become a completely totalitarian 'Cool kids table' type high school-clique like it would if the staff can only grow by it's own will to do so.

I mean, if a user isn't cut out for the job, they can always be demoted at any time. But we should at least give them a shot if the community in general believes they deserve a chance. I mean, the forums needs to put at least some trust in the judgement of it's own members, otherwise, the staff team will seem detached and distant, thus further decaying the public's perspective of said staff team.

-----------


In closure, I would like to say that these steps would ultimately help the forums and continue to help it grow and prosper, as opposed to stagnate (Even if the start of Season 4 makes the forums become more active, unless steps are taken, our increasing negative reputation will do much harm) like it is currently starting to do.

I am very passionate about this community, and am just worried about it, I want to see it continue to grow and expand it's horizons. I remain cautious but optimistic that the forum can become even better if only we set it on the right path.

I love you guys, and want nothing more than to have this forum continue to succeed for years to come.


-Harmonic 

Edited August 29, 2013 by Harmonic Revelations

[Batbrony 16,055]

Very well formulated, lots of good ideas here (a couple of which have even crossed my mind).  Here's hoping the staff take some of these suggestions into serious consideration, simply for the sake of the forums.  Also, good on you Harmonic for taking the time to type out your concerns and share them with the rest of us; that sense of duty and responsibility to the forums is the mark of a truly good, well-meaning, and valuable member of our community.  You have my thanks, endorsement, and support.   

 

[Marcato 2,143]

I would like to respond to each paragraph with a paragraph, because I like writing and have some opinions I would like to share. :3

 

 

 

So, let me start out by saying that I love these forums, these forums have one of the most varied and lovely communities out there, but now let me continue and say that it has some serious problems. Problems that need to be addressed.

 

I personally have noticed these problems in the past first hand, and I've seen it from a staffers perspective. They haven't gone unnoticed.

 

 

 

Let me also start out by saying that I will never give up on this community, I will continue participating in and helping this community until I have been put in the ground. So don't worry about this by thinking that it is that type of posts. This is more like a long string of feedback.

 

I believe it's excellent that you're speaking up like this, because to be frank, I think the staff (myself included) needed a good post like this.

 

 

 

The first thing I'd like to mention is that for the longevity of the forums, the "Address problems when we feel like it" model of operation will not work out in the long run. Don't laugh or think that's some kind of joke or poking fun at the forums, that kind of thing actually works on a small scale, but as the forum grows, more systematic moderation will be required to simply keep up with the amount of content being produced. I would recommend making some kind of system where there is at least one moderator always online, maybe by hiring moderator from varied time zones this will work out.

 

This is actually... really difficult to do believe it or not. We've made efforts in the past to spread out staff and timezones, but it's proven fairly difficult. Continually active staff members are hard to come by, and it's for this reason that there are occasional blank spots. 

 

Many of us on the forums that have been here a while are probably used to lightning fast moderation when something crops up. On other forums this is not the case. While a great commodity, it's not something that can remain consistent as the user count increases. Those blank spots in the day become more apparent, and this can't be helped really. 

 

"Addressing problems when we feel like it" could be easily translated to "Addressing problems when we have time." There are many staff that have jobs, and they often will pop on the forums with their mobile just to have a peek. They really can't do much from there, because 1. They're at their paying job and 2. The mobile theme is extremely annoying for moderation. (And we all know how well the desktop theme runs on mobile.)

 

 

 

Another thing I've noticed is that the Administration does not seem to take the recent problems with the forums' public image very seriously. That is unfortunate, because unless we take steps to enhance that public image, the forums will simply become more and more hated, and users will keep leaving. I recommend we fix this by hiring some kind of section of site-staff meant specifically to address problems with public image. They could do trivial things that in the long run will make the forums look better publicity wise.

 

I con confirm that yes, the forums public image hasn't been as good as it used to be, but again it's a difficult thing to maintain. It's an uphill climb sometimes trying to calm down an angered or upset member with the staff. If they took any form of moderation action it would fuel the flame for not only the angered user, but others eating up what he/she is saying about the staff. We've come across this multiple times and it's extremely hard to work around.

 

The concept of staff focusing on public image has in some ways already happened. (If unintentionally.) I've frequently made an effort to help out with this sort of thing and try to frequent blog entries and posts with what I was mentioning before. Others like ~CD~ and some of the other administrators do this as well.

 

 

 

This solution might not seem necessary, but think about it, do you know how many more users, would, for example, stay on the website if we had staff members that helped them at home by doing things like replying to their welcoming plaza posts, handling issues with name changing so that the Admins do not have to. I would think they'd be a step from between Poniverse staff and moderation. You might think of this as trivial but keep in mind that this would help the mods and Admins by freeing up their time that they would have spent on trivial things like this.

 

That's pretty fair, but not everyone likes posting in the welcome plaza and often people don't *keep* posting there for a long time. Even then if we keep adding new member groups it gets crowded and confusing, something many staff members have displayed a disliking to. (And users as well.)

 

Although I would still say it's something up for consideration. Poniverse Staff is pretty much a global 'not moderators, but they do work around here' rank. We might be able to do something like this.

 

 

 

Some recommended titles might be things like "Community Representative" or something similar that gives people the idea that these users represent the things that the forums are really about.

 

 

I can see potential in that. Making it clear that these people voice for MLP Forums in of itself could raise thoughts on it.

 

 

 

On to the next problem, inconsistencies in rule enforcement. It should not be set up in such a way that several minor infractions could lead to permanent bans. An example would be making it so that the most ban time a minor offense like backseat moderation or pointless/off topic could only add up to a week ban maximum, while excessive vulgarity could add up to a month maximum, and so on. You might say that users could abuse this, but here's the thing, I don't mean that it could never end up perma banning a user, I simply mean that the severity and intent of an action should be considered. Somebody well-intentioned should not be banned permanently for the site because they simply don't understand what they're doing.

 

I can actually see the trouble with this, and to be honest I... never really paid much attention to this system being a Poniverse Staff. I have displayed a little concern in the past about communication between staff members before performing an action, and I believe this should be taken into discussion. The warning point system does have flaws, like most set-in-stone systems, but I think these could be worked out with some time. (If it's available.)

 

 

 

In addition,this would help silence those who say things like "It's so easy to get permabanned here", and again, this would help the forums' public image. We should only be perma-banning long time-repeat offenders if they commit minor violations and permabanning extreme things like those who post NSFW content or trolls, etc.

 

Yes, that makes plenty of sense. (See above response. )

 

 

 

The last problem I would like to address is the staff-selection process. The problem is that only staff have a say on somebody's promotion into the staff. The reason this system will fail in the long run is that it means that if it gets to a point where there are a lot of bad mods/admins, no good mods/admins will get added. In the long run, a better alternative would be user-nomination by other members, and then the staff would vote on these nominations.

 

Oooooh staff selection... this is a fun one.

The reason only staff have a say in this is because we have 15,000+ users. While this could be used for a collective vote (followed by a staff vote) this can cause other issues as well, with users getting nominated by the member base, then not getting in. Some people may not take this well and get upset, and on top of that other users voting for said person may get upset causing all sorts of uproar.

 

 

 

That way, the public could express their support for a user's promotion, but the staff would still have the ultimate say in the matter. There should be some kind of fail-safe in case of staff corruption where if the general user consent is that this user should be promoted, they will be.

 

Thiiiiis could get bad... really, really fast. You might have expected a negative response to this (or not?) but here's the thing.

 

Staff corruption is frequently nipped in the bud, and attempted to be dealt with before it gets too big. (Normally it's noticed before it starts taking hold.) But regardless this 'fail-safe' really wouldn't be a fail safe, since the admins and moderators hold the final control anyways whether the community likes it or not.

 

Even then, a failsafe like this could turn into a popularity contest and not a skillset/ability vote extremely quickly.

 

 

 

That way, the staff will not become a completely totalitarian 'Cool kids table' type high school-clique like it would if the staff can only grow by it's own will to do so.

 

Now this was never the intention. If you think that our staff members are chosen by popularity or how 'cool' they are go take a look at Poniverse Staff's listing... x) Many of them don't have many posts at all, because they were brought on from elsewhere for example.

 

On top of that, most moderators, it can't be helped that they 'appear popular' by post counts and brohooves, because it's only natural that the more they post, the more they're seen and display who they are. The better the staff knows the person, the better a decision they can make, and MLP Forums is always trying their best to make good decisions.

 

 

 

I mean, if a user isn't cut out for the job, they can always be demoted at any time. But we should at least give them a shot if the community in general believes they deserve a chance. I mean, the forums needs to put at least some trust in the judgement of it's own members, otherwise, the staff team will seem detached and distant, thus further decaying the public's perspective of said staff team.

 

 

There is no denying that the staff appear distant and detached. Many (if not most) of the staff don't have much involvement in the community to begin with, something that many find difficult to do. I've promoted staff involvement many times, and some have made efforts (including myself) to get more involved, but alas the repeated phrase that kills us all... 'we have lives.' It's been said hundreds of times and is probably starting to look like an excuse, but really it couldn't be more true. For example, I have school coming up soon, and during the summers I spend all my time working on music composition, writing, spending time with friends and coding. There are certain things we prefer; or need, to prioritize above the forums.

 

 

 

In closure, I would like to say that these steps would ultimately help the forums and continue to help it grow and prosper, as opposed to stagnate (Even if the start of Season 4 makes the forums become more active, unless steps are taken, our increasing negative reputation will do much harm) like it is currently starting to do.

 

I am very passionate about this community, and am just worried about it, I want to see it continue to grow and expand it's horizons. I remain cautious but optimistic that the forum can become even better if only we set it on the right path.

 

I love you guys, and want nothing more than to have this forum continue to succeed for years to come.

 

Your words will *not* go unheard. I assure you. You've made some very clear points that I think should be fully discussed in detail in the near future. Your motives are strong, and I feel quite similarly. Perhaps I'm not quite as vocal or assertive. Either way I'd like to say (if I may) thank you on behalf of the staff of MLP Forums for this in depth feedback article.

[Harmonic Revelations 8,835]

I would like to respond to each paragraph with a paragraph, because I like writing and have some opinions I would like to share. :3

 

 

 

 

I personally have noticed these problems in the past first hand, and I've seen it from a staffers perspective. They haven't gone unnoticed.

 

 

 

 

I believe it's excellent that you're speaking up like this, because to be frank, I think the staff (myself included) needed a good post like this.

 

 

 

 

This is actually... really difficult to do believe it or not. We've made efforts in the past to spread out staff and timezones, but it's proven fairly difficult. Continually active staff members are hard to come by, and it's for this reason that there are occasional blank spots. 

 

Many of us on the forums that have been here a while are probably used to lightning fast moderation when something crops up. On other forums this is not the case. While a great commodity, it's not something that can remain consistent as the user count increases. Those blank spots in the day become more apparent, and this can't be helped really. 

 

"Addressing problems when we feel like it" could be easily translated to "Addressing problems when we have time." There are many staff that have jobs, and they often will pop on the forums with their mobile just to have a peek. They really can't do much from there, because 1. They're at their paying job and 2. The mobile theme is extremely annoying for moderation. (And we all know how well the desktop theme runs on mobile.)

 

 

 

 

I con confirm that yes, the forums public image hasn't been as good as it used to be, but again it's a difficult thing to maintain. It's an uphill climb sometimes trying to calm down an angered or upset member with the staff. If they took any form of moderation action it would fuel the flame for not only the angered user, but others eating up what he/she is saying about the staff. We've come across this multiple times and it's extremely hard to work around.

 

The concept of staff focusing on public image has in some ways already happened. (If unintentionally.) I've frequently made an effort to help out with this sort of thing and try to frequent blog entries and posts with what I was mentioning before. Others like ~CD~ and some of the other administrators do this as well.

 

 

 

 

That's pretty fair, but not everyone likes posting in the welcome plaza and often people don't *keep* posting there for a long time. Even then if we keep adding new member groups it gets crowded and confusing, something many staff members have displayed a disliking to. (And users as well.)

 

Although I would still say it's something up for consideration. Poniverse Staff is pretty much a global 'not moderators, but they do work around here' rank. We might be able to do something like this.

 

 

 

 

 

I can see potential in that. Making it clear that these people voice for MLP Forums in of itself could raise thoughts on it.

 

 

 

 

I can actually see the trouble with this, and to be honest I... never really paid much attention to this system being a Poniverse Staff. I have displayed a little concern in the past about communication between staff members before performing an action, and I believe this should be taken into discussion. The warning point system does have flaws, like most set-in-stone systems, but I think these could be worked out with some time. (If it's available.)

 

 

 

 

Yes, that makes plenty of sense. (See above response. )

 

 

 

 

Oooooh staff selection... this is a fun one.

The reason only staff have a say in this is because we have 15,000+ users. While this could be used for a collective vote (followed by a staff vote) this can cause other issues as well, with users getting nominated by the member base, then not getting in. Some people may not take this well and get upset, and on top of that other users voting for said person may get upset causing all sorts of uproar.

 

 

 

 

Thiiiiis could get bad... really, really fast. You might have expected a negative response to this (or not?) but here's the thing.

 

Staff corruption is frequently nipped in the bud, and attempted to be dealt with before it gets too big. (Normally it's noticed before it starts taking hold.) But regardless this 'fail-safe' really wouldn't be a fail safe, since the admins and moderators hold the final control anyways whether the community likes it or not.

 

Even then, a failsafe like this could turn into a popularity contest and not a skillset/ability vote extremely quickly.

 

 

 

 

Now this was never the intention. If you think that our staff members are chosen by popularity or how 'cool' they are go take a look at Poniverse Staff's listing... x) Many of them don't have many posts at all, because they were brought on from elsewhere for example.

 

On top of that, most moderators, it can't be helped that they 'appear popular' by post counts and brohooves, because it's only natural that the more they post, the more they're seen and display who they are. The better the staff knows the person, the better a decision they can make, and MLP Forums is always trying their best to make good decisions.

 

 

 

 

 

There is no denying that the staff appear distant and detached. Many (if not most) of the staff don't have much involvement in the community to begin with, something that many find difficult to do. I've promoted staff involvement many times, and some have made efforts (including myself) to get more involved, but alas the repeated phrase that kills us all... 'we have lives.' It's been said hundreds of times and is probably starting to look like an excuse, but really it couldn't be more true. For example, I have school coming up soon, and during the summers I spend all my time working on music composition, writing, spending time with friends and coding. There are certain things we prefer; or need, to prioritize above the forums.

 

 

 

 

Your words will *not* go unheard. I assure you. You've made some very clear points that I think should be fully discussed in detail in the near future. Your motives are strong, and I feel quite similarly. Perhaps I'm not quite as vocal or assertive. Either way I'd like to say (if I may) thank you on behalf of the staff of MLP Forums for this in depth feedback article.

I must have worded the whole failsafe thing poorly. I meant it more as "The staff would be forced to come to a final decision on the candidate" and not "They skip the decision making process", like if somebody had enough votes, the staff would get a notification about it so that they would know it's a good time to make a final decision on the matter. The staff would still decide, but it would be harder for them to just, say, ignore the votes completely if it got brought to their attention.

 

Sorry for my poor choice of words.

 

 

Also on the whole staff focused on Public image, the thing is, even if the normal staff are doing this, it is likely taking time away from things that might more urgently need their attention, it would be good to have a few staff members who just really devote their time to focusing on public image without having to worry about taking time away from important things like moderation and maintenance.

Edited August 29, 2013 by Harmonic Revelations

[Creamy Arty 6,252]

Actually, I'd guess about 40% of all HR said are things we discussed/are considering. Some trivial things such as changing names have been made non-trivial by IPB. You'd think it a simple thing, but it can only be done in the admin CP. This is probably the case for several ideas that have crossed lots of people's minds. :/

 

 

Since I'm on my phone at work, I'll have to wait until this evening to go into any more detail on any of this. Sorry. Nice post though, and the feedback is appreciated. Just wanted to at least acknowledge that since I had a minute. It's kind of annoying I can't use my computer here, but it is what it is. I have a feeling Marcato's huge ass post that I can't see covers much.

[Princess Periwinkle 3,775]

I agree with the majority of this post and I'd like to thank you for taking the time to express your concerns. However, I would like to give a counterargument to your last point.

 

 

The last problem I would like to address is the staff-selection process. The problem is that only staff have a say on somebody's promotion into the staff. The reason this system will fail in the long run is that it means that if it gets to a point where there are a lot of bad mods/admins, no good mods/admins will get added. In the long run, a better alternative would be user-nomination by other members, and then the staff would vote on these nominations.

 

This suggestion has been shot down numerous times on this thread. I am under the opinion that this is Feld0's forums, and I trust that he will do his job to be in control of the mod recruiting process. He'll always be at the end of the line in case the quality of the moderators goes downhill.

 

 

 

I mean, if a user isn't cut out for the job, they can always be demoted at any time

 

But it also wouldn't look good in the public eye for moderators to keep getting demoted if they don't fit.

 

 

That way, the staff will not become a completely totalitarian 'Cool kids table' type high school-clique like it would if the staff can only grow by it's own will to do so.

 

In my opinion we have enough level-headed people in administration to not let people with this attitude on staff.

[Harmonic Revelations 8,835]

I agree with the majority of this post and I'd like to thank you for taking the time to express your concerns. However, I would like to give a counterargument to your last point.

 

 

 

This suggestion has been shot down numerous times on this thread. I am under the opinion that this is Feld0's forums, and I trust that he will do his job to be in control of the mod recruiting process. He'll always be at the end of the line in case the quality of the moderators goes downhill.

 

 

 

 

But it also wouldn't look good in the public eye for moderators to keep getting demoted if they don't fit.

 

 

 

In my opinion we have enough level-headed people in administration to not let people with this attitude on staff.

On the point of Feld0, it's not that I don't trust his judgement, it's that as the forum grows, it will be less and less efficient (and even less plausible) for him to personally see every staff addition and maintain the rest of Poniverse at the same time.

 

If the moderators get demoted because they don't fit it would not look bad in the users' eyes as the public would be at least partly responsible for giving these individuals a chance to be staff in the first plaace.

 

But that's the thing, sometimes it's not obvious if people have that kind of attitude or not. If it's kept internal, and is for the most part unnoticeable, it still has a negative impact on the quality of the staff team.

Edited August 29, 2013 by Harmonic Revelations

[Twilight Sparkle ✨ 8,527]

It may not look the part (yet), but we're currently working on streamlining and overhauling much of our internal management. Traditionally, we've been a singular forum community, but we're now transitioning into the Poniverse network. There's a first time for a lot of things, and maintaining this community has always been a learning process with its ups and downs. Harmy, I just want to say thanks for being patient with us throughout this process and pointing out some things that aren't working as well as they could be.

On moderator selections... we actually tried a rather unorthodox method last time that was mostly software-based, and the results were fantastic. Choosing between letting staff nominate their picks or a democratic process involving the community at large is really just picking the lesser of two evils: either group's picks will be skewed by members they personally feel closest to, which is orthagonal to one's actual ability to moderate the community.

Last time we promoted a new round of moderators, we queried the database for users who were active in particular sections at particular times of the day. This resulted in a "shortlist" from which the administration made its final picks. We found many new names on that list who proved to be great people to work with, and whom we otherwise would never have known about; and this process gets about as close to eliminating personal bias as we can get. We will probably employ this method of moderator selection in the future again because it worked great last time.

This post is already way too long for my phone... I will return to this thread later.

[Aura 120]

If Harmonic's idea on picking staff doesn't feel like the best choice, then I would like to recommend an alternative.  On another message board I frequent, the moderators have multiple ranks.  From the top down, there is the Owner, Administrator(s), Global Mods, and Local Mods.  I'll explain what I know about each position --besides the most obvious.

 

Local Mods are moderators of specific forums.  Yes, the message board is so big that moderators have to be assigned certain areas.  They can move, open and close threads, and they can even ban members from their specific forums.  Openings for this position are held either on an as needed basis or when the higher-ups want to wipe the slate clean.  If a member meets certain requirements, he or she can send the Global Mods (explained below).  Anyone applying to be a Local Mod needs to show the current staff that they have what it takes.

 

Global Mods have power over the entire board.  They can do everything Locals can, but they have they authority to ban members --temporarily or permanently-- from the entire message board.  Global Mods also have the authority to vote on who can become a Local Mod.  Global Mods have already proven their dedication to promoting the message board's values.

 

Administrator(s) have authority over everyone on the website with the exception of the Owner.  Rarely does this message board have any Administrators as they can only be appointed by the Owner.

 

Owner owns you.  Don't ask questions.   :comeatus:

 

This is merely a suggestion.  If you have any questions about this system, feel free to ask.  Although I never was a staff member, I have been a well-trusted member for over 2 1/2 years.

[Harmonic Revelations 8,835]

If Harmonic's idea on picking staff doesn't feel like the best choice, then I would like to recommend an alternative.  On another message board I frequent, the moderators have multiple ranks.  From the top down, there is the Owner, Administrator(s), Global Mods, and Local Mods.  I'll explain what I know about each position --besides the most obvious.

 

Local Mods are moderators of specific forums.  Yes, the message board is so big that moderators have to be assigned certain areas.  They can move, open and close threads, and they can even ban members from their specific forums.  Openings for this position are held either on an as needed basis or when the higher-ups want to wipe the slate clean.  If a member meets certain requirements, he or she can send the Global Mods (explained below).  Anyone applying to be a Local Mod needs to show the current staff that they have what it takes.

 

Global Mods have power over the entire board.  They can do everything Locals can, but they have they authority to ban members --temporarily or permanently-- from the entire message board.  Global Mods also have the authority to vote on who can become a Local Mod.  Global Mods have already proven their dedication to promoting the message board's values.

 

Administrator(s) have authority over everyone on the website with the exception of the Owner.  Rarely does this message board have any Administrators as they can only be appointed by the Owner.

 

Owner owns you.  Don't ask questions.   :comeatus:

 

This is merely a suggestion.  If you have any questions about this system, feel free to ask.  Although I never was a staff member, I have been a well-trusted member for over 2 1/2 years.

We actually used to have that exact system, it was just recently that all section mods became global mods.

Edited August 29, 2013 by Harmonic Revelations

[Nohbdy 4,108]

If Harmonic's idea on picking staff doesn't feel like the best choice, then I would like to recommend an alternative.  On another message board I frequent, the moderators have multiple ranks.  From the top down, there is the Owner, Administrator(s), Global Mods, and Local Mods.  I'll explain what I know about each position --besides the most obvious.

 

Local Mods are moderators of specific forums.  Yes, the message board is so big that moderators have to be assigned certain areas.  They can move, open and close threads, and they can even ban members from their specific forums.  Openings for this position are held either on an as needed basis or when the higher-ups want to wipe the slate clean.  If a member meets certain requirements, he or she can send the Global Mods (explained below).  Anyone applying to be a Local Mod needs to show the current staff that they have what it takes.

 

Global Mods have power over the entire board.  They can do everything Locals can, but they have they authority to ban members --temporarily or permanently-- from the entire message board.  Global Mods also have the authority to vote on who can become a Local Mod.  Global Mods have already proven their dedication to promoting the message board's values.

 

Administrator(s) have authority over everyone on the website with the exception of the Owner.  Rarely does this message board have any Administrators as they can only be appointed by the Owner.

 

Owner owns you.  Don't ask questions.   :comeatus:

 

This is merely a suggestion.  If you have any questions about this system, feel free to ask.  Although I never was a staff member, I have been a well-trusted member for over 2 1/2 years.

I may address the OP at a later time, but I'll make a quick response to your suggestion here.

 

The "Local Mod" and "Global Mod" system was what we used to have. We had Sectional Moderators who patrolled certain areas of the forums, and Global Moderators who patrolled the general community, including blogs and statuses. This was effective in encouraging focus on certain areas of the site, but had the disadvantage of restricting rule enforcement on a general level. 

 

In recent months, the staff abolished the distinction between Global and Sectional Moderators. The moderators continue to patrol their primary sections (chosen by activity), but are now able to deal with issues elsewhere, should the need arise. Very little is lost, but much is gained. 

 

Ultimately, moderation is the same regardless of section (the primary difference being familiarity with a certain part of the forums), and clear distinctions between roles serve only to limit the effectiveness of the team. 

 

For more details, please see this announcement.

[SCS 7,537]

Thank you for taking the time to make your post, Harmonic Revelations. I and the rest of the staff love this community, and I can assure you that we will do everything we can to address concerns raised by the community.

 

I also want to see this forum go as far in the right direction as it possibly can. I love this forum and everyone here. I will do everything I can as a member of the staff to ensure that the community's concerns are addressed, and that the staff continually strives for self-improvement to make the community as happy as possible.

 

 

The first thing I'd like to mention is that for the longevity of the forums, the "Address problems when we feel like it" model of operation will not work out in the long run. Don't laugh or think that's some kind of joke or poking fun at the forums, that kind of thing actually works on a small scale, but as the forum grows, more systematic moderation will be required to simply keep up with the amount of content being produced. I would recommend making some kind of system where there is at least one moderator always online, maybe by hiring moderator from varied time zones this will work out.

@PlasticHelix was recently hired to be our Project Manager. He will be in charge of making sure that there is a set schedule for all projects that we need to tackle, and that they are completed in a timely manner. He is studying business in college, and from what I have seen of him so far, he is certainly qualified to be the Project Manager for Poniverse. He is working to change our current model of operation into a much more systematic and efficient one.

 

I feel that it would be a good idea for there to be at least one moderator or administrator online 24/7, but I do not know when it would be reasonable to expect that of the staff. We are all volunteers, and most of us have academic and/or work responsibilities that come first. From what I have seen, at least one moderator or administrator seems to be online most of the time. If we ever did get to the point where it would be essential to have at least one moderator or administrator online at all times, then we would most likely need to hire more staff in order to make that goal reasonable to accomplish.

 

 

Another thing I've noticed is that the Administration does not seem to take the recent problems with the forums' public image very seriously. That is unfortunate, because unless we take steps to enhance that public image, the forums will simply become more and more hated, and users will keep leaving. I recommend we fix this by hiring some kind of section of site-staff meant specifically to address problems with public image. They could do trivial things that in the long run will make the forums look better publicity wise.

 

This solution might not seem necessary, but think about it, do you know how many more users, would, for example, stay on the website if we had staff members that helped them at home by doing things like replying to their welcoming plaza posts, handling issues with name changing so that the Admins do not have to. I would think they'd be a step from between Poniverse staff and moderation. You might think of this as trivial but keep in mind that this would help the mods and Admins by freeing up their time that they would have spent on trivial things like this.

 

Some recommended titles might be things like "Community Representative" or something similar that gives people the idea that these users represent the things that the forums are really about.

From what I have seen, the administrators do take these problems seriously. But, if that is not apparent to the users, then that is a problem that needs to be addressed. We will be implementing the user satisfaction survey that I suggested within the near future to help analyze and increase community satisfaction. Also, we have recently added a Public Relations section to the staff, which is lead by @~Chaotic Discord~. This section is explained on the who does what here FAQ entry. Perhaps this section of the staff could be expanded to include staff members whose sole job it is to deal with public relations matters that do not require access to the Admin Control Panel. However, I do not feel that a new tier of staff would be necessary - a subsection within Poniverse Staff would suffice.

 

 

On to the next problem, inconsistencies in rule enforcement. It should not be set up in such a way that several minor infractions could lead to permanent bans. An example would be making it so that the most ban time a minor offense like backseat moderation or pointless/off topic could only add up to a week ban maximum, while excessive vulgarity could add up to a month maximum, and so on. You might say that users could abuse this, but here's the thing, I don't mean that it could never end up perma banning a user, I simply mean that the severity and intent of an action should be considered. Somebody well-intentioned should not be banned permanently for the site because they simply don't understand what they're doing.

 

In addition,this would help silence those who say things like "It's so easy to get permabanned here", and again, this would help the forums' public image. We should only be perma-banning long time-repeat offenders if they commit minor violations and permabanning extreme things like those who post NSFW content or trolls, etc.

I agree with your suggestion to make it impossible to be permanently banned for several minor infractions when the warning system guidelines are followed. However, people should still be punished more harshly or banned permanently immediately for serious offenses such as posting NSFW content, abusive behavior, and registering here for no other reason other than to troll.

 

 

The last problem I would like to address is the staff-selection process. The problem is that only staff have a say on somebody's promotion into the staff. The reason this system will fail in the long run is that it means that if it gets to a point where there are a lot of bad mods/admins, no good mods/admins will get added. In the long run, a better alternative would be user-nomination by other members, and then the staff would vote on these nominations.

 

That way, the public could express their support for a user's promotion, but the staff would still have the ultimate say in the matter. There should be some kind of fail-safe in case of staff corruption where if the general user consent is that this user should be promoted, they will be forced to at least acknowledge the vote by getting a notification. This way they will know if it's a good time to make a final decision.

 

That way, the staff will not become a completely totalitarian 'Cool kids table' type high school-clique like it would if the staff can only grow by it's own will to do so.

 

I mean, if a user isn't cut out for the job, they can always be demoted at any time. But we should at least give them a shot if the community in general believes they deserve a chance. I mean, the forums needs to put at least some trust in the judgement of it's own members, otherwise, the staff team will seem detached and distant, thus further decaying the public's perspective of said staff team.

My fear with having community elected staff is that it would turn into a popularity contest. Even if the staff had the final word so that no one who would not meet the general requirements to be a staff member would be hired, it might anger people who won a community election but were then denied entry into the staff. On the other hand, the current staff selecting new staff is flawed as well. There is always the potential for bias. However, as feld0 said in his reply, we use a largely automated process for hiring new moderators, which greatly reduces bias. I feel that combining this with staff determinations on who should become staff is the best way to go. However, it should be made clear that if anyone ever feels that a current staff member, regardless of their job is not fit to be staff, that they are always welcome to send in a support ticket sharing their concerns. This way, the community can still have a say in who is staff and who is not staff, even though the administrators would make the final decision about who was and who was not staff.

[NavelColt 22,881]

I'll be honest, I'm not in the space to touch most of this at the moment, and, being late at this point, I don't think I'm going to, as there's been a fair amount of others who have given similar input. Instead, I'll just say what's on my mind at the moment, as it's somewhat relevant to the 'community representative' idea.

 

A lot of the time, I feel like I'm one of the few staff who are top-tier as far as vocalness goes and general member activity. Artemis is practically the only other admin who even comes close, and as far as moderators go, DF, perhaps Twilight and perhaps FS are the only ones that come to mind. There is a lot of lurking as opposed to upfront talking that tends to come from many of the others, and to be honest, it feels like a burden much of time, because it feels less like instant teamwork, and more like, I get to deal with the negativity and problems that come up, first, and after anxiety is eating my brain, I need to go get support, instead of it already being there.

 

I'm not griping about issues that can be piled onto the conspiracy theorists' list of things to whine at the staff about, but I am putting this out there because, the idea of having more staff who are out in the public eye, constantly, posting as well as doing moderating on the side, is something that I feel is needed. While having an entire rank for 'Community Representative' is a tad unneeded IMO, the core idea for it is sound.

 

* To that end, many PS now run our off-site entities to help with the public image, so, there is no 'we don't care about it'. If we didn't care, we wouldn't be here, Harmonic :3

[Zoop 8,384]

Not going to mince words. No real point for me to, really.

 

Soliciting community feedback for staff selection is a great way to turn things into a pointless popularity contest that will bring forth little in the way of useful or realistic choices. I truly and desperately hope that this is never given any serious consideration by anyone. No matter how many times it is suggested.

[Yellow Diamond 7,574]

We have a reputation? A negative reputation?

 

I'm not trying to be facetious: I wasn't aware that word was going around about MLP Forums being a tough neighborhood. And I haven't the slightest clue whether such complaints, justified or not, constitute anywhere near the majority opinion. Negative responses also tend to get more attention that positive reinforcement. Who knows? I could just be out of the loop. To the best of my knowledge and experience, members who leave or are banned tend to be dissatisfied with things other than how long it may take for a Support Ticket to receive a response; furthermore, I am not under the impression their dissatisfaction would be assuaged by the membership retaining the authority to nominate staff members.

 

Now I'm not trying to dismiss the concerns and concepts brought forth by you, HR; for instance, the PR end of MLP Forums/Poniverse is indeed a serious matter which requires more attention. As with most administrative tasks, however, it takes time to acquire the tools and install the logistics necessary to cultivate a new branch in the system. I'd likewise rather see a well-crafted system in place than some slipshod attempt at implementing a new feature. SCS mentioned some of the steps we are taking. Speaking from my personal experience with ongoing projects, I am confident we will have a strong PR wing once the time comes. Until that point in time, of course, the MLP Forums staff must represent itself through both word and deed -- not to say that having a slick PR system translates into shoddy management. To the contrary, it raises our game to a new level. We have to learn step by step how to properly mold our image without appearing artificial.

 

But let's get back to the nuts and bolts operations for a moment. As others have outright stated or alluded, no rule system is inherently perfect; the one we have in place is intended to best meet the needs of this community, the staff, and how we (i.e., the staff) envision the conduct of a healthy MLP online community. The rules are explicit and, to be honest, quite forgiving. Above all, however, everyone is held to the same standards. Whether someone constantly insults fellow members or loves posting off-topic material, the rules apply in both cases. Warning points are as equal as possible. If you're accumulating enough points from backseat moderating as someone might from posting Borderline NSFW content, then the problem is systemic. Members are ultimately tasked with policing themselves; creating a multitude of exceptional cases tempts cries of bias and further confusion.

 

To be blunt, if one gets permabanned from MLP Forums, they likely lack self-modulation, common sense, or simply do not care enough to meet the standards of this community. I'm not terribly interested in being more lax so that people stop complaining because, regardless of how we alter the warning system, someone will be ready to gripe.

 

Most everyone else has in some shape or form touched upon the matter of members nominating staff positions. I will add this point, since I did not see anyone else mention it explicitly: there are needs to which only staff are privy; and some projects need to be kept discreet, i.e., apart from public knowledge. This means that public votes would almost inherently favor popularity over desired competence. We would end up with too many staff members being dumped because their skills are insufficient or were never required. Then the staff would most certainly appear totalitarian in the eyes of membership.

 

Bear in mind that I would be happy to test the waters with certain initiatives or projects involving MLP Forums. Members might not have an official vote, but your opinions do mean a good deal to us. I'm sure others on the staff feel the same way. Breaking up the potential echo chamber is a nice thing. The staff exists, however, for the purpose of keeping things running as smoothly and efficiently as possible; achieving these ends may necessitate otherwise undemocratic maneuvers. Asking us to be both more systematic and democratic is quite a trick, given the nature of online communities.

 

This post may sound fairly dismissive, but it is not; if I wanted to dismiss these concerns, I would not have bothered to respond. I nonetheless do disagree fundamentally with some of the propositions made; in other cases, there is definitely room for improvement on the part of the staff. We would not be having this discussion if certain issues were not valid problems.

[Akemi Homura 7,680]

My fear with having community elected staff is that it would turn into a popularity contest.

 

If that model were to be introduced, then it will - and, I have to admit, the amount of posts I read over at Canterlot Castle stating that someone's "apologetic" that a staff member has to resign is slightly disturbing. People don't realize that this job/position/title is nothing special; it is virtually the opposite. It's mundane, boring, a waste of time, and don't get me started on how much flak you occasionally receive after you've taken action. There is also this belief that being a moderator is the ultimate symbol of status on the forum (might hold true in general, really) and that folks who acquire such a position should be treated differently, kind of like a president or a queen. No regular member will understand this, however, unless they've actually put on the work gloves and have gotten a taste of what it's like.

 

Being a moderator is not unlike being a magical girl from Puella Magi Madoka Magica. The only ones who should do it are the ones who don't know the meaning of the word "ego" and who objectively know that someone has to do it. Even then it can be stressful; most of the time not fun. You still have to patrol threads removing crap, dishing out warnings to whomever's dull enough to break a rule or two, or in rarer cases, hurt your friends because they screwed up. It's quite easy to get alienated this way, and in a tragic twist it's often from your own hand.

 

This is, of course, not to undermine the work put in by many former mods by maintaining this place in tip-top shape over the course of this site's existence - they are appreciated, but speaking objectively, there is little reward for that dedication. In the end, you may likely feel bruised and battered. To what degree lies within your experience. As I said previously, no one will understand if they have not put in the work themselves. If you get to be a happy member and spend time posting away freely without ever having to worry about reports or any of that crap, cherish it. In this respect, becoming a moderator on a stupid whim is the worst thing you can do, especially when the qualification process happens to be a pseudo popularity contest.

 

 

 

Since I'm on my phone at work

 

I realize this practice might be commonplace, but, you really are an -oop incarnate.

Edited August 30, 2013 by Mami

[King 5,625]

@@Harmonic Revelations,

Its similar to any democracy....the guy who smiles the most and makes the most promises will be elected....but that doesn't make him right for the job. Its a great sentiment, wanting community involvement in staff selection, but in the long run, its not going to matter as staff will be selected based on what other mods and admins have seen of them. There activity levels, there community involvement and how dedicated they appear to be.

 

As Mami stated, the job of being a moderator..is just that...a job. It isn't some glorious position that turns a member into a rockstar...its work. Dishing out warnings and being hated on by some members for doing so, cleaning out bad threads, locking and unlocking threads, pinning things, talking angry members down and receiving hate mail (yes, some mods do get this) for just doing your job...nothing glorious there. Think about how the Admins feel ,having to oversee the entire site. Just more jobs and responsibility to do....

 

You dont know what its like unless you have stepped in a mods boots before. Sure, it can be rewarding being a part of Poniverse...but everyone has their breaking point and the "life bus" can run you over in a second.

 

My personal view...Mods and Admins need to be chosen by other Admins..the people who have been through those roles and know whats needed to fulfill that sort of responsibility...chances are the people they choose are people who the community would be agreeing on in the first place.

 

However, as for Poniverse Staff... Im not quite sure, im a little torn on this one... I can certainly see a benefit with allowing community involvement in selection of these...but I dont think I can really tell people my view on it as of yet, as I dont really have an idea myself...

 

 

On to the Public Image issue, I myself haven't heard of anything to do with a negative image...so I cant say much there. What I DO know is that we have a Public Relations staff group now to handle Public communication on things sch as Twitter and Facebook as well as other sites, and to promote the Poniverse itself, but not only that...all staff have the responsibility to uphold the sites image and I personally see other staff doing as such.

 

And lastly as for staff interaction with the community, this is being discussed as we speak...its been something talked about for a while, and we are working towards becoming more interactive with the community in a few different ways. Believe me when I say we really are trying...

 

 

Thanks Harmy for voicing your opinion. Everything you said has been poking up around staff channels so dont think you are going unheard <3

P.S  Luv u Harmy <3

Edited August 30, 2013 by Dawn♥Rider

[Wingnut 7,000]

First off, I want to thank Harmonic for starting this topic. Throughout your lengthy OP, the one point that stood out to me is the notion that MLP Forums has public image problems. Really? This is the first time I've read that anywhere. Aside from some who felt they were unfairly banned or penalized, I thought our reputation was generally good. But I can think of two frequent suggestions that would worsen that image overnight:

 

1. Do away with moderation entirely thus letting the forums become a free for all.

2. Having staff directly elected by the members.

 

For those who want to post outlandish content and flame to their heart's content, there are plenty of other websites for that. And like Zoop said, direct elections would turn staffing decisions into popularity contests. Suggestions for mods are appreciated and taken into account by staff. And I was unaware that you can review member activities for optimum time and section coverage. Sometimes I feel like, somebody's watching me, heh. But if that info helps nominate mods, that's a good thing.

 

To anybody who thinks this forum is overly moderated: Seriously? My favorite rail fan forum closes threads at the drop of a hat. Copied and pasted articles or Youtube clips are immediately removed if it runs afoul of copyright rules. All things considered, the attitude here is moderate and, at times, maybe too laid back. This is one of the things that drew me here in the first place. I knew I wasn't going to get slammed for not fully thinking my thoughts out or opening a duplicate thread. The current discipline system could probably be revised, but no system is ever perfect. As far as I can tell, most perma bans resulted from flagrant and repeated violations.

 

The staff here is all volunteer. It is a mundane job at times that requires a degree of commitment and time. I've thought about volunteering but I decided not to because I didn't want to make a promise I wasn't sure I could keep. But I do help by reporting posts that may need attention.

 

In conclusion, I wanted to thank everyone for their attention to the matters raised here.

[Harmonic Revelations 8,835]

 

1. Do away with moderation entirely thus letting the forums become a free for all.

 

For the sake of my faith in humanity, I absolutely refuse to believe that is something that gets frequently suggested.

[Wingnut 7,000]

 

 

For the sake of my faith in humanity, I absolutely refuse to believe that is something that gets frequently suggested.

 

You're right.  It's not a frequent suggestion. 

 

Perfect example of me not always thinking or reviewing my posts before pressing enter. 

[Doctor XFizzle 8,669]

 

These mostly mirror my inner thoughts from like a year ago as the forums began to expand exponentially but the timing was wrong to address it. I'm not as active as much to notice the current crop of issues, but for everyone's sake and well-being, I hope positive growth can come from this. *hands HR an honorary fez and bow tie*

[Shanks 10,816]

As others have said I am not sure that allowing users to nominate new moderators is a good idea, sure as per your suggest administration would still have the final say but it may end up becoming a popularity contest anyway which could cause some unnecessary butthurt and drama when certain peoples favored candidate didn't get the job. One concern I do share though is all the recent resignations of staff member, while I understand that life can get in the way at times I personally believe that while the staff does a fairly good job that more moderators may be a good idea.

 

Removing the distinction between global and section moderators helped a great deal but one thing I have noticed is that alot of moderators while they do their jobs and do them aren't too active in the community itself. I don't fault them for this as I myself was once a moderator on another site and know that it can be quite a bit of work, much of thankless but what concerns me about it is that it makes it more difficult for them to see things from the perspective of the average user and cause them to be a bit out of the loop for certain user concerns.

 

While there are some people who complain just to complain there are some people with actual legitimate concerns and while there are people on staff willing to listen the larger a site get the more difficult it can become to separate out the people with legitimate concerns from the people who are just bitching.

 

The warning system while it is not perfect is the best I have seen on any site I have been on, it is not fun being on the receiving end of it but I am yet to have any major complaints about it. The warnings I did get weren't causes for celebration but they were fair and in 2 cases where I had quesitons about my particular warning the moderator in question answered fairly quickly and gave a professional response. If there are issues with consistency than of course they need to be addressed, but there are a lot of cases where different moderators have to make different judgment calls and sometimes might make a different one.

[King 5,625]

 

 

that more moderators may be a good idea.

Something like this is generally discussed between staff. As an issue that a few members have brought up recently, it will be discussed more. Personally I agree...only because I've seen times where there are no mods or Admins on, and as hard as it is, it would be nice to have a 24/7 coverage. Which is possible I may add...

 

 

 

I have noticed is that alot of moderators while they do their jobs and do them aren't too active in the community itself.

This is actually something we have been trying to work on by doing simple things such as greeting people in the welcome lounge, participating in forum games and threads and thinking of more possible staff v member, or mixed gaming nights every now and then.

This is just a bit if a busy period for the staff, but Im sure we can come up with something to become more active in the community itself

[Shanks 10,816]

 As an issue that a few members have brought up recently,

Yes, I remember that it was just shortly after a troll attack. I think I came off as more panicky than I intended and I do apologize for that, alot of people panicked and I think that backfired. I suppose the main reason I would like to see more moderators aside from making such events less likely is that it will make it easier for moderators to be more engaged in the community by spreading the work load out a bit more.