We all know mods are been suggesting by the other mods etc
So what about a new system to elect new moderators
A new section in the forums where all moderator applications will be posted and on those applications Epicmafia can vote on so its more fair choosing the mod for epicmafia by the players of epicmafia
So its -1 votes or +1 votes with a reason why you downvote or upvote
This will highly stop mods suggesting only friends
A mod should be choosed by the players of epicmafia and not the mods themselves
Current template i thought up
Main account:(Whats your main account)
Alternate accounts:(Your alternate accounts)
Why would you be a good mod(explanition why you be a good mod)
What would you do if three poeple gets into a fight with eachother(explaining how you would handle it)
Do you have any prior experience being a mod?
Did you contribute something to the community
Your timezone:
Langauges you speak(sometimes there are games with other langauges but very uncommonly)
Age:(how old are you in real life)
HEY LOOK A TEMPLATE^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Poll
Democracy
Democracy67%57
Lets the mods choose by themselves32%27
deleteddeletedabout 11 years ago
I didn't created the topic because that jonsnow wanted me to create
We can't send rejection letters because we keep the moderator applications on file. If you weren't picked as a mod this time does not mean that you cannot be picked as a moderator down the road.
deleteddeletedabout 11 years ago
Can mods send rejection letters that state why someone wasn't picked? I mean, make an option to opt out of the rejection letter if a user is sensitive or emotional (which validates the rejection anyway since it would be a criticism letter -hopefully-) Because there were some friends of mine I /honestly/ thought would make good moderators, and instead someone who turned out to be p bad was modded over them. I know everyone is gonna say "I honestly thought my friend was good enuff!!11!!" But a rejection letter with criticism seems fair imo. Just a suggestion to add.
I lead this conversation to the path of thinking a system which is a good modification to pure democracy. I'm pm'ing you Blister case if you are sincere about learning it.
No, we are going to change this topic's main conversation because you lead it down that path. I'll wait patiently because since you say that moderators do not communicate and you have one asking you questions and asking for you input.
people who are inexperienced in modding need to be given a chance at the very least. how are they supposed to gain experience if they aren't given a chance to prove themselves.
The issue is that this is all based on speculation. Where ar the mods corrupt? Which ones have been protecting their friends and where are the links to the reports and decisions showing that?
Being mod can be more than writing a verdict, but it cant even be that now because they are so corrupt in the current system. May be bronto was a good admin, but sims is not. May be this system works well only when admin is a good person, this means system needs to be fixed to work with every person.
And no, if you get strangers as a mod it does not mean they wont communicate.
i do agree that there could be a more beneficial system (as a result of what i've seen in the past, not naming any names but an admin who decided who he wanted modding personally and 90% of the time modded people who hadn't even applied which led to mods who were bored and uninterested but friends with the admin) but i don't really know what that is, i just really don't think that the solution itt is the answer
having been a mod for 11 months under 3 separate admins it was pretty clear that the mod team was most efficient under bronto as admin and the thing that he was best at was definitely communication with the team and also encouraging them to help eachother out where possible. there are always going to be internal issues but they'll never be resolved without communication, it's more than just writing a verdict
Yes katie, there are a lot of problems may occur with pure democracy. This topic can be place to find a better solution.
So Katie, you say if we get democracy for mods these can happen:
"being a likeable person =/= good mod" This is happening in mods now. YES SOMETHING YOU SAID THAT SHOULD NOT HAPPEN HAPPENING NOW AND YOU ARE PROTECTING IT.
"create bias or overly lenient modding from the elected mod towards the players that elected " This is also a current situation. Since mods are selected corruptly, they give biased and overly lenient desicions.
If we go to pure democracy, all bad things happening now 'could' still happen, but surely with lesser amount,, so better. If we can think a better system, it will be much more better.
I think there should be a viewing of applications and let the community at the very least decide "hey x has a p good resume! Y has been a mod before and the results were terrible..please eliminate y's resume from this. Maybe Z could be good, there are some parts that I don't like ects" Maybe something like that.
that has been true, although i still feel like a community vote wouldn't fix this problem because instead of being the mods' friend it would be the community's friend and being a likeable person =/= good mod
also, do you think that a community election could create bias or overly lenient modding from the elected mod towards the players that elected them?
What stenght are you talking about? A mods job is anwering questions from people and giving desicions on reports "this is a vio" or "nah this is not". 'Working together' is only happens when they protect a friend of them from being violated, which should not happen.
deleteddeletedabout 11 years agoedited
so if I was on the mod team and say I hated one dude who applied but everyone else was neutral/on good terms towards the guy, he's instantly rejected and its fair b/c I'm already a mod and he's just an applicant? This is hypothetical btw but basically in my other post about what I saw in a party game, that's how the convo went.
Suggestion:Mod election system
Poll
