|
| Thread: More Incentive for Five Star Members |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 · NEXT» |
|
RedSoxFan3
Admirable
Legendary Hero
Fan of Red Sox
|
posted November 04, 2004 09:33 AM |
|
|
More Incentive for Five Star Members
I've talked to several people and they all say this. I don't care about any QP I get after the 8th one so I don't have flood protection. Surely there should be something to motivate members to get 5 red stars. I guess at the moment we don't really need any thing for 6 star members cause there's only me and I don't really care. I guess you could say that 6 red stars gives you bragging rights and that's close enough for me. 
But I was wondering if there could be anything easy to implement. Like maybe access to a personal color scheme at HC. Maybe you could get one of those shield avatars like the mods get. Maybe a combination of the two. The point is that our 4 star members get lazy after the 8th QP.
____________
Go Red Sox!
|
|
Sir_Stiven
Honorable
Legendary Hero
banned
|
|
posted November 07, 2004 12:01 PM |
|
|
as this thread is going off topic, i find the original idea by rewarding 5 QP:s in a better way to be quite good. But as an idea it needs more thought and a better concept of what the reward should be instead IMO.
Make it read only access to mod squad and ill get another 4 QP:s just to see how many threads there are about me there
|
|
Vadskye91
Promising
Supreme Hero
Back again
|
|
posted November 07, 2004 04:03 PM |
|
|
Hey, that's a good idea! 5 red stars could get you read-only access to the mod squad... on condition you don't tell anyone.
____________
Knowledge is power...
|
|
Djive
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Zapper of Toads
|
posted November 07, 2004 05:14 PM |
|
|
Perhaps we should move removed flood protect to six red stats?
Anyway, you are free to come up with suggestions here. Since, this is for very few members perhaps we may do something extra.
-Among the things I've seen discussed are:
Special Avatar (Like the Mod Sword and Admin Staff, but something else)
-Allow an Avatar with bigger file size limit, and perhaps with a different shape, like the "Shield" shape of the Mods/Admin.
However, more suggestions and alternatives are welcome.
____________
"A brilliant light can either illuminate or blind. How will you know which until you open your eyes?"
|
|
Daddy
Responsible
Supreme Hero
and why not.
|
|
posted November 07, 2004 11:22 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Perhaps we should move removed flood protect to six red stats?
Anyway, you are free to come up with suggestions here. Since, this is for very few members perhaps we may do something extra.
-Among the things I've seen discussed are:
Special Avatar (Like the Mod Sword and Admin Staff, but something else)
-Allow an Avatar with bigger file size limit, and perhaps with a different shape, like the "Shield" shape of the Mods/Admin.
However, more suggestions and alternatives are welcome.
This new-ava idea I like very much 
And The idea with the custom colorsheme is nice, too - but I guess hard to make 
reg
Daddy
|
|
Sir_Stiven
Honorable
Legendary Hero
banned
|
|
posted November 19, 2004 05:16 PM |
bonus applied. |
|
talking about QP:s...
I got some critism about the whole giving out system.
At first i would like to point out that this post is not meant as any personal attack on any moderator or member, but as niddy pointed out in another thread.. this is me trying to spark a discussion again and hopefully a solution to this what in IMO is a problem here.
1) People never get QP:s if they are on opposite side of an issue then the moderators in a discussion
IMO this is the biggest problem and also the reason why i started with this point.
In all my days here ive never seen a QP given out to any member who is in disagreement over something with a moderator. No matter how well constructed the argument is or how many good points they bring up. If the content of the post isnt what the moderator wants it to be then its no QP material. On the contrary if a post is in agreement with the moderator they have always been rewarded even if this was more obvious earlier. Now the best way to get a QP in a discussion seem to be to be the one to try and take a neutral stance and points out that he/she "tries to see the points in both camps" and then go from there. Problem is that even when that happens the content of the post is usually once again leaned towards what the moderators think.
The reason im bringing this up now is that just recently i saw yet another awesome post from a member, one that i kept laughing at for a long time and its a shame to know that it will never get rewarded due to the fact that it is in disagreement with the moderators opinion.
To me the problem when it comes to a post like that seems to be that the moderators doesnt know what to do. As they work alot on a teameffort here, the rest of the moderators seem reculant to do something when a member has a different opinion then a moderator nm how well the member puts up his ideas. This seems to be because they do not want to take stance against the moderator, and the moderator who is in the other side of the topic isnt very likely to reward the post either.
And then the post gets forgotten and no reward has been given out. Simply due to that the moderators didnt know how to handle the situation.
IMO the solution to this, lies within mutual trust. As a moderator you must be able to reward a person on the other side of an issue for jokes/arguements and such even if it is a fellow mod they discuss with.
Quote:
gain a quality point, a moderator needs to rate one of member's posts as being among the TOP 2% of posts at Heroes Community
This is a quote directly from the FAQ.
And as it states, "top 2%" of the posts should be rewarded. Not "top 2% as long as they are in agreement of what you think".
I wonder what kind of teamwork there is anyway if youre not allowed to reward things other ones is biased in. To me that isnt a teamwork, its a team who must share one opinion in each issue.
Now dont get me wrong here, taking an incommon stance is usually the best thing to do. But when it comes to individual thinking and the fact that you seem to must agree with a moderator something is wrong IMO.
And the sadest fact is, that if this keeps up all members who is fascinated by the stars in this messageboard will try and share the opinions more and more with the mods as they will get rewarded for it. While standing on your own opinions and speaking your mind doesnt as it will be in disagreement with the mods.
Because doesnt this star system seem to have backfired alittle as things are now? IMO it has since i believe that a messageboard should be built on individual thoughts and opinions, thats what is unique to us and can build up dynamic discussions.. while having 10 members saying the exact same thing in hope to get rewarded isnt.
2) Starting threads
Another problem in all my days here, has been that starting a thread about something new has a tendency to result in a QP.
Which usually is a great thing off course, but many times it isnt the thread itself that triggers the thread to be what it becomes. It is a regular post that draws attention to the thread and makes it more interesting. Problem is that when the thread then get rewarded it usually still is the creator of the thread that gets it.
Another problem IMO when giving out QP:s for a recently started thread, is that many of them has a tendency to die out once the reward has been given out. As in my earlier post i could bring up really obvious examples of this aswell but i wont as im trying to have this critism as general as possible and not make it personal.
Yet as in one, the QP problem in this is that it is a negative trend.
The problem here is that the members who cares about QP's will learn to start many threads (if they havent already learnt that) and hope to get rewarded for some of the ideas they bring up.
Meaning: If they start 10 threads one might be new and will be rewarded, even if as it as i have pointed out earlier doesnt trigger a good thread in itself. It just seems that rewarding the thread starter seems like the easiest way to handle things. Still 9 of the 10 threads are crap usually and just takes up space and delivers good threads down the pages... some threads which does have good potential and ideas behind em disappears because of that.
Because what the mass threadstarter gets is a QP, just as he wanted so he is happy and ready to launch another 10 threads.
While the rest of the community gets alot of lesser quality threads and a good idea which turns to nothing because the thread creator has turned his head to try other new things and get rewarded for them aswell.
So there.. this was supposed to be my triggering post so feel free to post your opinions on the matter
|
|
Conan
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted November 19, 2004 05:35 PM |
|
|
If I might add...
Interesting thought, SS.
But something else. I know moderators moderate only specific forums. But it seems that sometimes, the mods of a forum are busy and don't visit all that often. Then the forum gets left behind and the posts in that forum don't get rewarded just because the moderators arent there to see it.
I contacted a moderator about a specific forum and he told me there was nothing he could do since he was not the moderator of that forum.
Now I've learned in my days not to give critics if you cant come up with a solution. So this is my solution: Have some mod ranks. Lower rank mods and higher rank mods and let them be identified. Now, higher ranked mods could moderate more than their respective forums and give QP's to other forums aswell. This would be usefull especially when a forum gets left to itself because the mods of that forum are "temporarily" busy in RL and can't put that much time in HC, witch is always understandable.
Well, that would be my 2 cents, but do not let this post obscure SS's because he had good points in there aswell.
-Conan
____________
Your life as it has been is over. From this time forward, you will service.... us. - Star Trek TNG
|
|
pandora
Honorable
Legendary Hero
The Chosen One
|
|
posted November 19, 2004 05:47 PM |
|
|
I agree with you completely that a Moderator's personal opinions should not influence their decision making process. Obviously it is difficult to step back away from something that you feel strongly about, but in my opinion if you feel so strongly that you cannot step back - then you should have another Moderator make the decision and step away entirely.
Of course now that I have agreed with you, I cannot give you a star for your post, as it would serve only to reinforce the idea that Moderators give stars to those that share their views lol
I think that its a very positive thing that members would step up to share their opinions if they think another post is QP worthy -- and when the post has support of several members, we as Moderators should look to that as well since 'Community' is for everyone, and should represent that.
As for your thoughts on thread starting, I do feel that the wastelands serve well to control this. I will always look at if a member has made a bunch of new threads and move them right away to discourage that kind of spamming.
In regards to new privelages for red star members I think that the Avatar idea is a nice one - tho i would lean away from the shield avatar and suggest something entirely new. At a glance members have come to associate the shield to moderators I think, and therefore it should stay just with them.
I don't think that Mod-Squad access is a good idea, because there is quite a big difference in how QP's are awarded from forum to forum. My point being that it really isn't the same process across the entire HC, and i think it would be unfair to give something like mod-squad access to someone based on QP if that would mean essentially they are given access based on where they chose to post rather than what they choose to post.
____________
"In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends."
|
|
Lord_Woock
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Daddy Cool with a $90 smile
|
|
posted November 19, 2004 06:20 PM |
|
|
I like the avatar idea too, but should I get enough QPs, I prolly wouldn't want a shield avatar Why not a star-shaped one? It'd look nice and it'd be perfect for a person with many red stars
____________
Yolk and God bless.
---
My buddy's doing a webcomic and would certainly appreciate it if you checked it out!
|
|
Khaelo
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Underwater
|
|
posted November 19, 2004 07:39 PM |
|
|
Don't five star members already recieve the ability to rate threads?
____________
 Cleverly
disguised as a responsible adult
|
|
Asmodean
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Heroine at the weekend.
|
|
posted November 19, 2004 07:47 PM |
|
|
One particular point I took out of Stiven's post was the thought that promising threads get rewarded with QP's too soon.
Lately I too have noticed this and tried to refrain from giving a QP until the thread develops well.
Though I think the rest of his post was well thought out with good reasoning.
I also thought Conan's idea about Mod ranks to be intriguing as well, though how that would work is tricky. Of the exisiting Mods, who gets the extra rank? (Pan cos she rocks, but who else?)
Keep the good vibes flowing.
____________
To err is human, to arr is pirate.
|
|
Conan
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted November 19, 2004 08:01 PM |
|
|
Well,
Maybe a ranking system that would reflect seniority, contribution to the HC forum and whatnot.
I find some mods contribute alot (Khaelo) and don't get rewarded for it. Maybe work out another red star system to reflect the rank of each mod. These ranks should only be given by Val himself or someone he designates... a "second in command" if you will
____________
Your life as it has been is over. From this time forward, you will service.... us. - Star Trek TNG
|
|
Sir_Stiven
Honorable
Legendary Hero
banned
|
|
posted November 19, 2004 08:59 PM |
|
|
what conan suggests, different modranks has been discussed before but then it was called semi admins.
Back then i didnt think this was a good idea, but now im more dubious.
The best way would IMO be if all forumparts were actively and handled correctly by choosen moderators. My logic tells me that that is the main idea about different moderators for different forums.
Another arguement why not to bring in semiadmins is that there would be no real modsquad then and it could make the mods feel smaller as they could stand corrected in a much more regular manner. Meaning a semi admin could make a decision that usually is against the code the usual 2-3mods there act. This could lead to problems.
The good part about semi admins is besides to control the none moderated forums that it could lead to a more set standard. As pandora says there are a big difference between forums how things are treated.
For more concrete solutions in this matter, i only know of one forum where the moderation is more or less non existant. Which is a shame since that forum is becoming more and more active, and no moderation whatsoever of it just makes the interest go away.
So my prefered solutions would be:
* replace the library moderators.
If i were to pick two mods as semi admins i would pick:
* Pandora, has already shown she could handle tavern and im sure she could handle each and every forum here if needed. What pan also got that many other mods doesnt is great knowledge in the game, meaning she could judge a great post easily in the library... not many other mods could do that.
* Djive, shows great ambition in what he does and has great experience in being a moderator here. With library excluded im sure djive could do well in every forum here aswell.
But i stand by my opinion that semi admins just seem like a way to cover up other moderators shortcomings. In this case it would be the library in my opinion, but im also interested if anyone else of you have any complaints about lack of moderator activity in another forum. Because i dont see it.
As for my previous post, please let the opinions and possible questions out.. id be happy to discuss it with you if anyone doesnt share my views
|
|
Conan
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted November 19, 2004 09:07 PM |
|
|
yeah, I agree.
I din't want to be soooo straight forward and name specific mods, but SS is right on every count.
I thought of it as a way to make-up for other mod's short-commings as he put it... But I still think some short-comming is normal because we all have RL issues.
I think some (2-3) mods should have the right to work/moderate in every forum.
____________
Your life as it has been is over. From this time forward, you will service.... us. - Star Trek TNG
|
|
pandora
Honorable
Legendary Hero
The Chosen One
|
|
posted November 20, 2004 07:15 AM |
|
|
I would hesitate to consider the idea because of 'mod-shortcomings' or on the pretense that one moderator would have the power to overturn another...I think any moderator differences of opinion should continue to be handled in the Mod-Squad over donuts, and that all moderators should be considered as equal.
I think the idea has merits in that if moderators are absent from their forum for whatever reason, it could be beneficial to have others who could step in to fill the void if needed. I wouldn't think it would ever be neccessary to have one moderator actively modding every forum (and just imagine the workload!)
I think the idea of coming up with a standard for how the forums are modded would be quite difficult. The boards are all different enough that trying to come up with a guideline that fits each one becomes rather difficult. Of course we have the CoC as the standard for basic forum rules, but to define "quality" when considering such different subjects is hard! In example, to set one standard with the OtherSide in mind, how many Tavern posts will ever meet the criteria to earn a QP?
ps: thank you to those of you who mentioned me here.. remember though, I am a rather new mod
____________
"In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends."
|
|
RedSoxFan3
Admirable
Legendary Hero
Fan of Red Sox
|
|
posted November 20, 2004 09:32 AM |
|
|
Quote:
thank you to those of you who mentioned me here.. remember though, I am a rather new mod
Being new has nothing to do with it. To me being a new member has really means nothing except for a lack of reputation. Anyone can be in this position if they are a good leader and fair. You are both.
Seriously it doesn't matter if you are a new member or not. Anyone can be a leader in the community.
I just brought this up in Glade, although leadership is more important there as the threads are very teambased rather than in other threads that simply have open discussion. Nonetheless, I think having an active 2nd in command would be good. Pandora would certainly be the person.
____________
Go Red Sox!
|
|
gorman
Promising
Legendary Hero
Been around since before 2003
|
|
posted November 20, 2004 01:24 PM |
|
|
I agree, a sort of 2nd admin would be handy since the head turban himself doesn't appear much as he, among other ppl, have much in the real world to do.
____________
When all else fails... Take notes.... ALL the time... ESPECIALLY when playing D&D.... or Pokemon in my case
|
|
Conan
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted November 21, 2004 07:44 PM |
|
|
Quote:
I think the idea has merits in that if moderators are absent from their forum for whatever reason, it could be beneficial to have others who could step in to fill the void if needed. I wouldn't think it would ever be neccessary to have one moderator actively modding every forum (and just imagine the workload!)
Fair enough, I would be happy with this. I think it would be beneficial even if some mods would be able to ask another mod to fill-in if need be.
I didn't really mean a mod moderating other mods... more of a second in commnand to take the place of Val if he is also gone. I guess something to give a little more structure. (I'm not saying there is no structure to HC).
Of course, I'm fairly new here and I realize I probably don't understand the internal workings of HC... So if I'm coming up with weird ideas, please forgive my ignorance
____________
Your life as it has been is over. From this time forward, you will service.... us. - Star Trek TNG
|
|
Sir_Stiven
Honorable
Legendary Hero
banned
|
|
posted November 24, 2004 02:47 AM |
|
|
hmm would still like to see some more discussion about the 2 issues i raised and particulary the first.
Some ideas for solutions on the first issue would also be nice as it is an important issue here IMO.
oh and btw pan, even if you agree with the content of my discussion starting post you are still doing the "expected" thing here as you take the stance with the moderators recieving the critism
So even if you agree with the words im writing you still react in the regular moderator manner in issues like this, meaning moderator critism posts or posts that disagrees with the mods behaviour doesnt get rewarded.
On the contrary im happy not to see my post gotten rewarded yet though as last time i brought an QP issue up i got an QP more like "so there you got a QP, now shut up" instead of seeing any actual improvement of the QP system itself.
Though i find myself somewhat amazed by these QP:s issues, if i were in a leading position here the first thing i would like to know about the QP:s would be how to improve the system around it from the members. The feeling i get here is more like QP discussions are out of reach as they are a moderator thing anyway. i hope im wrong though as this was the scenario even if more obvious when i got here 3 years ago and i really want to believe that things has improved.
|
|
Khaelo
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Underwater
|
|
posted November 24, 2004 04:59 AM |
|
|
Just to touch on a few points:
Quote:
if i were in a leading position here the first thing i would like to know about the QP:s would be how to improve the system around it from the members. The feeling i get here is more like QP discussions are out of reach as they are a moderator thing anyway.
Unfortunately, from a technical standpoint, the QPs are a moderator thing. I would be all for a more democratic feedback system, but the board software doesn't have one right now. The alternative would be for people to vote on QPs, which could get cumbersome. In any case, QP discussions shouldn't be "out of reach." Most mods do take member recommendations into consideration, and there are several threads dedicated to this purpose.
Quote:
I wonder what kind of teamwork there is anyway if youre not allowed to reward things other ones is biased in. To me that isnt a teamwork, its a team who must share one opinion in each issue.
Moderators are supposed to present a unified front for the community. That doesn't mean that there isn't teamwork, with all that implies, going on behind the scenes. It means that when there are differing opinions, they're not out here. They're in ModSquad; that's why ModSquad is there. I understand that this system conceals a vital part of QP discussion from the community, namely disagreements amongst those with the power to give/withhold the QPs. However, the system at large is designed to uphold mods' authority. When there's a major problem, a united front is absolutely necessary. I am at a loss as to how to make the QP system more democratic without undermining mods' united front. I agree with you, Stiven, that the current system is buggy, so to speak. The Other Side is in a de facto "freeze" of QPs thanks to these problems (no 'arrangements' or anything, just the way things are working out). But I don't know how to fix it.
To make a long post short, I too am interested in seeing this discussion continue.
____________
Cleverly
disguised as a responsible adult
|
|
|
|
