Quote:
Originally Posted by
nvrspk4
You compare us to professionally staffed sites or non professional sites the workers have a fair degree of control over their lives. No.
No I don't? And even if I did, take a chapter out of their books. Their forums work smoothly, with this, you have to argue repeatedly to get your point across.
Quote:
Speak not of what you know not, a principle you really should look into. You make comments on Habbox management all the time. I felt the same way about the American government until I took an AP Gov class and was a little more forgiving of the inefficiency. Let me give you an example. If we did not stick everyone to a standard decision making process, unbans or certain decisions would have results based on who made the decision. Thus the decision would be a matter of luck, or you contacting that member of management who was then overloaded. On top of that, it might be a bad decision.
Ooo, reminds me of philosophy. As my teacher said in reply to something as daft as comparing government to the workings of a forum: "Speak not of what doesn't compare." The works of a forum can be seen by anyone. The works of a government cannot be seen as easily and in some aspects, cannot be seen by anyone at all! So yes, using the government as an example is stupid, when anyone can view how a forum works. Anyone can even have a say on how a forum works, because a forum extracts the workings of common day activities, hobbies and conversations and puts them into place. A government is higher up in a hierarchy compared to a forum, because forums most likely have to follow the goverment in some way because the forum creators e.g. vBulletin must follow the law, so therefore any forum breaking the law is removed.
Quote:
We do have security measures intact, very stringent security measures that were put into place, the latest hacking was an extremely freak circumstance and we cannot always account for freak circumstances. We have a Forum Manager, he just happens to be called the Moderation Manager. And he is a big part of the decision making process, he mostly lead the discussion on this issue. There will be discussion else there will be rash decisions and rapid reversals. When we offer you something it will be after we've made a good decision on it. If its really non-trivial it will be decided instantly obviously but if its not we want to make a good decision. While this has a detrimental bit of taking longer for rational suggestions, the upside you don't think about is that nobody who's extremely conservative will have the ability to unilaterally and irrationally shoot it down without hearing about it from other members of management.
Moderator Manager = Manages Moderators. I don't see forum in there. So a "Cat Moderator" must also be a "Frankfurter Manager." If the Moderator Manager manages the forum and the workings of the background areas of the forum, then he is a Forum Manager. A Community Manager, coincidently manages the community. Moderation is only one fraction of a forum. In order for moderation, you need catagories, rules, guildlines, forums, threads, members, posts, polls, PMs, systems and so on. So what you are saying is, the Moderator Manager is just the confusing, mis-used title for someone who is actually a Forum Manager? It's like Assistant General Manager argument again, where the AGMs aren't actually AGMs, they're senior managers/staff.
Quote:
You don't know what the hell you're talking about. Believe it or not there are loads of threads discussing forum changes, we have just opted to make all changes on Sundays from now on to standardize it and give members something to look forward to, also giving ourselves a deadline instead of allowing ourselves to continually put it off with no clear deadline. We're moving forward in terms of time efficiency, not backwards. Had you waited before spewing your usual nonsense, you would have found that out.
Urrgh, why don't you just do things immediately? Standardizing and scheduling changes never works, and give members something to look forward to? Pah, as you know, we're not told anything until an argument appears because of it. Looking forward to means we know something is going to change. Mainly because of the terrible communication skills. What you're suggesting is changing things without noticing people, which is a surprise. Deadlines aren't scheduled for x day of the week. Deadlines also have random dates e.g. 14th July = End of Schoo/Start of Summer Term. Why don't you deadline something which gives you, say a week to do something? "Oh look, someone has been stabbed! It's Monday so umm, we'll have to deal with the rules in a weeks time just so we look tidy and give people something to look forward to."
Quote:
The reason it fell through was it was a committment that I took merely because I was the only one who could take it. I got assigned the position - I didn't volunteer. Please don't make personal attacks on my management, they really won't get you anywhere. That was your biggest problem with MAD - you were an idealist. You believed so long as you were right, you should be in the clear. The world doesn't work that way, we are humans. The harder line you take, the less likely you are to make your opponent see your side. This is fine if you are facing off against an opponent for the votes of another entity, such as an election, but when you want that opponent to decide on something, its a terrible way to get at it.
So did aload of other council members, because we had strong evidence to get things changed, but for some reason management took the ideas, changed them and went against what the council wanted and what was in the best interests of the members. But as with most things, it dies down and people get used to it. Even though a few weeks later the reputation argument came back up even though it was changed. Members agreed with the changes, except the one thing that was the major item on the list, which was how many people you must rep to rep the same person again. Again, management made some daft, unagreeable reason and left it, even though anyone can see how it would of changed and how it would work, but for some reason management couldn't. I pull back the, "anyone can run a forum" argument. It's not special and anyone can do it.
Quote:
Once again, your use of the word prolonging is flawed ;)
In what sense? A flurry of members agree that the word filter needs the change through reasoning alone you can see it.
Quote:
1) Being fixed
2) Wrong
3) Wrong
How? Again, no reason, just a "wrong" comment. It's right and right, the B word isn't offensive in modern day, youth culture and D has never been offensive. So if they are both wrong, then why is ***** right? ;)
Quote:
People don't spend the working day online, some are on three hours, some more. Even when I'm on during the UK day, I never have all the people I need at the same time. We make all the major/non essential changes on Sundays now and that is how we're going to do it. I don't see any urgency at all, and I don't see that you need to have words unfiltered or filtered within days so that you don't keel over.
Because loads of the members are fed up having to wait ages for changes, and it's been Sunday now and still no change. It doesn't take more than week to discuss the filter. Most of the discussing was done on Day 1.
Quote:
Because management make decisions too, we can get quite a grasp on what you're thinking in this thread, and usually the questions being raised are sufficiently answered in the threads. You speak of inefficiency, think of the inefficiency of debates with members.
What a stupid thing to say, when you debate with members and management to get things done aswell. You're discussing this thread with members/management, chucking arguments for each case around to get an answer. Sounds like debating to me. Also, members were debating in this thread about what words they want changed. So you are saying members are inefficent?
Quote:
We do usually reply, I believe administrators had replied to this thread and I left it at that - I did not feel it fair to reply unless I had the time to write out a big long reply and at the time I saw this I was dealing with forming some goals for departments. A simple post saying "This is being discussed" would be merely aggravating to members, and feeling like their voice had been completely cut out of it - which it was not. I am not going to inform you of every decision management makes because we're not here to serve you foot and hand, nor would that make us any more efficient.
Saying something is better than saying nothing at all ;) And no-one listens to administrators, it's management people listen to. And it takes less than a few seconds to say, "We're discussing this thread now. If you have anything to add, do keep discussing them." Better than leaving it blank. And again, why discuss it in secret with management, when it's public forum so any decisions effect a large area? Should be discussed with members, rather than letting it be member v member.
Quote:
Here's the deal, the forum is inhabited by many, many, immature forum members. Like it or not, the mature members experience censorship due to the others. This is the community you choose to stay with, therefore you accept its flaws. We do not make decisions based on a very mature teen community, we make decisions based on the HabboxForum community - which we do have a better understanding of than you because while you are limited to certain forums, our moderators span a lot of forums so we get feedback from different groups, if we broke members down by the sections they used the contrasts would be stunning.
As far as I am aware, what members think of a forum isn't discussed in random forums and threads like "Selling throne, 60 CS!" As we all know, moderators don't do surveys and randomly PM members asking what they think, it usually draws back to the feedback forums, where there is an actual discussion going on. Not "I want 62CS for my throne" :rolleyes: And these immature member have proven to not be much of a problem when a word is unfiltered. I bring back the word ***** again. That died down, accept that fact :$
Quote:
***** is going to be refiltered due to us trying it and finding through experience that its not being used in a mature fashion and only being used to insult for the most part. Kiss and make up, relax and chill, good advice, nobody heeds it. Well few do. And those that do suffer at the hands of the many. This forum will not operate based on your maturity level - we operate on a maturity level we believe the forum can maintain, and that is how it will be.
So? That's what moderators are for, and what changes will it make to their work load? None, because if a member wants to offend someone, they will through other words. So re-filtering it will not prove anything nor give any solutions :/ You should know, of all people, that through experience, words do not matter and if a member wants to offend, they will through other words and sentences/phrases. Again, you bring me up when it's not just my opinion, others have the same opinion, mature or immature. Do you not go outside or look at others talking? There are more words out their than *****. I could go around calling people a douche bag if I wanted to offend people. And if that gets filtered, more other words like idiot, stupid, dumby etc etc. The maturity of a forum will not change through filtering words, it cannot change. It's completely dynamic. Filtering ***** will just mean one less word out of millions to offend people. Tis pointless to refilter it, you don't need to be a manager, moderator or anyone like this to see that.
Quote:
You don't have to read that, then at least this. First of all, the way you debate is severely flawed. As I said, you're debating for an audience, not for persuasion. Your method of debate is incredibly unforgiving and quite frankly makes us not want to enact the changes. You have to make concessions, and those you make none of. You can take a hard-line, yes, but that won't get you anywhere really.
Can't take the heat, get out of the fire is all I say. Don't make the changes or don't give any good reasons is putting fuel in the fire. You bring it upon yourself. How is it flawed? Your method of debating is flawed to, because you don't give an answer, you just give excuses and then the circle of me pointing out why it should change continues and you continue to babble on about why you don't give answers.
Quote:
From the FM thread I saw about this, I was ready to make certain changes. I will not lie when I say I considered reversing such changes after reversing the sheer arrogance of your post, immature and juvenile as that impulse might be. But its human, and your idealism really doesn't work. There was a time when we just decided that we weren't replying to your posts, because you refused to yield at all, and nobody else could be right so long as Gomme was right. Someone asked me what I was doing, I said replying to one of your posts, they said "Why the hell would you do that?"
Not sure where this breed of management came from, because as far as I am aware people disagree with you too, not just me. You would not believe how many times I have been told about changes. It gets boring and old rather fast. And I don't feel I am right, not at all. Everyone makes mistakes, but what is incredibly irritating is this "big man" attitude and how you feel you're always right and that being a part of management means you are smarter and feel that members are disposable. It fails, creates conflicts and makes a place unpleasant. This forum was once rich with fun conversations and creativity, now all that is labeled as pointless. Having fun = pointless. The only things I find enjoyable are the members. I have fun talking to some of them and I feel that some changes the management do ruin it for them and for themselves. If you were so good as a manager, why are we arguing now? Surely something is wrong? Why is Arch arguing about the WoW Thread being closed? Why did Jake leave? Why is there a lack of freedom with what members do? Because of restrictions which create conflicts such as this thread. And what you said below backs up with why you're a bad General Manager, care for your members and your staff. Take what both say and listen, not argue. If something cannot be done, give a clear answer - Don't hide it behind the staff roles and behind the scenes. It's a forum and a fansite, not some company where any gossip from behind the scenes is strictly confidential. MAD hid things and sometimes never gave a proper answer, but he certainly gave clearer answers than you. Infact, just before he quit things were looking up. As some people have said (and I will keep their names hidden), things look like they're going to go backwards until you get your act together. Heck, another said you should think about members more than staff. So before you have a go at me for pointing out your weakness, look at yourself and point out why they could be true. Because until you start thinking about members, you're not going to get anywhere.
I do respect the staff, naturally. I don't have any criticisms with the majority of the staff. Infact, I can only think of the management team. Moderators are doing their jobs as they have been told, which is what you want. It's just a shame the brains of the outfit doesn't quite understand the workings of members. You're a GM, you don't know how a member thinks, you're too busy to change things rather than sit and reflect. Usually when members are arguing about a department, it falls back down to restrictions put on the departments making them powerless. Not sure if you were around when Habbos.co.uk existed, that worked well. Not sure what makes the staff at Habbox lose passion in their jobs, but they weren't heavily staffed as Habbox and did a tremendous job, especially with communication, competitions and feedback. They took the positive outlook on running the site, while Habbox takes a negative look at everything, by questioning the member, rather than the question and not giving a suitable answer.
You really need to think more about members. Perhaps get JackHb and Seacat back, they did and did a good at looking after things too. Since 8Freak8 it's all been about keeping staff happy and taking an aggressive stand against members.
