Printable View
Why are there now four super moderators with just four standard moderators, it seems completely unnecessary and over the top, I know there's a shortage but it basically defeats the point of having moderators in the first place.
Unless of course you're planning to open moderator applications (Again..)
Edit:
There's also management who often moderate, so you have essentially more people promoted higher than moderators than there are moderators?
Are you complaining that there are too many super moderators? Surely having more super moderators is more efficient than having normal moderators. If you report a post there is a higher chance of it getting sorted. Unless I have missed what you're trying to say completely? I don't know about you though, but I haven't seen any problems with the moderation of this forum. Although I am not going to forgive you for removing my profile picture Bolt660! That was downright pointless and totally out of order. See here for more information. :@
It's an upside down command chain, you have more people in charge than not in charge. (Well not strictly speaking but sort of)Quote:
Originally Posted by Neversoft
More Super Moderators are a good thing :P The majority of forums do not need specialised moderators so it's not too much of a big deal :) A bit weird, but with the size of the forum, it's bound to happen :P
It's just showing that the staffing is becoming a closed system where old staff are being recycled and not updated..Quote:
Originally Posted by GommeInc
Edit: Especially considering that two of the standard moderators have jobs in other departments.
It also undermines the purpose of the standard moderators because by the time they realise there's a problem post, the swarm of super moderators have it under control.
I don't believe normal moderators can do as much as super moderators anyway, so if there was a huge problem, a super moderator would need to deal with it anyway. So basically if there's no super moderators online, that could be a problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chippiewill
But with so many super moderators why not just scrap the normal moderators since they now serve no purpose with:Quote:
Originally Posted by Dean
Four super moderators
AGMS (Not 100% sure about that, but Oli sure does moderate the feedback forum)
Asst. Forum Manager
Forum Manager
General Manager
All doing the same thing except more effectively?
Surely removing the normal moderators would only create more problems? I don't think 4 super moderators is enough alone to moderate the forum and I don't think general management do much moderating.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chippiewill
In my opinion, there should be more normal moderators as the forum needs to stay moderated as much as possible. I'm sure if it was left for a few hours some havoc would break out.
Most of the post edits I see now are by super moderators anyway, I rarely see edits by standard moderators.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dean
I honestly don't know how the moderation system works, but I'm sure normal moderators do partake in moderating otherwise the role would've been dissolved long ago.
It seems kinda standard for a forum of this size to have 4 SMs, Moderators are for more specialised forums or (at least) one per forum. Members come and go quite often, so they may just stick with SMs because finding a good number of Moderators is a bit difficult, especially when quite a few have left and some people just aren't interested anymore. The lack of activity may have something to do with it too :/
It's only really recently, moderators have been promoted to smods because a lot left, then some came back which has now led to there being more smods than mods.Quote:
I honestly don't know how the moderation system works, but I'm sure normal moderators do partake in moderating otherwise the role would've been dissolved long ago.
I would have thought 2-1 or 1.5-1 would be around the right amount.Quote:
Members come and go quite often, so they may just stick with SMs because finding a good number of Moderators is a bit difficult, especially when quite a few have left and some people just aren't interested anymore.
Depends how you view mod systems. Quite a few forums I have used don't have super mods, or only hire special people for mods with expertise in an area. It's quite useful as it means any attack on a forum can be dealt with quickly, while mods either lack global power or the power for advanced tools such as banning, deleting etc. Maybe Habbox have looked at reducing the number of mods, because they see super mods as more useful in general? I can see your point though :)
I suspect it's just more recently since so many mods became smods and then Apple got removed because he's secretly Mint and all that, it's just left a lacking of moderators I think. And they can hardly rehire a super moderator back as a moderator because it's a waste when they'd do more good as an smod. It's probably just the way it's turned out over the past couple of weeks.Quote:
Originally Posted by GommeInc
Edit: And Syko resigned
I'm not sure about the other normal moderators but I haven't found a lack of things to moderate in the Technology section at least. I know James, Sarah and General Management can see our statistics so I'm sure if moderator activity is reduced overall they'd pick up on it fairly quickly.
There's definitely been a shift in the ratios in the past two years..
http://i53.tinypic.com/rhipzt.png
Four Smods ****-ton of mods
^^ I think those were the days when the moderating system was more relaxed in terms of the fact they didn't put that much pressure on mods. Nowadays a mod has quite a tough job with all the logs and targets, hence they are a lot more dedicated to the job. Also, the forums have been cut quite significantly and are not as active as they once were, yet another reason for less mods.
I agree with the ratio bit, that there should be more normal or specialized mods, but Nicola's hiring was a good decision as she was one with experience and apart from Martin the only other experienced S Mod on the team. This isn't unheard of as there were 4 SMods when Gairon and Oli were forum management.
Firstly, only up until recent times there have always been 4 Super Mods for long periods of time. I think it's underestimated the amount of work thats required of smods, and it's far more than just checking over posts etc. I can't really see any problems with there being an inbalance at this moment in time, since Supermods are required to do everything that normal mods do and more, so surely it's not really going to cause any huge problems.
I think it's all fine trying to compare things to the past, however times change, and perhaps a different balance is needed for the current conditions. I don't think you can assess what kind of moderation we need when you're not behind the scenes to see what kinds of problems we deal with. It has to be remember that SuperModerators are responsible for all sections of the forum, and it's far more useful and easier for us to be able to get to rulebreaks and deal with them as quickly and efficiently as possible with there being more chance of us being online. 2 newer Smods yes, and it's therefore much easier to have Nicola and myself available should help and guidance be needed here.
As Jin rightly pointed out in another thread: These things are really down to management to decide, and there really is no need for public disapproval of every single staffing issue that's made. Department managers often know what they are doing and will do it for the good of the department. These decisions are not made with haste, and they will be for the good of the forum. Taking something positive like an additional smod (Which will keep the forums far better moderated), and turning it into something negative for trivial reasons like this is unfair. "completely unnecessary and over the top" makes this situation sound far more serious than it is, especially considering Four supermoderators was always a decent number to have.
I understand there could be changes soon anyway, but in the meantime the current positions within the moderation team are fine, and if anything this will improve the moderation not hamper it in any way.
Hi,
Moderation is currently being dealt with by Forum Management and General Management - so watch this space. In terms of "General Management and Forum Management" doing the same role - we actually don't. We don't moderate the forums only if we come across something or if someone alerts it to me via MSN (even then I will ask a Super Moderator). We focus on managing the moderators and checking on them. We also have other roles and is not merely focused on Moderation. It isn't in the description on how to do our jobs that we have to Moderate - but once a moderator always a moderator in my eyes.
In terms of General Management the only person you will see edit posts will be Hecktix as he is the AGM Staff. This means that any staff breaks can not be dealt with (Super) Moderators and he proceeds to take a course of action against the rule break. You may sometimes find a AGM or the GM moderating but that is because like me - if they come across it they will deal with it themselves (not always) or they will report it.
Some people under estimate the role differences between a Normal Moderator and a Super one - they have to do more work in terms of moderating the whole forum thus it would be an advantage. For example if there was a rule break in Feedback and less amount of Super Moderators it would not be dealt with until one came online or an Administrator saw it.
As I said in the VM, unless they are lazy are morons, you don't need four. When the forum used to be at its peak, they used to keep 2 super mods and more normal mods and it used to work perfectly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarah
As Sarah has hinted at there are some major changes up ahead in regards to the forum department which is why external applications haven't opened to address the reduced regular moderator presence. Nicola wanting to return was an unexpected bonus as it reduces the strain on martin with two very new smods who are still learning. It's far better to have more smods than normal mods than vice versa :)
The forum is sad to say, no longer at its peak which is why we are changing things to address this department wide.
it's nice to see management finally accepting thus and not using their usual old excuses.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamesy
I'm going to venture a guess and say that a new moderation model has been implemented. To ensure more quality and consistency in moderation, the number of Super Moderators will be increased and the number of normal moderators will be decreased. Normal moderator will essentially become a stepping stone to Super Moderator, making the normal moderation position much more competitive.
This has been argued for a few times over the past few years, with many saying that since SMODS can view post reports which Mods often can't (was that changed?), it makes more sense to just use a number of Super Moderators. The downside here is that the moderation will go to much more of a reports-based response system, as opposed to moderators browsing all the new threads in their forums and proactively finding rulebreaking. Of course, I'm sure the super moderators still browse as well, but they're not going to see all new posts.
On the other hand, reducing the number of overall moderation staff makes it easier to implement policy and ensure that it is being practiced and practiced evenly throughout the department. It's easier to find 6 quality staff than 20, essentially.
Or I could be wrong about the changes :P
As it still stands only Super Moderators can view post reports.Quote:
Originally Posted by nvrspk4
I remember this being the case when MAD was Forum Manager or AGM. The idea was that being a Forum Moderator was essentially a trial for Forum Super Moderator. If this were to happen it wouldn't be a bad idea in the way the current Forum is moderated.Quote:
Originally Posted by nvrspk4
Then why have 4 smod's?!?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamesy
He also said there are major changes up ahead for the forum department :PQuote:
Originally Posted by Samanfa
I know, but surely if 2 managed in peak then 1 will manage now before it actually changes. :P
Edit: If a SMOD who resigned decided to come back, would you let them?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samanfa
I don't really get what has got to do with anything at present. As I have said (and Jamesy) Moderation and the forum will be totally redeveloped, meaning the structure of the team will change.
I'm saying surely the forum isn't as active as it used to be, so you don't need as many smod's.
It's up to management to decide this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Samanfa
I'm not stupid.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamesy
I asked a question beforehand, no one answered.
As both Jamesy and Sarah have said there was a need for an extra Super Moderator as two of the Super Moderators are very, very new - one of which only passed his trial a few weeks before his promotion, and although is capable to do the job Forum Super Moderator is a very complex job and a lot is expected of a Super Moderator, this pretty much left a burden on Martin as the only fully-able Super Moderator, in turn this puts James and Sarah under more pressure and we were seeing them complete more and more moderation tasks - on top of their other daily duties, this is too much for them in my opinion, it would be hard for them to moderate the forum on top of ensuring all the moderation is of an excellent standard. Therefore hiring another Super Moderator at this point, made sense.
For some time now there have been ideas to reform the Forum Department - and this weekend you will see phase 1 of the reform plans for Habbox Forum, later in the week phase two will appear and phases three and four will appear in consequent weeks.
The idea regarding moderation is to have HabboxForum moderated to an excellent standard, and should a proposal involving an experienced Super Moderator who has been very good at the job in the not so distant past, we will jump at this in an attempt to provide you with the best moderation.
I know it's in need of help. But surely she could have returned as a normal moderator.
This is like the Shar thing all over again.
But I did go back on my word, I do say Nicola is the best for the job at the time being.
And if we are arguing about this, then we should also be arguing the fact that kelly-Mate returned as a Trade Expert and not normal staff.
Does it even concern us directly? I don't see the point of another ridiculously long thread when it will hardly affect us*. The only thing we'll notice is the reports possibly done more quickly but other than that, nothing.
*Us excludes rulebreakers.
Feel free to tell me though.
She didn't return as a normal Moderator as it wouldn't have helped anything really, normal Moderators really do just tidy up nowadays and the main work is left to the Super Moderators - as Jamesy said this is due to the difference in the forum climate at the moment and is going to be addressed in phase 1 of our reform plan which will be revealed on Sunday.Quote:
Originally Posted by Samanfa
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hecktix
But the second part to that is true though isn't it. We're arguing over something like this, when something the same happened in Rv. Kelly left as te kelly returned as a te.
But anyway, what's done is done.
It doesn't really bother me, a mods a mod at the end of the day. I suppose the normal moderator job is there to gain trust before giving them more 'power'.
I'm pretty sure we don't get a say in staff affairs. Also, why do you keep bringing this point back? It's got nothing to do with the ratio of supermods to normal moderators. That topic is over too now we've been told there are some new changes coming to the structure of moderators several times. Let it go.Quote:
Originally Posted by Samanfa
If she's good enough for the job there's no reason she shouldn't be able to return to that job, what's the point in putting someone in a role they are over-qualified for? It wouldn't happen in real life if there were positions available, so it'll happen here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Samanfa