The forum review

[Josh]

unluckily

Yeah, it's all dependent on luck? ???

Anyway, surely someone is going to resign over the next month or two when you continue you change the forum.

Will he get first pick or a free trial when someone leaves?

i expect a lovely big thread when i wake up tomorrow and i also want to see dictionaries has been reinstated as global moberator honestly. goodnight.

[AgnesIO]

If we keep someone on there's no point in reforming, it defeats the whole point. All moderators agreed to the reform and thought it was a good idea, they accepted the situation and unluckily it didn't work out in Dictionaries favour, this time.

Of course. I can see how the forum would have gone downhill if you kept a good moderator on.

Posts merged by Nicola (Forum Super Moderator): due to forum lag

[Hecktix]

Yeah, it's all dependent on luck? ???

Anyway, surely someone is going to resign over the next month or two when you continue you change the forum.

Will he get first pick or a free trial when someone leaves?

i expect a lovely big thread when i wake up tomorrow and i also want to see dictionaries has been reinstated as global moberator honestly. goodnight.

No it was most definitely not down to luck - although I will say it is unlucky for the member of staff, just as it is unlucky when any member of staff loses their job.

The reasons for a member of staff's departure are confidential and no more shall be said on the matter, in terms of if someone else leaves and should a position need filling, I am of the opinion applications will open even if it is for one position.

[AgnesIO]

No it was most definitely not down to luck - although I will say it is unlucky for the member of staff, just as it is unlucky when any member of staff loses their job.

The reasons for a member of staff's departure are confidential and no more shall be said on the matter, in terms of if someone else leaves and should a position need filling, I am of the opinion applications will open even if it is for one position.

I think your reasons are already public.

[Nixt]

These changes are definitely a positive step in the right direction. Six Moderators with global powers is plenty to cover the forum rule breaks, any more would definitely be overkill.

It is unfortunate about Dictionaries but at the end of the day when you are streamlining and modernising a department sometimes cutbacks have to be made, although unfortunate, it is inevitable and necessary - I am sure the selection was done fairly and it really isn't our place to question it.

The main focus now is ensuring that future Moderators are still considered on the basis of the forum browsing preferences. An issue in the past is sometimes forums would get neglected by Moderators with global powers so to ensure the forum is covered this still needs to be kept in mind, and obviously Moderators reminded that they are to browse all forums and not just their favourites. This has always been the case though and I am sure it has been kept in mind, but that's the only problem I think could really arise out of this and providing that is kept in check I think it's perfect.

Excellent changes and I look forward to the future reviews!

[Mathew]

I think this is a good update, I've never really seen the point in restricting moderators to one section when they can just browse it all. The restriction is what has put me off applying in the past, fear of not having enough to do.

[Hecktix]

I think your reasons are already public.

Not at all. People seem very quick to make accusations when they have no insight into the work put in behind these things.

[Inseriousity.]

It's only cos he's from Middlesbrough! Suffering severe redundancies irl (going to be the worst hit town in the uk according to a BBC survey). Pfft we can't even keep our jobs on an online forum, what chance have we got in life!

I'm sure it was a fair system, still a slap in the face, fair or not. Free month's VIP compensation, I reckon

[Josh]

I am sure the selection was done fairly and it really isn't our place to question it.

Dictionaries has said it was mainly due to his section not having enough activity which lead to not enough moderator action. However that could just be his side of the story and of course I will never hear the other side. All I'm saying is, it may not have been fair.

[immense]

If this management was a political party you would be CONSERVATIVE. People losing their jobs. How devastating.