More / Better Moderators needed.

[Galaxay1]

Re-posting would be a waste of time/space.

[Catzsy]

Re-posting would be a waste of time/space.

I agree but not for probably the same reason. As I have said before lot of these threads are just allowed to die without anybody making a decision although Nvrpsk4 and a lot of members contributed an awful lot to the thread so its a shame that a legitimate request for a council is not considered important enough to be given a decision whether it is Yes or No. :S

[Ostinato]

I agree but not for probably the same reason. As I have said before lot of these threads are just allowed to die without anybody making a decision although Nvrpsk4 and a lot of members contributed an awful lot to the thread so its a shame that a legitimate request for a council is not considered important enough to be given a decision whether it is Yes or No. :S

You go girl!

[Sammeth.]

Ive made a thread in the managers forum to try and point people to this thread. I think its important that Higher Management realise how much effort and backing has been put behind this idea, and how its developed so much. Something needs to be said, and I eagerly await MADs reply.

Edit: And Alex, it would be a waste of time reposting it, as there are so many posts that develop the idea, or take it further, or add bits to it etc.

[Catzsy]

Hey,

Apologies for this thread going so long without a management reply, I was away Saturday and spent most of Sunday night replying to my 73 PMs and sorting out VIP problems I also apologize, because I've done a lot of work today, I took the liberty of reading to about page 15 and then reading about 4 pages between 15 and 30. So I am going to outline things that you may have suggested, I am not aiming to steal your idea, I simply was for once lazy and don't have the time to read 17 pages of the same stuff.

One thing I will say, please, don't turn this into fights as I saw midway through. There is a good point in this thread, and I'd be really dissapointed if we had to shut one of the few civil discussions because some people decided that they just had to have a catfight in this thread. Accept that others may not share your views, and that doesn't mean they or you are wrong, it just means that you have different opinions, which is fine. Onto the replies.



Yes actually, we have tried to get this running, if Smiddums is somewhere he was in charge of starting up a Council, as delegated by sierk, but he resigned, and the entire thing died.



There is a specific place for those kinds of posts, and perhaps the moderator PMd the member about it. I agree that it probably wasn't the best way to go about it if he didn't PM him, but people will make mistakes. I'd appreciate it if things singling out specific moderators were PMd to me or MAD though, we will deal with them, its just that publically putting people on the spot usually leads to them being defensive, which makes the environment rather tense, thus slowing down discussion.



T minus 8 minutes. Not bad eh?



That is one of the things I've noticed, and commented on several times. I know I sound like a right prat going on about how things were in the old days, but I feel that its a sort of cycle, the members expect the Staff to be perfect, so because of that staff don't have room for interpretation, or personal flair, personal harshness or leniency, because if they don't do everything exactly by the book, they often get their very own thread in this very forum. Then, because of that, things are often harder for us to deal with on a person-by-person basis, and people get upset about it, because their situation was extenuating, but the mod dealt with it by the book. Its really a neverending cycle that makes everyone unhappy, but really until mods are no longer held up to a magnifying glass, nothing can really change.

I think the big moment of change where members really started criticizing mods is when infractions came in. The simple reason was, members got huge amounts of usernotes, more than the current infractions, and more unfair even. However the member couldn't see the usernotes, therefore they didn't complain. Then when they were banned, when it was said, "Oh you had 15 usernotes" there wasn't much dissent. As soon as members got to see every time they were infracted, they decided to kick up a fuss (well, I can't generalize and say all members, as some are mature about it) but nobody can seem to accept that moderators don't have a driving need to issue as many infractions and get as many people banned as they can. They're just trying to do their jobs.



As far as the council idea, I think its terrific. Here's my ideas about it, and I apologize once again if I mention something someone else has suggested, its simply because I sorta skipped half the thread.


Habbox Council is comprised of 21 members and an executive board of 5.

Executive Board

Management - 2
Staff - 1
Members - 1
VIPs - 1

General Council

Management - 2 + 1 department manager
Staff - 6
Members - 6
VIPs - 6


Terms - Each member of the VIP and Member council are elected for two month "terms". After that, there is another election, where members may run again, or choose to let someone else. Members who have server 3 consecutive terms must sit out at least one term before trying to run again, to get fresh ideas in.


Nominations - For members, nominations would be made in a closed forums where only admins could see the threads. The members with the top 20 votes would be looked through, and those who did not fit the criteria (see next section) would be removed. The top 5 of the remaining members would move on to general elections. Of the top 30 (eligible) members, management would also select 5 candidates. This way, there is an even match.

Requirements - Candidates for Habbox Council must

• Have less than 6 active infraction points.
• Have no more than 2 bans (temporary).
• Must have no less than 150 posts.
• Must have been a member for at least 4 months (on the account they are running.)
• Must be active and willing to listen to ideas

"Elections" - The 10 candidates, selected by admins and members, would be put to a public vote, open for 7 days. The top 6 members would move on to become the Member Council Reps for those two months.

VIPs - VIPs can nominate and vote in the normal elections, but they may also vote for and nominate VIP reps in a special VIP forum, and these VIP reps will serve as voicing the concerns of VIPs which I believe are underrepresented on the forums.

Staff - Staff will function sort of differently, the staff will nominate one staff member (other than the manager) for that term, and the manager may opt to choose one member on top of that (not required). Then all managers will submit names to (A)GMs, who will then post a poll, allowing staff members to elect their 6 representatives. The (A)GMs will also post a poll with all the managers, and people will select who will accompany the two members of management to make up the management portion of the council. The same rules with terms apply to Staff and VIPs.


Functions of the Council - To ensure that this doesn't become an "abuse of power" kind of thing, I don't believe that the council should be given the power to actually execute actions, such as to hire or fire people, or institute changes of their own accord. Otherwise people would run for the simple reason of gaining power, as opposed to representing members. The Council, therefore, would gather ideas and propose new ones, and discuss them in a closed forum, as well as taking in ideas from the Feedback Forum. Votes might be taken, however management will probably take this into account, but reserves the right to deny changes based on workability, difficulty to execute, danger to the safety of the board, limited resources, etc. etc.

"Meetings" - There would probably be a Council Drop-In sort of thing with open stickies and also council members to take ideas, and sort of be a chill-out place. Also Council members could explain what they've been discussing, in addition to a perhaps biweekly summary posted on the forums, and perhaps a monthly Meet the Council type of thing? Each would have a little part in the thread, and in the Meet the Council thing on Habbo. However the main meeting place for the council itself would be the closed forums.

Administration and Impeachment - Any council member who is banned permanantly, or for serious offences, will be removed from the council immediately, and replaced by the next runner up. Habbox Management will reserve the right to decide what serious offenses are, but if you get banned you really shouldn't be on Council, because that's just being irresponsible and unfair to your fellow members. For Staff, when they are fired they will be "impeached" from their position as the Staff Rep, and if they resign from all jobs it will also be considered a resignation from the Council. The next Runner Up will take their place. (This is why there will be more candidates for staff, we're more likely to lose someone to a resignation or a firing than to a banning.)


That's just the basic layout, but what do you guys think? I'm open to suggestions, additions, or modifications.

nvr

Well to save people sifting through this was the final plan that Nvrspk4 posted to which most members agreed

[Jamie.]

REPORT POSTS! Makes a mods job easier.

[Galaxay1]

Jamie. if you cared to look through the pages you would relise the idea re-devloped to a habbox council preferred to more/better moderators. And alot of people do report posts.

[Jamie.]

Jamie. if you cared to look through the pages you would relise the idea re-devloped to a habbox council preferred to more/better moderators. And alot of people do report posts.

I was reinstating the fact along the amount of pages for people who cant be bothered to look through?! :eusa_ange

[Sammeth.]

Still awaiting a reply from higher management !

[Catzsy]

Still awaiting a reply from higher management !

Maybe copy and paste Nvrspk4 suggestion for the make up of the council and make a new thread with a poll and see what demand there is?