a staff member concern

[Raster]

People don't have the right to call out the staff?

You're taking it out of context. People don't have the right to call out the staff on their activity because they can't see the logs or view the staff forum.

And God, this thread is terrible.

[Mable]

I think I would make a decent staff member.]

That was a joke right.

[Superiorstar]

If activity were everything, I'd be like founder by now.
Actually, I don't think I'm fit for staff on a forum of more than ~500, I'm also really strict.
However, on a forum of 10-499, I'm not actually that bad since I can contribute. I was the founder of a forum of ~450 a few years back, for another cancelled Mario fangame (an online one) which nobody here even has heard of since the game appealed to Sonic fans (it had Sonic character playables).

OFF TOPIC:But I'm the most active in the forums.
ON TOPIC: You shouldn't demote someone that hasn't been active for a month, a year maybe but not a month.
anyways, if he does his job right, why demote him for it?

[silent_]

But no. This is a staff member not handling arguments, not handling locking threads, not handling clarifying things, and I highly doubt he has gave anyone warnings or bans when it seems like all of the bad users are getting banned by administrators.

And you can't view the logs or the staff forum so this is all flagrant conjecture.

Well, I at least have proof that he's not handling arguments and not clarifying things to benefit the community. As for locking threads and punishing users, I do have a tiny bit of proof, because when I was a level judge I had access to the moderator and level judge logs and it seemed that he was doing no actions at the time.

I don't see how it's not my business when a staff member is not contributing to the community. No, I'm not saying not contributing the staff forum, as that's not "the community". And if it was a normal user not contributing to the community, it would be different. But no. This is a staff member not handling arguments, not handling locking threads, not handling clarifying things, and I highly doubt he has gave anyone warnings or bans when it seems like all of the bad users are getting banned by administrators.

And again I'd like to see why this is your concern if he is not directly damaging you or other users.

It's not damaging me, and I'm able to admit that. It's just that it concerns me how such there are three active moderators and one inactive, kind-of-non-contributing moderator.

If activity were everything, I'd be like founder by now.
Actually, I don't think I'm fit for staff on a forum of more than ~500, I'm also really strict.
However, on a forum of 10-499, I'm not actually that bad since I can contribute. I was the founder of a forum of ~450 a few years back, for another cancelled Mario fangame (an online one) which nobody here even has heard of since the game appealed to Sonic fans (it had Sonic character playables).

This thread is not about you. Just thought I should clarify that.

Allow me to clear up a few things here.

Being a moderator IS contributing to the community by taking part in staff discussion/handing out warnings and bans. Claiming otherwise is outright stupid. Even if you don't see him making posts that doesn't mean he's not contributing. One of my biggest gripes with this community is the fact that members believe they have the right to call the staff out on everything they do when the staff is clearly capable of handling itself. Really, it's none of your business Kep.

People don't have the right to call out the staff?

If we weren't able to call out the staff, half of us, including me, would be permanently banned by now.

If activity were everything, I'd be like founder by now.
Actually, I don't think I'm fit for staff on a forum of more than ~500, I'm also really strict.
However, on a forum of 10-499, I'm not actually that bad since I can contribute. I was the founder of a forum of ~450 a few years back, for another cancelled Mario fangame (an online one) which nobody here even has heard of since the game appealed to Sonic fans (it had Sonic character playables).

OFF TOPIC:But I'm the most active in the forums.
ON TOPIC: You shouldn't demote someone that hasn't been active for a month, a year maybe but not a month.
anyways, if he does his job right, why demote him for it?

He's not doing his job right, that's what this thread is mostly about.

[zioy]

If activity were everything, I'd be like founder by now.
Actually, I don't think I'm fit for staff on a forum of more than ~500, I'm also really strict.
However, on a forum of 10-499, I'm not actually that bad since I can contribute. I was the founder of a forum of ~450 a few years back, for another cancelled Mario fangame (an online one) which nobody here even has heard of since the game appealed to Sonic fans (it had Sonic character playables).

OFF TOPIC:But I'm the most active in the forums.
ON TOPIC: You shouldn't demote someone that hasn't been active for a month, a year maybe but not a month.
anyways, if he does his job right, why demote him for it?

I say more around 2-3 months.

Also, if there was a post-count growth chart my post-rate is probably something like 4-5 posts an hour. It'd be more if I was online on Sundays.

I know the thread's not about me, btw. I'm just referring to staff in general (and also me b/c I just so happen to know what it's like to be staff)

[bossedit8]

It shouldn't based on "activity", it only relates if you are good and also understand of the whole concept of being one.

[Nexia]

There just might be better potential gmods out there who could be more active than Kley, while doing the same sort of things he does around here.

At the same time saying "someone not posting = not active/helpful" isn't that good of an argument either, especially since you don't know what's going on behind the scenes like some others have already said.

Anyway IIRC GhostHawk already said (on IRC) that the Staff was working on changes internally with demoting/replacing in-active mods. So my suggestion would be, to just let the staff handle it like they said they are.

[zioy]

It shouldn't based on "activity", it only relates if you are good and also understand of the whole concept of being one.

And actually do your job, which Kley does when he's online, but I feel like he's more of a backup moderator kinda guy.

[silent_]

OFF TOPIC:But I'm the most active in the forums.
ON TOPIC: You shouldn't demote someone that hasn't been active for a month, a year maybe but not a month.
anyways, if he does his job right, why demote him for it?

I say more around 2-3 months.

Also, if there was a post-count growth chart my post-rate is probably something like 4-5 posts an hour. It'd be more if I was online on Sundays.

I know the thread's not about me, btw. I'm just referring to staff in general (and also me b/c I just so happen to know what it's like to be staff)

Honestly, how is referring to your activity rate related to the staff? Just asking.

It shouldn't based on "activity", it only relates if you are good and also understand of the whole concept of being one.

I feel like I have said this too much, but:

Kley was in the first place to chill and noncompetitive to be a moderator.

At the same time saying "someone not posting = not active/helpful" isn't that good of an argument either, especially since you don't know what's going on behind the scenes like some others have already said.

I never said "not posting = not active/helpful". I was just saying Kley shouldn't be a moderator if he's not contributing to non-staff-board threads, because that's part of being helpful and contributing.

[RudeGuy]

Kley was a good and mature member overall, I think he was promoted (and voted) for that reason.
Activity is a thing when a memeber isn't here for a week or a month.

[silent_]

Kley was a good and mature member overall, I think he was promoted (and voted) for that reason.

I see what you're saying and I agree that Kley is good, but he's not that mature. Still, though, he's more mature than a large chunk of the community, including me.

[Superiorstar]

Off topic: I'm aiming a flailing bullet at Kep but... why is it that you make dramatic threads?
On topic: Activity=helpfulness.

[Marina]

I really still don't understand why it's your concern if he is a mod or not. It's not like it's some reward or something. He is mod because he is helpful, even if you don't see it.

[silent_]

Off topic: I'm aiming a flailing bullet at Kep but... why is it that you make dramatic threads?
On topic: Activity=helpfulness.

How is this dramatic? I just like debates and questions/answers, that's all.

I really still don't understand why it's your concern if he is a mod or not. It's not like it's some reward or something. He is mod because he is helpfull, even if you don't see it.

He was honestly a lot more helpful when he was active.

[Fuyu]

Kep, you may think it concerns you, but it clearly doesn't. You're curious about it, but being curious != concerned.

Being a Moderator is about contributing to the forum as much as possible, by either punishing users that constantly break forum rules, or lending a hand on a discussion held by the rest of the Staff, or by anything that helps the forum in general. You don't know if Kley is actually contributing to any discussion the Staff is holding up right now. Also, the fact that Kley wasn't as active as you may have wished for in the past doesn't mean that hasn't changed. Like Raster said, you're just making pure conjectures based upon beliefs and past facts. That will lead you nowhere.

Last but not least, being chill isn't that bad as long as you know when to stand and defend your views. And by the way, what is your definition of mature exactly?

[silent_]

Kep, you may think it concerns you, but it clearly doesn't. You're curious about it, but being curious != concerned.

I'm curious and concerned. I'm curious because I want to know why he's a staff member still, and I'm concerned because he shouldn't be a staff and I'm also concerned that the staff is like not even noticing it.

Being a Moderator is about contributing to the forum as much as possible, by either punishing users that constantly break forum rules, or lending a hand on a discussion held by the rest of the Staff, or by anything that helps the forum in general. You don't know if Kley is actually contributing to any discussion the Staff is holding up right now. Also, the fact that Kley wasn't as active as you may have wished for in the past doesn't mean that hasn't changed. Like Raster said, you're just making pure conjectures based upon beliefs and past facts. That will lead you nowhere.

Okay, this thread's sole purpose is not just activity. Kley in the first place is too chill (in a bad way) and cannot handle being in charge of anyone.

And by the way, what is your definition of mature exactly?

What the dictionary has to say.

[Fuyu]

I'm curious and concerned. I'm curious because I want to know why he's a staff member still, and I'm concerned because he shouldn't be a staff and I'm also concerned that the staff is like not even noticing it.

Ok so let me clarify what I've said there as much as possible, it is NOT of your concern. Not in a way that it bugs you, or that you're curious or any other way you want to think, in a way that it has nothing to do with you.

Okay, this thread's sole purpose is not just activity. Kley in the first place is too chill (in a bad way) and cannot handle being in charge of anyone.

Even I was chill when I was on NSMBX and grew up on SMBX:R and became what I'm now. Besides, the one that decides who should be in charge isn't the userbase but the Staff. They know better if he is capable or not.

What the dictionary has to say.

And how does Kley not fit said definition exactly? You don't know if he contributes doing other things.

[DarkMatt]

Look, I don't mean to stir up the pot,

Funny, because that's exactly what you're doing.

Why should we boot one of our staff out just because a user in our community's all like, "HEY HE'S NOT USING HIS DESK FIRE HIM." If anyone's going to want to demote someone, it's going to be us and we're going to handle it ourselves. I'm not saying you shouldn't report when things like this happen, just that internal affairs is ultimately left to what we do, not what you guys want us to do. Public outcry against a mod is one thing, sure, but booting our staff members because of inactivity? Leave that to us to decide please.

So just remember what this guy said,

Really, it's none of your business Kep.

because it's really not your concern. You can point this out just fine but there's no point in going 4 pages about why you think you're right and we should do something.

Every fiber of my being wants to lock this topic but I'd rather you guys get the full benefit of making threads like this, so feel free to continue circlejerking.

[Hawkeyeone]

I think I would make a decent staff member.]

That was a joke right.

Your logic is the biggest joke I've ever seen.(nah jk but seriously, I don't think I would be terrible in the activity apartment.)

[silent_]

Every fiber of my being wants to lock this topic but I'd rather you guys get the full benefit of making threads like this, so feel free to continue circlejerking.

If you want to lock this, lock it, I honestly don't really care at this point.