Super Mario Bros. X Forums

My only concern with inactive staff is that only three to four of the moderators have been doing anything.
Pseudo said something about it earlier.
It's mostly just GhostHawk, Pseudo, Ignoritus, and occasionally TNT doing all the work. I think he said something along the lines of, DarkMatt and Kley dont show up at all in the more recent logs.

Inactive staff is a bad thing because there's hardly anyone available to possibly handle spam, reports, posts that break the rules, etc.

Joey wrote:So, if you want that to stop happening, report it and we'll take care of it.

But, something I've been wanting to say for a while and never got the appropriate chance to do so, at the time reports are made, there's hardly ever any staff members online!

I'll back this up. The other day, there was this spam topic, and it was posted two minutes ago. I reported it, and it said "This post has already been reported." But in spite of that, the thread wasn't removed for another 3-5 hours (I can't remember exactly), even though the thread was reported about two minutes after its creation.

That's a good point. However, if you think about it, most spam topics (while really annoying) are relatively harmless and formulaic. What you (all users) need to do is report it and then ignore it. If it's really invasive then this would be different, but it's just one bot posting a topic written in Chinese. Just ignore it until it's dealt with; it shouldn't be such a bother.

Joey wrote:Kley obviously isn't very active but you'll need to give us a reason as to why that's a bad thing.

How is it a good thing? What is the point in having a mod if they won't do anything..... I would not say it is a bad thing but it is pointless at least.

Palisade wrote:

Joey wrote:Kley obviously isn't very active but you'll need to give us a reason as to why that's a bad thing.

How is it a good thing? What is the point in having a mod if they won't do anything..... I would not say it is a bad thing but it is pointless at least.

Having a moderator that doesn't do anything is like having a bathtub with a giant hole in the bottom of it.

Besides, an inactive moderation team wouldn't be appealing to the new members that we apparently want to attract.

having a moderator who's inactive isn't a completely awful thing.
it is, however, pointless but it's actually probably hard to find people capable enough and in different timezones to fill undermoderated shifts.
i think the higher priority here is getting admins who are actually active and know what they're doing.

fireflowerhour wrote:Having a moderator that doesn't do anything is like having a bathtub with a giant hole in the bottom of it.

Bomber57 wrote:Besides, an inactive moderation team wouldn't be appealing to the new members that we apparently want to attract.

ragont wrote:i think the higher priority here is getting admins who are actually active and know what they're doing.

Gonna need some more explanation here.

New rule for this thread: Don't make vague claims without backing them up with cited evidence. If you want to see change, put in the effort on your part.

may i see some of your other admin's actions in the log then?

fireflowerhour wrote:Having a moderator that doesn't do anything is like having a bathtub with a giant hole in the bottom of it.

I'm guessing this is a simile stating that the forum won't operate correctly without all the moderators doing their part. Might be wrong, but that's how I interpreted it.

Bomber57 wrote:Besides, an inactive moderation team wouldn't be appealing to the new members that we apparently want to attract.

This was actually a really good and self-explanatory point. What's so appealing about the moderation team if more than half aren't active? If new members need help, then there's only about 2 moderators there out of the 6 that can help him or her right away, and only 1 out of the 4 admins would be able to help.

ragont wrote:i think the higher priority here is getting admins who are actually active and know what they're doing.

All of the admins know how to do their jobs exceedingly well, but the activity part is true. Joey, you're basically the only active admin here. Valtteri is doing mandatory military service, Quill shows up about once or twice every two weeks, and m4sterbr0s makes one post every 3 months or longer.

Ragont: You were implying that the administrators don't know what they're doing.

I need more explanation for that. I understand that some of them are inactive but we already know that.

Bomber57 wrote:This was actually a really good and self-explanatory point. What's so appealing about the moderation team if more than half aren't active? If new members need help, then there's only about 2 moderators there out of the 6 that can help him or her right away, and only 1 out of the 4 admins would be able to help.

While there's some truth there, that's not what I got from what Bomber said. I interpreted it as "new/prospective members will see that the staff is inactive and therefore won't want to be a part of the community", which I disagree with.

i implied so because i haven't actually seen them do anything...

valtteri hosts community contests every once in a while.
okay.

what do quill and masterbros do, then

i don't see how it's not a problem that the users you entrusted to administrate aren't active, either.
that more or less tells me there's something lacking in the competence of the forum founder..

I mean, I don't think that they'll just instantly leave on the spot if they notice slight inactivity with the staff. I'm sure they wouldn't leave JUST because of inactive staff.

ragont wrote:i don't see how it's not a problem that the users you entrusted to administrate aren't active, either.

I don't see how it is, so until you can give me some examples I can't do anything.

ragont wrote:that more or less tells me there's something lacking in the competence of the forum founder..

"Joey can't see it how I see it, so that makes Joey incompetent."

Joey wrote:New rule for this thread: Don't make vague claims without backing them up with cited evidence. If you want to see change, put in the effort on your part.

you guys, just

"Why don't we have more active moderators" is one thing I'd like to know though, because I think that if we had more of them, it would take less work on a few people to get things done. I mean do you see what point I'm trying to make?

I'll respect whatever answer you give me, tho

Joey wrote:2. I'll listen to the "inactive staff!!!!!" argument once you guys, y'know, provide examples as to why that's a bad thing instead of just expecting everyone to know.

This primarily: http://www.smbxgame.com/forums/m ... memberlist

I've given you and Quill lists of bots, and it seems inefficient at this point.

ragont wrote:what do quill and masterbros do

The most recent thing I recall without going into the logs, that Quill has done was prune a list of spambot accounts I gave him. m3m3br0s doesn't administrate but he still drops by, but I can respect that since there isn't a flood of things to do, but rather finishing up goals like medals, SMBX 1.3.0.2, and keeping the bots under control. I can't say the same for Kley because somehow he visits everyday but I never see him online at all, and I'm here most of the day.

GhostHawk wrote:

Joey wrote:2. I'll listen to the "inactive staff!!!!!" argument once you guys, y'know, provide examples as to why that's a bad thing instead of just expecting everyone to know.

This primarily: http://www.smbxgame.com/forums/m ... memberlist

I've given you and Quill lists of bots, and it seems inefficient at this point.

May I ask how you know these people are bots?

^
They're not all bots, but most of them are. We can tell by whoising them and stuff. The bots either have random characters as their username or a "real" first name followed by a sometimes scrambled character last name followed by numbers - ErikGoluboff## is the most common example of the latter.

Pseudo-dino wrote:^
They're not all bots, but most of them are. We can tell by whoising them and stuff. The bots either have random characters as their username or a "real" first name followed by a sometimes scrambled character last name followed by numbers - EricGoluboff## is the most common example of the latter.

This. The link is the most recently registered users by the way, not all of the bots.

So honestly this might be straying a bit from the current conversation but I thought of it recently. The only two real active moderators are Pseudo and GhostHawk, they do great jobs. Those are just two out of the six moderators we have. I can respect TNT and DarkMatt being busy with real life, but Kley has done next to nothing. Pseudo and GhostHawk are doing all the work, having more active moderators could probably take a little pressure off their shoulders and make their jobs slightly easier. It's just like the level judge team when I was part of it; I was really the only one tending to the mass amount of levels that had to be reviewed, while the others didn't really do anything. It made my job a lot harder since I had to cover more area in a short amount of time while the rest of my supposed team did nothing.

Inactivity is bad because it puts more pressure and stress and work on the actual active moderators, because they don't have a full force to work with, just themselves. Even your own moderators have complained of the inactive staff, shouldn't this speak to Joey and the other higher-ups? Apparently not, it's not a problem to them. I would give my suggestions on which staff need to definitely be replaced but Joey doesn't want to talk about that for whatever reason, I mean as long as I make valid points that people can agree on, Joey should do something about it, right? Out of the 10 administrator/moderator members, only 3-4 of them are active, this leaves you with 6 members of the staffing team who are doing next to nothing. Not only does it make us look more unprofessional or what have you for the supposed audience Joey wants us to reach out to and gain, but it puts a lot more work and stress and pressure (as I stated before) on the actual active members because they have to be dealing with more work that could be covered a lot easier if you actually had active staff members.

Plenty has been said as to why and how the staff should and could be changed on this forum, I'm not certain why you're hesitant to fix a problem that has been around for a long while now, and such a problem has been addressed by your own staff members a couple times over as well. It honestly makes me want to say that you're just lazy and incompetent as an administrator, because you won't actually do anything that needs to be done. I've noticed that a couple of these messages have been directed towards Joey mostly, that should be a wake-up call, but I guess it hasn't been yet. Humans don't hibernate during the winter, wake up Joey.