No I didn't say that. But that's not the point as Darlene already said. It doesn't matters how many mods a forum has, but how active it'll be moderated. And just because Zone has some more active staff we don't need to chose who will be the predestined to do this job. I am glad we have active mods!
And I say a manager or an admin needs to be able to take action in the forum of his server. The same goes for the kingdom leaders on the GK forum.
I'm also saying PWA's should have mod rights to the entire Playerworld forum.

I don't need to, you need to provide me with reasons as to why though shouldn't because they already have moderation rights.

Errm..

I already said they don't need it.

And I've already quoted...... 3 or 4 times now...



Errm..

Doesn't answer my question.

I have never seen a thread closed because it was answered. Please, show me the rule that states that. Should I start reporting every single thread that has been answered? If it's in the wrong section then move it... I know you mods can do that.

Like I posted before, I don't understand why you're so hostile towards this thread. Are you scared you're gonna lose your moderation from a sudden realization of the higher-ups?


Anyways, back on the topic I agree with Rufus and co. I don't think there's a need for that many moderators. Hell, I doubt you need 5 moderators to moderate the whole Graal forums. It's just not that active. It's already stated that Vulcan is inactive, so why is he still a mod? I guess there is no harm in having that many moderators, but it seems like way more than is needed. Look at PW's. I'm sure if they had 15 GPs, or 15 ET's, or 15 FAQs everyone would be screaming as to why there are so many... I can't see the harm in it, can you? Nah... but it still sounds like a lot, right? Is there really a need for that many when 1/3 of that amount could cover the job?

jkool666, stop repeating those quotes in every post, it's annoying.

It really annoys me when a moderator closes a thread because it has supposedly been "answered." Forums are for discussion and unless a thread is breaking rules somehow there isn't a need to close it. Answers are for discussion too.

Moderators can close a thread at their own discresion. They don't need your permission to do it.

If it's such a big problem then I'm sure a Forum PM to Darlene (or the moderator himself) explaining the situation is all it would take to get it reopened.

Well, USUALLY. It's unfortunate, but Admins and moderators don't always see things from your perspective. It's..difficult..to make them understand what you're trying to say sometimes.

Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should.

I've seen threads closed when they were answered. I also don't think it's needed, except we decide the topic should not discussed or spammed anymore. In this case (thread) I wanted to post my opinion (which I also can when it is closed, I know) and give other users also a chance to discuss it.

My experience is, not every staff/mod is online around the clock but users/posters are able to post all the time. Having more mods makes sure that threads can be better controlled. Zone is not over moderated in relation to the rest.

The Admins on Zone, and GK forum PM me who to add/remove as moderators since I dont play either one, and have no idea who staff are.
If they dont do their job, or dont do it correctly, they can be removed.
The zone forums seem to, a lot of times, have heated discussions that can quickly turn into very insulting fights.

Other forums dont need as many moderators, and if I see the need for them, I will handle it.

Like Inverness said. Just because they can doesn't make it right. They can start closing random threads if they wanted, but do you think that's a very smart thing to do?

And since Darlene already posted and was seemingly annoyed at this thread(for whatever reason, I don't know!), she of course didn't want to reopen it. Regardless of it being against the rules, she didn't want to do so because she didn't like the thread. And yes, it was attempted. This is the same with most appeals around here, they don't like undoing their decisions. You know, makes them look wrong. Can't have that!

The only reason this thread is back open is because Sam had an interest in it.

I didnt close the thread

Jkool originally closed the thread.

Perhaps Sam unlocked the thread because he simply thought it shouldn't have been closed, not that he had any interest in it. That is what I think.

In the end it doesn't matter if there are 5 moderators, as long as they don't cause problems.

He reopened it to give his input, and to hear others input.
I would have probably closed it, or would be closing it soon.
Threads like these become repetitive because some people cannot accept other peoples answers. When the same things are said over and over, and no one budges, it's time to drop it.
I hate repeating myself. It's a pet peeve. :\

Perhaps you know Darlene's views and explain them to us, but I don't need a spokesman. I've opened it because:
1. there was no need to close it
2. to give you and the other users also a chance to reply

As stated before: forums are to communicate and discuss and as long as it's going in the sense of the rules it's ok.

So if people want to argue over it then let them. Why should you interfere and close it just because you're annoyed with it? Having long threads is not against the rules. I don't want you or anyone else deciding when I need to drop something.

Darlene always closes threads she's offended by...

You know, if I closed everything that annoyed me, there would barely be any threads open. I'm not trying to be mean, but that's the truth. I can be annoyed, and still be reasonable.

I have no intention of continually explaining my actions, and arguing about them.

Wrong, I also close/delete threads that offend others. There is no need to be offensive towards people, although some members love to do it.

Come on, man, be honest. I think if you had no interest in this thread that it would still be closed right now.

When did I ever say you did?

Now I think you're just pushing it because you want to not like Sam or something.
You quite clearly implied it.
So then only close/delete threads if they break rules, not because you don't like them.
I believe what he meant was that you supposedly close/delete threads that you have personal issues with even though it might not break any forum rules.

Your post seemed to imply that I did. It certainly implied that I didnt reopen it because it annoyed me.
For your information, I didnt know it was closed until someone forum PM'ed me about it, and I told him that I probably would have closed it myself. There, you have the truth so you dont have to spout off about something you know nothing about.
Sam reopened it, and I had no problem with it, but yea, I probably would have left it closed.
Unixmad seems to have a problem with people arguing with the moderators about moderation, probably because that is something to be discussed between moderators.

It's nothing against Sam, just the way moderation works. Having dealt with Sam and Darlene, they are very reluctant to admit they are wrong or undo anything. To be fair, Sam seems to be a little more on the lenient side lately with that, but I still stand by what I said. Had he no interest in this thread it would still probably be closed.
No I didn't. Dante posted that if it was a problem, that we should PM Darlene. Hence, Darlene was brought up. I never implied that she closed it, merely that she would not be the one to reopen it. Please, read my post again.

Exactly. No where at all did I mention you closing it. Nor did I imply it.
Why would you have closed it/left it closed? Where did it break a rule? No one was insulting anyone, no one was spamming. It was a decent discussion other than the fact the one guy kept repeating the same thing over and over. Just because it annoys you doesn't mean it should be closed.

Huwajux - 1. World - 0.

Yes, moving onto the matter at hand. Zone has 5 moderators because those moderators have a relation to Zone. Why would we need someone who is experienced in Zone to moderate the Era forum? It just doesn't make any sense. Just because the Zone forum is more 'well stocked' in moderators purely means that it is just lucky to have that amount of staff who are willing to help moderate this section of the forums. Hmm, forgive me, I'm rambling.

Basically, Zone has 5 moderators because there are 5 competant moderators available to do the task at hand (Well, maybe discounting Vulcan of course ;)). Other areas such as the Era section of the forums have less moderators because there are less people available to do the job. The other reason is that the Zone forums are well-managed and have scouted around to hire decent moderators, although in my opinion I'd have to agree that Supernanny is a bit trigger happy, Jesse only does event related things and moderates fairly...averagely (Sorry Jesse!), Dan just does whatever the hell he wants because he can, and I have no idea why Dante is a moderator.

So yes, I guess Dante and Vulcan should be removed from the moderator list, which would narrow it down to just 3 moderators, would that make you happy Rufus?
*Hugs* You're alive!

Pretty sure I answered this.

I have no qualms with my Zone Moderation rights being removed. In fact, it should have been done quite some time ago. However, I think Rufus is simply looking for something to complain about in order to draw attention to what he believes is improper forum administration.

Agreed, Rufus has made a mountain out of a molehill.

I agree with that. Sorry Rufus. :p

Uhh.. I simply asked a question which led me onto a similar thought so I broke it up. It seems as though everyone on this forum gets fired up when the word "moderation" is mentioned, and that is kind of sad to be honest. I asked a question that was pretty straight forward, but instantly I was being accused of criticizing staff, causing trouble, and looking for attention, just goes to show really. The truth of the matter is I don't actually think that the people moderating that section of the forum are necessarily bad at their jobs, it just looks a little overkill as it's not exactly the most active forum section here and it proposes the question of why there isn't more moderators in other sections of the forum. I did not make a mountain out of a molehill, I simply responded to aggressive responses from staff members. Oh well.

Firstly, you don't seem to be understanding what the purpose and benefits of having moderators are. By your logic, a member of the FAQ team on a server would be there solely for the purpose of answering questions, and has nothing to do with integrating new players into the community, or providing a good service to those in need, they just answer questions? Right, very attentive. You think that the responsibilities of a forum moderator is limited to reviewing content? Sure, that is one of the main aspects of being a moderator but not their sole purpose by far. I guess this is why people like yourself aren't dealing with players of this game more often.

Moderators are responsible for maintaining a the productivity of the forum, and for most of the part, a constructive environment. A breach of the forum rules would disturb the two factors I've just outlined, which would obviously require attention and that is generally what happens. Like I said though, moderators are responsible for maintaining productivity, whether that be through community activities, encouraging discussions, whatever. No moderator, nor administrator should just accept that part of a forum is inactive -- to keep the forum at a good standard, and so that all of the areas are utilized well, it is not up to just the members of the forum to encourage activity and it never should be.

That post shows nothing but the fact you would have closed it. My question is why. Please show me the rule this thread broke. All you have said is you would have closed it because repeating yourself annoys you. But I don't see that in the rules anywhere. I'm not nagging, I just want to hear your thoughts on it.

I agree, and thanks for letting me know about your moderation position. I have no way of knowing these things.

Yup

Reasons dont always have to do with the rules. Sometimes I make a judgment call.
Read the part about unixmad, and you will see why I would have left it closed, or closed it myself.

It's not the first time I've reopened a (by myself) closed thread and these threads were reopened on request of other members.
I know I am not dearly beloved and it does make a difference to me, but I am doing my job and that's it.
And to be honest, I like to discuss more than just post in a "person above you" thread.
In this case it's okay to take their rights, if Vulcan and Dante have no interest in moderating the zone forum anymore. But it still don't hurts anyone to have 5 mods in a forum.

How would an FAQ intergrate new players into the community? I made it into the community by logging on, talking to someone, making a friend and then making more friends through that friend, and so on.

And don't FAQs provide a good service to those in need by answering questions? Which is, you know, their job?

If moderators wish to contribute more to the community, then they are free to do so, much how I did when I was a moderator (Oh yeah ;D). However there is no set rule which makes them do that kind of stuff, they are there to do their job and nothing more.

Then bring the mod vs mod to the mod board and leave this one as it is.

Anyways, I'm going to bring up what you posted before --
Why should a thread be dropped because no one budges? What's wrong with standing your ground? What harm is being done? I agree not everything has to be in the rules, but if it's not it should only be done out of interest of the forums. I didn't see anything in this thread that was going harm the forums.

You mention it's a pet peeve so I think it's safe to assume it has a lot more to do with your personal feelings of the matter than a professional unbiased one.

I just think closing a thread is a very big deal and shuts the door on a lot of potential discussion, which forums are about. Given the activity of these forums discussions like this don't happen very often and to have it disappear simply because it annoys a moderator is a slap in the face to all of us.

The communities for most servers are not exactly the most welcoming, and neither are the majority of staff. Some people have trouble making friends and/or feel as though they need to know more about the community to fit in. FAQs do provide a good service by answering questions, but it's also important for them to be welcoming, because if they don't do so, then who will? FAQ is about helping people, not just answering questions and help can be interpreted in many ways, but in my opinion the best way to describe it is to try to make people happy, without doing so at the expense of others' happiness.

There is no rule against moderators removing every single post in the forum they moderate either but they don't, what's your point here?

Why haven't we got 25 moderators per forum section? That wouldn't "hurts" either.

Having a moderation team 5 times larger makes it 5 times harder to make sure that they're not abusing their power. It's not worth it obviously.

And no need to mock people when they make a typo. :)

Would it hurt?

Yes there is, because that would be classed as an abuse of power and Darlene and Sam would be quick to pick up on this and sort it out ASAP.

And referring back to the previous section of your post, I stand by my point that an FAQ is not obliged to help out in any other way than by answering questions, just as a moderator is not obliged to do anything other than moderate their forum(s). However when we are considering how good a moderator is we can bring those issues into question, but that isn't what we are talking about. You brought up the amount of moderators there are, and have already mentioned that you are not filing a complaint about their actual capabilities as moderators.
Uh yes, the answer is already in his post. It would be harder to make sure that such a vast number of moderators were not abusing their power.

:D You don't feel childish by making me look like a fool? I've started to learn your first language when I was 40.
And to answer your question: because there are not enough people being able. In lack of good mods we have to take sometimes mods that shouldn't be that. :)

This: