voting for future moderators (?)
 

it'd be nice if we could vote for any future moderators.. you wouldn't have us complaining 24/7 and making threads about the new moderators.. especially if a lot of us don't particually enjoy that person.

At most you would get to vote between a couple of admin-picked candidates. This is not going to work because a commercial game is not a democracy. The interests of the users are not that of the guys running the whole place.

Edit: Apart from that, we would want to vote on the rules, not on the moderators hired to enforce them.

I don't think the job of a moderator is to try to be liked. Their job is to enforce the rules and other things similiar. Perhaps that would be why some people don't like that certain moderator you were referring to.

As Loriel said, it isn't a democracy.

If players were the ones voting for forum moderators, there's a good chance that the forums would become a disaster, then we would have nobody to blame except ourselves for that. I agree with Loriel though.

Well, maybe the people who didnt vote for that chosen moderator would complain you see..

If a moderator is someone not many people like, then people will complain about what they do, and thus cause more spam.

A moderator needs to be someone already respected and awesome.

As part of the job a moderator should delete spam in certain cases. People may spam more as a result of that moderator, but it is that moderator's job to deal with it. As moderation can be considered a way of not allowing people to post their opinions (If there opinions are radical and violate the rules), there is the chance that a moderator can be disliked for doing their job.

It can also be shown that moderators who are already respected and awesome can be hired, as was the case with Crono.

We will have to wait for Darlene to post, and after all, it is Darlene's decision.

I dont think unixmad would ever go for that, and neither would I.

What makes the difference? Even an awesome, cool, popular person has to enforce the rules the way unixmad wants, and then that person isnt so awesome, cool, and popular anymore. See how that works?

Common misconception, it is up to unixmad.

Awesome, Cool, Popular person would support rule changes to things that are simply unreasonable.

a 'cool, popular person' would follow the rules, but wouldn't treat the rules as if it's holy. therefore, making them a 'cool, popular person'.
maybe if unixmad actually responded to our cries, we'd know the answer.

I assume you mean wouldn't support rules changes to things that are simply unreasonable.

Unixmad put moderators in place that will enforce his rules. If they dont, he gets someone else. If someone can convince him to change a rule, I will be happy to enforce it the way he changes it. I'm not here to be popular, I'm here to do a job.
Whoa, dejavu (sp) .

LOL WAT? Have you developed some kind of split personality? Unixmad added Crono as moderator? Unixmad added Supernanny as moderator? Unixmad hasn't even been on the forums this year.

Does unixmad even care about Graal anymore?

I meant super moderators, and above, excuse me.

No, seriously, the problem is the rules and not the way they are enforced.

'cause you know, super moderators are hired soooo often.

Oh, come on, I am sure we can at least agree that they have been hired too often.

Your point?

agreed. i think we should definatly cut down on our super moderators.

They're either too vague or too strict.

It is really hard to take you seriously. :\

I feel the same about you. :\

no thanks

although if there was a vote, I know who I would vote for :O

A lot of discontent is caused by asinine rules such as "No talking about other MMOs" and "No URLs," and personal opinion interfering with moderation.

Meanwhile I belief we don't need all these forum rules.
A short specification is enough. Other forums also don't have such rules.

This is a waste of forum space.

Moderators are picked for a reason and if your post happens to get deleted then its because you broke a forum rule. If you don't like it then don't post in that fashion anymore. Plain and simple.

If you would like anarchy on forums then go to a site that offers forum hosting for free and start up your own.

So are almost all subforums, so this is just fine, then.

And most of us seem to disagree with that reason.

False dichotomy.

Voting for moderators? No. Last thing we need is for this place to be ruled by a popularity contest.

Exactly...

Just take the person with the least amount of votes. That's what happened the last two times right?

To my knowledge, there was no voting.

:noob:

How is this necessarily a bad thing?

Well, for one, the 'popular' people would be those that are constantly raging against moderators and the rules they uphold.

I don't understand where certain people get the idea that Darlene and company treat the rules as 'holy'. Rules are rules, and are made to followed and upheld. It only makes sense that Unixmad would want to select supermoderators based on how well they uphold the rules (whether or not those rules are agreeable), not how well they'd revolt against them.

Loriel is right. The problem, if there is one, is not with the moderators, but the rules themselves. If you want to fix the problem, then convince Unixmad to change the rules. However, almost all of you have burnt that bridge, and effectively guaranteed that changes are unlikely to be made.

Agreed.

The only rule I think that is rediculous is having to have links approved. If parents didn't want their children looking at certain websites there are content filters that can be purchased or even downloaded for free and maybe parents should consider the fact that the internet is the internet, it is definitely not a safe-haven for young children in the first place. Almost every website these days have meta-tags to ensure content filters work.

It would be nice if there was another private forum we could have where anything goes (accept for obvious things such as warez, pr0n, etc., that could cause legal issues for Cyberjoueurs). I figure the chances of that happening are very very slim though.

I agree.

The best solution would really be to add a confirmation page that comes up every time you click on an external link, asking if you really want to go to it and disclaimer saying that Cyberjoueurs is not responsible for it blah blah blah.

I think the link rule was mostly added because unixmad didnt want links other than Graal related ones on the main forum.

If so, I find it extremely stupid.