All these new mods

[Endless/Nameless]

Just now, Amiir said:

Yeah ok sure no problem. We can always mix and match

Is it ok if I'm thinking about Mr. Potato Head?

[Guest]

We can solve this with some yiff

[Endless/Nameless]

1 minute ago, 6tails said:

And let's go back and look at who's complaining vs who posted in the other thread.

Oh, jeeze, look at that nice overlap.

 

 

Ikr

[Azure]

Id like to remind everyone that real life doesnt have a filter, so why should the internet? If you value candid discussion and people repreaenting what they believe then why bother with moderation at all. Also its just the internet, chill the fuck out.

[Guest]

15 minutes ago, Newt said:

Some people did so seriously and even admitted that it was a bit creepy.

The "manhandling chests" incident happened in another thread a while back. Understandably, this made Vae uncomfortable being "hit on," joke or not. Users should know better than to tag people in such a thread without permission. Just because the thread didn't explicitly state that it was opt-in (which it should have), doesn't mean that it isn't up to the users to behave appropriately.

That particular post may have been a bit rude, but it doesn't change the fact that nearly all the insults thrown about were toward users who did nothing but say that the thread made them. It also doesn't mean they and others weren't voicing legitimate concerns.

You still have no way to tell

 

That's right, it happened in another thread unrelated to the one at hand

 

I didn't see a single insult aimed towards those who wanted to opt out but I may have been simply inattentive here. Screenshots would help refresh my memory

[willow]

8 minutes ago, Feelwell the Rabbit said:

Hold up, er, who are you appeasing

the social justice warriors of course

it was a joke though because several people said I was the social justice mod. which is also ironic because SJWs don't usually like me

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Azure said:

Id like to remind everyone that real life doesnt have a filter, so why should the internet? If you value candid discussion and people repreaenting what they believe then why bother with moderation at all. Also its just the internet, chill the fuck out.

Thank you for some sanity

[Newt]

1 hour ago, Amiir said:

You still have no way to tell

 

That's right, it happened in another thread unrelated to the one at hand

 

I didn't see a single insult aimed towards those who wanted to opt out but I may have been simply inattentive here. Screenshots would help refresh my memory

 

If you aren't actually going to listen and think about what I'm saying, then I'm not going to argue with you any longer.

 

I've stated my case, so it's up to the rest of you to be objective. I'm not going to waste my time replying if my argument is recklessly tossed aside and responded to with 1-sentence quips.

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, Newt said:

 

If you aren't actually going to listen and think about what I'm saying, then I'm not going to argue with you any longer.

 

I've stated my case, so it's up to the rest of you to be objective. I'm not going to waste my time replying if my argument is recklessly tossed aside and responded to with 1-sentence quips.

That's because there isn't anything else to add, the facts speak for themselves. Ain't nothing to think about

Edited March 29, 2016 by Guest

[Spot]

20 minutes ago, Astus said:

Why can't we all just be friends? :c

Because friendship is not a given, it is something that has to be earned.

Being respectful and friendly on the other hand? 

Well...

[ArielMT]

15 hours ago, MissFleece said:

All these new mods and none of them are on to do anything about the spam?

And none of them listen to complaints about certain threads which make a lot of users uncomfortable.

What's the point of reporting posts if it does nothing, if no one is listening? 

Wtf phoenix

go buy fake driving licenses. 

 

I have a fairly big question: Why did it take this thread, exploding like it did, for everyone to really say anything where it would do the most good?  Part of forum mod accountability is users saying what needs to be said.

22 minutes ago, Feelwell the Rabbit said:

Hold up, er, who are you appeasing, and why should a babyfur moderator be hired to appease people. Like uh, who's that appeasing?

Colon-vee is the emoticon of sarcasm.

[Endless/Nameless]

2 minutes ago, ArielMT said:

Colon-vee is the emoticon of sarcasm.

I always find it funny that we actually have to signal sarcasm around here. 

[Feelwell]

19 minutes ago, Endless/Nameless said:

I always find it funny that we actually have to signal sarcasm around here. 

I'm both not great at picking up on it, and unfamilair with the people here I'm still pretty new.

Also, you get a thumbs up, because the method you said to try to remove the quotes on mobile worked.

 

Also, I'd like to point the whole FORUM is being pulled into this arguement, and it is ultimately going nowhere. The other threads are all ghost towns because everyone's just arguing here, and it isn't helping anybody. If there are suggestions to improve the site, that's awesome! Constructive criticism is fantastic, and it's always looked for. Heck that's one of the purposes for some of the threads here. I'm all for discussion, but this thread is becoming more toxic than the WFMWYF thread. 

So maybe we could get back to more constructive things, instead of yelling at the mods, throwing insults, and fighting. Because I'm pretty sure few people want to sit and watch a massive arguement.

[Endless/Nameless]

8 minutes ago, Feelwell the Rabbit said:

'm both not great at picking up on it, and unfamilair with the people here I'm still pretty new.

Dats ok

8 minutes ago, Feelwell the Rabbit said:

Also, you get a thumbs up, because the method you said to try to remove the quotes on mobile worked.

[FenrirDarkWolf]

lol this thread could've been done after last night

[Toshabi]

21 minutes ago, FenrirDarkWolf said:

lol this thread could've been done after last night

It's because the people jumping in on this (Sans Vae though) have no legitimate reason to even be up in arms in the first place. They're just the toxic that loves to hop on drama and ride it harder than a bad dragon dildo.

It's the joy of being angry.

Edited March 29, 2016 by Toshabi

[Zaraphayx]

4 hours ago, willow said:

the social justice warriors of course

it was a joke though because several people said I was the social justice mod. which is also ironic because SJWs don't usually like me

Social Justice Warriors all hate each other though.

Zara Verdict: Guilty.

[willow]

1 minute ago, Zaraphayx said:

Social Justice Warriors all hate each other though.

Zara Verdict: Guilty.

not unless you agree with them

[Zaraphayx]

Just now, willow said:

not unless you agree with them

I agree with them that they are all extremely problematic and should stop blogging forever.

[Terminal7]

5 hours ago, Feelwell the Rabbit said:

So maybe we could get back to more constructive things, instead of yelling at the mods, throwing insults, and fighting. Because I'm pretty sure few people want to sit and watch a massive arguement.

We do need to argue every once in a while. Then I can finally finish recording the first season of "Furry Roots"

About 2 months from now,  this post will be forgotten. Everything said here is pretty much for free kudos, not for the well being of the site. 

[Feelwell]

3 hours ago, Terminal7 said:

We do need to argue every once in a while. Then I can finally finish recording the first season of "Furry Roots"

About 2 months from now,  this post will be forgotten. Everything said here is pretty much for free kudos, not for the well being of the site. 

"Furry Roots" sounds like something I'd have to watch just because of the title.

[Toshabi]

I feel like this thread is going to spawn forum "Safe Space =w=". That or we can get a petty show of salty vagoos like The View to talk about things that hurt their feelings.

[Toshabi]

6 minutes ago, 6tails said:

Well, we've already got my kitchen cooking show to counter-act any nonsense like that. :3

Your abs are oppressing me and are shaming flabby chest people.

 

Ugh, WHY DONT THE MODS DO SOMETHING ABOUT THINGS I DONT REPORT!?!?

[FlynnCoyote]

Mods need thicker skin, greater detachment and probably most pressing atm is more numbers. Four mods won't be able to cover a site like this, especially when most of them live in similar time zones and all have social obligations. Higher numbers of mods to cover all those blind spots is needed.

Put some more on as trial moderators. If they fuck the job up you know where not to look next time. There's no shortage of capable volunteers here I'm sure. A lot of people probably seem unfit, but I'm sure a few of the current staff can attest that the increase in responsibility and public scrutiny does affect your posting habit. Some of these immature looking dickbags could surprise you.

[Toshabi]

5 hours ago, FlynnCoyote said:

Mods need thicker skin, greater detachment and probably most pressing atm is more numbers. Four mods won't be able to cover a site like this, especially when most of them live in similar time zones and all have social obligations. Higher numbers of mods to cover all those blind spots is needed.

Put some more on as trial moderators. If they fuck the job up you know where not to look next time. There's no shortage of capable volunteers here I'm sure. A lot of people probably seem unfit, but I'm sure a few of the current staff can attest that the increase in responsibility and public scrutiny does affect your posting habit. Some of these immature looking dickbags could surprise you.

Wow, okay fine, I'll put in my application for modship.

[Zaraphayx]

Mods have failed you, what you need now is a Posting Overlord free to exercise his prerogative for the betterment of all of posting kind.

[Feelwell]

6 minutes ago, Zaraphayx said:

Mods have failed you, what you need now is a Posting Overlord free to exercise his prerogative for the betterment of all of posting kind.

Go all or nothing,  ressurect Fidel Castro as our posting overlord. Free cigars and beards.

[Zeke]

6 hours ago, Toshabi said:

Wow, okay fine, I'll put in my application for modship.

Toshabi for warchief #2016

[Clove Darkwave]

On 3/30/2016 at 1:34 AM, FlynnCoyote said:

Mods need thicker skin, greater detachment and probably most pressing atm is more numbers. Four mods won't be able to cover a site like this, especially when most of them live in similar time zones and all have social obligations. Higher numbers of mods to cover all those blind spots is needed.

Put some more on as trial moderators. If they fuck the job up you know where not to look next time. There's no shortage of capable volunteers here I'm sure. A lot of people probably seem unfit, but I'm sure a few of the current staff can attest that the increase in responsibility and public scrutiny does affect your posting habit. Some of these immature looking dickbags could surprise you.

Yeah there's just one catch; Not having any infractions is a requirement for being brought on staff. That, sadly, shrinks the pool more than it should.

[Clove Darkwave]

1 minute ago, 6tails said:

That's a pretty BS requirement. Ain't A SINGLE PERSON squeaky clean, infraction points or not.

If you can't behave yourself without an ulterior motive, I'm not sure if attempting to staff this community is a good idea.

[#00Buck]

46 minutes ago, Clove Darkwave said:

Yeah there's just one catch; Not having any infractions is a requirement for being brought on staff. That, sadly, shrinks the pool more than it should.

Requirements can always be changed. 

Also infractions can be removed. 

One non-requirement is being elected by the majority of forum users.

That is something that should change. 

43 minutes ago, Clove Darkwave said:

If you can't behave yourself without an ulterior motive, I'm not sure if attempting to staff this community is a good idea.

According to the standard of one particular person? 

The forum should not be run like a fiefdom. It should be democratic, transparent, and fair. 

[Feelwell]

54 minutes ago, Clove Darkwave said:

If you can't behave yourself without an ulterior motive, I'm not sure if attempting to staff this community is a good idea.

I gotta say in my opinion, that's not the greatest. There are fantastic people who've made one-off mistakes. Even the current mods, whom I think are doing alright, aren't perfect. 

If infractions can be removed, and that's not like a once in a lifetime thing, then it's be more understandable.

[DrGravitas]

The idea of popular vote democratic mod elections seems ridiculous to me. These are not representatives we're electing here, they're more like judges. The legislative process, the making and defining the guidelines by which our community is to be participated in, that is where the popular votl belongs. Judges should be appointed, perhaps by a council of existing mods and some elected community representatives. A direct popular vote of mods is a terrible idea.

[PastryOfApathy]

2 hours ago, Clove Darkwave said:

Yeah there's just one catch; Not having any infractions is a requirement for being brought on staff. That, sadly, shrinks the pool more than it should.

Active or ever?

[FlynnCoyote]

Having no infractions is a BS requirement. You automatically disqualify people who may have just had a bad day or lapsed on meds or whatever.

When I was made a mod of Heresy, I was not long off the expiry of a 40 pt personal attack infraction. That's a 100 pt system and I nearly broke the halfway mark in one go. But my track record was otherwise clean, and the admin understood that everyone has bad days. Hell, even some of the older staff there had done worse things before being put on as staff. Hell even the admin had thrown the word cunt at people more times than I cared to count.

Since then I've settled almost a dozen disputes between members,closed the lid on various shitstorm threads, helped introduce and implement two new features to those forums and even cleaned up the messes made by other staff. I know this shit. I have been moderating for years. Say what you will, I could do just as good a job here but I'm auto disqualified because of a single infraction? Yea I went through a rough patch here, I admit that.

Phoenix isn't beholden to some other authority. You have the power to make or adjust the rules as you see fit. And plenty of us have already said that keeping the faf system after what happened to faf is a terrible idea.

Edited March 31, 2016 by FlynnCoyote

[willow]

I'm assuming Clove means if you have active infractions then you're ineligible. at least that's what makes the most sense since they expire now

one of the requirements for being an officer in almost any organization is that you need to have no penalties (which are mostly fines) at the time of elections, but as soon as you've caught up then you're eligible. so not having any infractions when applications go up or end is pretty reasonable.

I know some people have really old ones from October but I honestly wouldn't worry about them that much. you can also ask to have the old ones removed too. 

that being said, I think conduct is something that needs to be looked at as well in comparison to your infraction history. if you generally have good conduct and maybe one or two infractions, it should be looked at differently from someone who has multiple infractions and generally bad conduct. you can also have bad conduct but no infractions, meaning your actions are just shitty but not infraction worthy.

[FlynnCoyote]

If expired infractions don't count then that's fair enough. The wording Clove used made it sound otherwise though.

[Guest]

I'd only like to take a moment to remind everyone that I, much like Zara, am gay

[Feelwell]

4 hours ago, willow said:

I'm assuming Clove means if you have active infractions then you're ineligible. at least that's what makes the most sense since they expire now

one of the requirements for being an officer in almost any organization is that you need to have no penalties (which are mostly fines) at the time of elections, but as soon as you've caught up then you're eligible. so not having any infractions when applications go up or end is pretty reasonable.

I know some people have really old ones from October but I honestly wouldn't worry about them that much. you can also ask to have the old ones removed too. 

that being said, I think conduct is something that needs to be looked at as well in comparison to your infraction history. if you generally have good conduct and maybe one or two infractions, it should be looked at differently from someone who has multiple infractions and generally bad conduct. you can also have bad conduct but no infractions, meaning your actions are just shitty but not infraction worthy.

I completely forgot infractions expire....

Being that they expire, I think making decisions based on behavior from the past is fair only if it was a continuous thing, or keeps reappearing. 

Otherwise, yea, I'd say that's pretty reasonable.

[Toboe]

6 hours ago, Clove Darkwave said:

Yeah there's just one catch; Not having any infractions is a requirement for being brought on staff. That, sadly, shrinks the pool more than it should.

Not having any infractions ever? Or having any active infractions?

And since at other points there seems to be a distinction between 0point warnings and 1+point infractions (see: state of the union 9th march), would those count?

 

 

[Toshabi]

Fyi, Donald Trump has a SHITLOAD of infractions and he's our future president.

 

#FoodForThought

[Toboe]

Just now, Toshabi said:

Fyi, Donald Trump has a SHITLOAD of infractions and he's our future president.

 

#FoodForThought

We Phoenixians/Exploding Crows want to be better than the US of A, don't we?

[Kinare]

I still feel like the more important thing is figuring out more solidified procedures and rules, then think about bringing in more mods (from what I've seen, this still has not been done, but correct me if I'm wrong). Ideally this will make it easier to not only train new mods in the workings of Phoenixed, but reduce the amount of inconsistencies between them. I know the email I sent was a wall of text, but I hope it got skimmed at least. I thinks I has good ideas about dat stuff.

Maybe base the next mod or two on their times of availability so that there's coverage around the clock (as best as possible without hiring crappy mods, of course).

About this infractions thing, I sure as heck don't want someone with a ton of expired infractions enforcing rules - I feel like someone who got so many would not be able to fairly and accurately hand out infractions themselves (the exception is when a couple years go by and they haven't gotten any more, but we're not that old yet). A couple minor infractions are one thing, everyone makes mistakes... and I dunno if you noticed, but the people here are highly critical of mods, so having just one slightly rotten seed will just give people more shit to whine about.

[Clove Darkwave]

To clarify, I believe active infracts is what automatically disqualifies you but it's worth noting overall behavior and history is of great consideration.

 

And no warnings are not Infracts.

[Toshabi]

1 minute ago, Toboe said:

We Phoenixians/Exploding Crows want to be better than the US of A, don't we?

We can't do much worse than Obama, so atm, yes, we're already there.

[#00Buck]

6 hours ago, DrGravitas said:

The idea of popular vote democratic mod elections seems ridiculous to me. These are not representatives we're electing here, they're more like judges. The legislative process, the making and defining the guidelines by which our community is to be participated in, that is where the popular votl belongs. Judges should be appointed, perhaps by a council of existing mods and some elected community representatives. A direct popular vote of mods is a terrible idea.

So having a small click of people select people they like is somehow better?

Judges are elected. So are sheriffs. I'd rather have a say in the process of selecting the people who will ultimately decide what happens to us.

[PastryOfApathy]

All I'm gonna say is that no matter how new mods are chosen, it's going to be a circlejerk regardless.

That said making it a 100% transparent 'election' will get people to stop bitching, so that means this is objectively the superior way of doing this.

[Zeke]

8 hours ago, 6tails said:

That's a pretty BS requirement. Ain't A SINGLE PERSON squeaky clean, infraction points or not.

We actually do not have that requirement if people remember the recruitment requirements. 

[DrGravitas]

10 minutes ago, #00Buck said:

So having a small click of people select people they like is somehow better?

Judges are elected. So are sheriffs. I'd rather have a say in the process of selecting the people who will ultimately decide what happens to us.

I don't mean local-level Judges. A small group of elected persons mixed with existing mods provides a better spread of the community by enabling more than one viewpoint to come from the community. If we directly choose mods, it becomes a popularity contents where the biggest block of like-minded individuals win, thereby alienating smaller blocks. By having multiple elected representatives discuss candidate mods and choose based on a vote between them, we stand a better chance of having mods that even people from smaller blocks will agree with. This is because even for the selection of one mod, we provide multiple representatives, reducing the effect of straightforward popularity. How we divide up selection of representation to best represent varying blocks is an entirely open question. Representative-based mod selection should allow everybody to give their own input into the mod selection, through these representatives, without simply being drowned out by the most popular choice.

[Zeke]

2 minutes ago, 6tails said:

I should have figured knowing the reputation a fair bit of us would have (or did have) on FAF.

On FAf, you couldn't be a mod if you had more than 3 infractions, which I found to be a pretty stupid requirement.

On the other hand, I don't really care much if a person's indignant or not, as long as they can handle themselves in a professional manner. We're people and this is the 'net.