With the new batch of moderators coming in, we took the opportunity to update the Site & Forum Guidelines prior to their arrival. These updates include:
Rule I.7
We have added a new rule to the General Site Guidelines section: Do not post moderator PMs on the site or otherwise bait/harass/abuse MAL's staff; mods are users, too. It has become increasingly common for some users to post moderator PMs on the site and openly mock their content. The staff doesn't post private messages from users; however, it seems that some users cannot extend this consideration back the other way and so we have now added it to the guidelines.
If you have a problem with how a situation was handled, then please reply to the moderator. If you don't receive an answer you can reasonably understand, then please message another forum moderator or myself. Posting moderator PMs solves nothing, only creates tension and encourages moderator animosity. In short, it only creates problems; please refrain from doing this in the future.
Violations and Ban Policy
As I stated in November elsewhere, we updated our ban policy at the end of September immediately prior to hiring the last group of forum moderators. The warning/ban system has varied a lot in the last 4 years and the current approach lies somewhere between the two more extreme approaches of the past. It has now been approximately six months since we started using this system and we plan to continue with it for the foreseeable future. Thus, we have now written the details of the system into the Site & Forum Guidelines so that the community can clearly see how rule violations are handled on MAL.
I will refrain from going into too much detail about the policy itself in this post. Please read through it in the guidelines and feel free to either post in this thread or PM a moderator privately to discuss any questions or concerns you may have.
Insults on MAL
Along with this update, we have also included our previously discussed stance on insults from November for easy reference.
First of all, I'd like to thank the community for your patience with us the last few months, and namely, the last few weeks. Open applications are typically considerably more work than nominations made by staff members, and the stages of this application process were longer and more rigorous than previous hiring rounds. Second, a big thank you again to everyone that applied for the position and underwent our extensive test in the second round! Regretfully, we could not take every applicant.
How we chose from the applicants
With this application round, we have decided to take on the largest number of forum moderators we have ever hired; the last major recruitment being the seven new mods in 2010. Between then and now, we've hired only 2-3 moderators at a time and have lost even more – all while our community continued to grow. Forum moderators typically burn out within the first year from the high stress of the position (if real life does not take them away before this) and as the team gets smaller the stress increases. We're now at the point where it has become difficult to even keep up with the report queue, let alone find problems in threads before they are reported.
By hiring so many new hands, we want to completely change this situation. We want to no longer be reactive and to take it a step further beyond proactive: we want forum moderators to actually become active participants in the forum. To achieve this we need enough dedicated moderators to easily handle the problems on the forum (both reported and not). Then we need moderators who are motivated to discuss regularly with the community (from a user standpoint) and not only lurking (as a moderator). This requires a genuine interest in the posting community and not the intolerance that sometimes drives users to become moderators.
With this in mind, we looked for the following from the large number of applications we received. The candidate's:
motivation for becoming a moderator;
activity level in the community and on the site, including average online times;
knowledge of both the forum moderator guidelines and experience with how the team typically handles certain forum situations;
general feeling towards the community and interest in discussion with other members;
communication skills and capability in explaining forum rules and policies.
While considering this, we have also tried to vary their online times to fully cover the forum in each 24 hour day. Alas, moderators who live in Asian timezones are very difficult to come by and so we have a larger number of NA timezone mods over EU/Asia. That being said, the forum is typically busiest during NA evenings and so it makes sense to have more moderators available during these times.
The next few weeks
Because we are hiring so many new hands at once, we will be limiting some of the actions they are able to perform without senior moderator approval. This will only last during the first weeks to try and control some of the inevitable chaos while new moderators get their feet under them. These actions include:
Permalocking threads
Removing threads
Warning users
Banning users
So if you see (or are subject to) one of these moderator actions, you can be assured that a senior moderator approved it.
Furthermore, we're taking this opportunity to build better consistency within the team about locked threads. There has been concern within the community that some threads are being locked which could better be left open, and we agree that this needs to be addressed. If you see a thread locked that you think held enough legitimate discussion that it should have remained open, please PM a moderator and express this concern. The only way that we can all work towards improving our community – users and moderators alike – is through regular discussion with each other.
I'd like to remind everyone of the purpose of moderator announcement threads: to inform the community that we are training new staff. No new moderator is perfect when they are hired (and even old moderators make mistakes from time to time). The announcement thread is partly a way for the community to welcome the new staff, but it's also there to say: "Hey, these guys are new, cut them some slack while we get them settled in."
What this thread is not for:
...criticising every mistake that the new moderators make.
If you are dissatisfied with how a situation is handled, please PM a senior forum moderator or myself. One of the downsides of taking on so many hands at once is that things will be a little chaotic at first. As briefly touched on above, we are doing our best to structure the upcoming weeks to mitigate this. You can help us out by PMing a senior staff member and making us aware of any problems you see, rather than publicly berating and/or trash-talking the new moderators. This solves nothing; it only breeds bad temper, drama and a much more emotional situation than any one of us needs.
...discussing the (un)suitability of the new moderators.
Every forum moderator and myself agreed to hiring each and every candidate. We have purposefully chosen moderators who lurk/post in a variety of forum boards and who we felt would bring strengths to the team which are unique to them. It may be that you do not see all of the qualities that we saw in them and are puzzled as to some of our choices. However, since our information sets are different – the community has not seen the applications, the test responses and results, and not interacted with them in a forum moderator capacity – you will need to have some faith in us and our choices. Please give each of them a chance and help us to get them up to speed.
Whether our open application process was a success or not still cannot be fully seen. However, it was certainly interesting to see which members of the community were interested in the position and it gave us the opportunity to see them from perhaps a different viewpoint. In the end, I do not think it was a loss (even with it being quite a long and arduous process), and I look forward to our new moderators showing us all that this recruitment was a success.
Finally, without further ado, please welcome our new forum moderators (here and/or on their profiles):
Seems like a good selection of people - not sure if I'm more excited for quick response on threadlocks or less excited to potentially be banned for shit-posting
/shrugssss
edit/edit/edit: My 1st first, I'd like to thank mai waifu, the quick thread refreshing skills I've honed over the last 5 months, and finally, you MAL! /curtsey
I know a bunch of people prooooobably (read: most likely) have some sort of beef with me.
If so, please direct your concerns to me via pm. That would be dandy.
Wow.!!! Grats Tyrel, julyan04, Niyawa, Ragix and sarroush! I'll read more on this thread later as I'm a little busy right now but nice to see new additions to the team.
I will desist from judging your choice of suitable moderators, for now atleast.
However, the list does seem somewhat mediocre. Of the users I recognize, I can't think of a single one whom I can view as wholeheartedly devoted to this community and keeping us on track.
Were you guys scraping the bottom of the barrel? How many people applied?
Well, congratulations all. With this, I'm sure Lupadim, Jd, and Okazaki could be moderators aswell.
Congratulations to Heddie, Mellow, Ragi, and Bacon.
The rest of you I wasn't even aware that you existed. But uh, congratulations too I guess.
This is going to make some interesting situations.. hey Mellow. Remember when we were talking about insults and such like two or so months ago, and you even made a thread requesting a discussion between the moderators and userbase to work out a more reasonable policy on the subject?
How would we see that reflected in your modding decisions? For example, if I happened to call you, say, an isulting name that doesn't even use MAL frequently enough to even be considered for a position such as moderator, would you take into account my personality and our relationship and how I'm just a tsundere for you, or would you be forced to take action even though you are completely aware of my intentions and nobody involved is actually offended?
Edit: Actually, this may have already been answered in the opening post. But fuck it, I want to hear your answer anyway.
Mod edit: Reasonable question, but I have removed what could have been considered an insult (even hypothetically) to avoid discussion being distracted. New mods are currently busy getting some additional orientation and may decide to answer by pm.
rodac said: Mod edit: Reasonable question, but I have removed what could have been considered an insult (even hypothetically) to avoid discussion being distracted. New mods are currently busy getting some additional orientation and may decide to answer by pm.
Oh for fuck's sake.
Well I guess that answers my question. It's been a time and a half MAL..
laot of the new mods who know me hate me so yes im in ofr a rough time
"If you tremble with indignation at every injustice, then you are a comrade of mine"
When the union's inspiration through the workers' blood shall run
There can be no power greater anywhere beneath the sun
Yet what force on earth is weaker than the feeble strength of one
For the Union makes us strong
Immahnoob said: Jizzy, I know you have no idea how to argue for shit,
tokiyashiro said:
Jizzy as you would call yourself because youre a dick The most butthurt award goes to you And clearly you havent watched that many shows thats why you cant determine if a show is unique or not Or maybe you're just a child who likes common stuffs where hero saves the day and guys gets all the girls. Sad taste you have there kid you came up to me in the first place making you look more like a kid who got slapped without me even knowing it and start crying about it to me
Mellowjello and Hederick's post history aren't important. Rules are rules, and regardless of what they've done in the past, they are now required to enforce them. If someone derails a thread, that is an offense that moderators, even ones with histories of doing the same, will have to take action on.
This site hasn't become a joke. Kineta said that they wanted moderators that are active in the forums. And who better than some of the ones picked? They're frequent posters and well liked within the community, know the community well, and can act responsibly.
I wouldn't have more than half of those people on the list, Hell, right now I would only accept myself as a moderator because I'm me.
Battlechili1 said: Mellowjello and Hederick's post history aren't important. Rules are rules, and regardless of what they've done in the past, they are now required to enforce them. If someone derails a thread, that is an offense that moderators, even ones with histories of doing the same, will have to take action on.
This site hasn't become a joke. Kineta said that they wanted moderators that are active in the forums. And who better than some of the ones picked? They're frequent posters and well liked within the community, know the community well, and can act responsibly.
True about the first part, but there is too little time between offenses to be able to say that the ones that did not follow certain rules changed all of a sudden.
Wait, what? I guess you're talking about the people you like, not who the community likes.
Battlechili1 said: Mellowjello and Hederick's post history aren't important. Rules are rules, and regardless of what they've done in the past, they are now required to enforce them. If someone derails a thread, that is an offense that moderators, even ones with histories of doing the same, will have to take action on.
While I do agree in that frequent posters should be given the positions, by this very same rationale, what is to stop say Lupadim from becoming a mod under the pretense that he will proactively practice and enforce the rules?
I think the moderation will improve with these mods because they know the community very well. While I have no negative feelings towards the other moderators I felt some users were being banned because the mods misinterpreted their posts
So I think Mellow as a mod is a great thing. He's a genuinely nice guy so I'm sure things will improve
FGAU1912 said: laot of the new mods who know me hate me so yes im in ofr a rough time
your not insulting people anyway from what i observe the people are the ones who insults you lol, so your fine
im not made of Glass i can take insult but alot of the new mods who know me hate me so il get banned more ie im in for a rough time
"If you tremble with indignation at every injustice, then you are a comrade of mine"
When the union's inspiration through the workers' blood shall run
There can be no power greater anywhere beneath the sun
Yet what force on earth is weaker than the feeble strength of one
For the Union makes us strong
This is going to turn out worse, than the similar thread before it. Should have a been a locked announcement. The results happening now, should have been predictable.
YorozuyaGinSan said: While I do agree in that frequent posters should be given the positions, by this very same rationale, what is to stop say Lupadim from becoming a mod under the pretense that he will proactively practice and enforce the rules?
He hasn't shown that he can act responsibly. Plus he may very well be able to, but he would have had to have passed the tests the senior moderators put all the new mods through. If he could pass that, then I guess he would be qualified.
Though, if I'm right, isn't he too young to be a moderator?
A bunch of baiting and derailing has now been cleaned out of this thread. Let me now briefly address a few of the points I saw while reading and cleaning this thread.
First of all, no one gets banned because the moderation team doesn't like them, or vice versa. Our ban policy is clearly visible in the guidelines now and I didn't see a category in there called "Hated by Mods". This is a cheap and baseless statement to make, so please refrain from doing so.
I put the "disclaimer" in the thread because this kind of behaviour has suddenly become commonplace in moderator announcement threads. Even the review moderator announcement, which I thought would go over relatively well, needed to be cleaned. While you're perfectly welcome to disagree with our choices, outright attacking new moderators simply because they were chosen is unnecessary and downright rude.
Popularity - or lack thereof - had nothing to do with the applications. I explained our criteria and our thoughts. We need people who actually post in the boards - and enjoy posting in them - to moderate them. We want moderators to have a presence and be active participants in threads. And CD in particular needs moderator love. One of the downsides of choosing active participants, though, is that not everyone likes them. Still, when we chose "no-name" participants, everyone was mad about them, too.
We held open applications. Everyone who was interested in improving MAL's forum and volunteering for the site was invited to apply. In total, we received ~45 applications. From those, we chose the applicants who best fit our criteria.
Not all of these users have perfect histories, but people are capable of improving themselves. If you think we're happy about the reputation of some of the candidates, then please think again. But our community has seemingly developed to the point where any moderator we chose would be criticised. We need to take these concerns in stride while continuing to move forward in efforts to improve the site.
The forum team has been lacking in number for a long time and I really hope that we can not only change this, but improve our forum environment in the long run through better and regular participation with the staff team. And as I've said before, our community is what each of us make of it. You don't need to be a moderator to contribute, and contribute well, to MAL.
Ragix's favourites will be modified once he logs in. He has been offline since before the announcement thread was posted, so he hasn't had a chance to modify them. While we haven't been banning for it lately, we will be enforcing the standard favourite amount once we have the means to clear the favourites ourselves. It's a frustrating exploit which results in numerous support threads asking about it, so I would ask that everyone refrain from abusing this.
Actually, my problem is a more personal type of problem, you claim you'd take anyone that is active on the Forums, likes posting, knows the community and the rules. You even claim that you took "no-names" that we still criticize anyway.
Yet, one (me) makes a mistake, a single one that I corrected right after, and you ditch him (me) down the gutter.
One would think (me), that his history was too bad for the moderator position, he (me) most likely took it with a grain of salt, even if he saw myself more than capable for it, but then he saw certain names, and he's completely confused. (sorry, I continued with this format and now I had to follow it)
The ban policy sucked ass until now, Kineta. We (me) had to pester you (the mod in question, whatever), for reasons for why we got banned and you'd just point us to an ambiguous response, smash the rules in like it was nothing and be like "It's okay, it's only one day, take it as a champ.". I won't name mods, fuck that.
And that contribution bullcrap is indeed, bullshit. I might have been here only for 2 years, but all the contribution you add is nothing in comparison to all those shitposters that drown you in their diarrhea, then you get taken as a "troll" of some sort if you want a discussion, of course, one might take it to extremes, he has that habit, but hey (yes, this last last part is a joke).
But this is something personal (it's too bad I can't see all the other applicants, I'd understand what's going on then), so I'll take it to PM.
Oh, and I mean it, I found your response lackluster, but you did tell me you had no time, now that you do (or so I think) have time please do explain the reasoning behind your choice.
The whole idea is that what's happening and what you're saying are a bit in contradiction, and this comes from a so-called "troll".