Making Age Exceptions For Moderator

[Lululioness]

I assume you were waiting for a staff's response to this so here it goes.

First I'd like to start out by saying The parts about the age exception are reasonable and understandable. This doesn't mean it's right. There are things that have been over looked and not noticed as an issue. The thread is aiming at a boarder part of the whole situation. If you want something to change, you have to analyse it from many different perspectives and understand the reasons behind it. I'd also like to say that the parts about the inactive staff are very ignorant, assumptive, disrespectful and insulting. I'm sure that's not what it was meant to be but the way the sections were delivered is very enraging not only to the mods(especially the mods specifically pointed out) but to the Sr. Staff since we hired them.

The reasons we have an age limit is the same reason actual real life jobs have age limits. Although this isn't a real life job where staff are paid, we still want to keep a sense of professionalism. Real jobs have an age limit to ensure stress is less of an issue, have a more similar and compatibly staff and keep a good appearance.

Believe it or not, even though this is a volunteer job, it is still very, very stressful. I've seen many mods become overwhelmed by the stress and fall behind in their real life as well as their moderator life. We want moderators to have fun while still doing their job. If the stress becomes too much, it is not fun and it could ruin many things. This is not at all what we want, and not something we want to risk. Older people have a tendency to be able to deal with more stress and can manage it more. This might not be true with everyone but it is good enough. Younger people tend to have a bad management of stress and cannot maintain the many different obstacles. as I've said before, this could lead to many bad things. Being a youngster myself, I can say with experience that the stress has come to the point where things are beyond my control and everything just goes bad. If that were to happen to someone else, I would feel bad. I would feel as if I've failed my job to keep the other staff happy. Having an age limit will prevent this from happening more frequently. There will be some who do break under the pressure but it's easier to try and fix that than have to deal with multiple breaking down.

It is no lie that the more similar people are to each other, they are more likely to work well together. Having an age range will help make our staff more similar and unified. This will mean the staff will be more efficient, which is a very good thing. Having a compatibly staff will overall ensure the productivity, motivation and reduce stress, which had been talked about previously. Sure people of younger age can be similar to those older than them but it wouldn't always mean this way. When it comes to staff, we don't want to take risks. We want to be sure that the staff will work together and not argue. Having an age limit will make this less of a risk

Overall, having a stable staff that works well together and are stress-free makes good appearance, which attracts more players. With many people showing they can be these things whilst being 14, we have made a decision to lower the age.

Next moving on to the issue about inactive staff. I'm going to begin by saying that just because you cannot see it doesn't mean it's not their. Just because you don't see specific moderators being on or doing their job does not mean they don't. Assuming so is very disrespectful and insulting. Saying that 35 mods out of 80 mods are inactive is very rage educing considering you're pretty much saying they are dead weight. And the people who hired them, wasted time... on dead weight. Unless you know from multiple perspectives and know the reasons behind them not appearing more active, you should not jump to conclusions and say they aren't doing anything. Pointing out specific people is uncalled for and unneeded. As of late, the Sr. Staff have had some extra time available for cleaning the staff list and checking up on the mods. We messaged people who have been seen inactive(reason why you've seen some people look back on the forums) and to my surprise, there was a huge reason for it. Issues from the past had unknowingly effected certain people and in result of that, causing an issue here today. As for mods only being active in game and not on the forums, let me just point out there that a lot of the things we do as a moderator, are not seen by the public. When we lock a thread or deal with a spam bot, it does not show to everyone who did it. For me, when I lock a thread, I make sure to state why I'm locking it to set aside confusion. This is seen publicly and makes me appear as more active. Others might be working more of "behind the scenes" work and may be classified as inactive, when they're not.

To sum up, The age limit is there for a reason and chances are, it will stay that way. Assuming people are inactive without know the stories behind it is insulting and shouldn't be done, non the less pointing specific people out.

I'm going to keep this open in case anyone has questions or opinions regarding this.

A chance. That is all.

 

[slasherxtreme]

A chance. That is all.

If you guys expect me to read and consider all of the opinions and statements posted so far, I expect the same.

 

[Lululioness]

If you guys expect me to read and consider all of the opinions and statements posted so far, I expect the same.

Mhm. I still think you should make duckluv moderator.

 

[darkai202]

G33ke JR, anyway I'll write some opinions down.

I assume you were waiting for a staff's response to this so here it goes.

First I'd like to start out by saying The parts about the age exception are reasonable and understandable. This doesn't mean it's right. There are things that have been over looked and not noticed as an issue. The thread is aiming at a boarder part of the whole situation. If you want something to change, you have to analyse it from many different perspectives and understand the reasons behind it. I'd also like to say that the parts about the inactive staff are very ignorant, assumptive, disrespectful and insulting. I'm sure that's not what it was meant to be but the way the sections were delivered is very enraging not only to the mods(especially the mods specifically pointed out) but to the Sr. Staff since we hired them.

In my personal opinion, MCSG should keep the age requirement but have exceptions for godlike apps and a mature person if underage. In my opinion, that'd be fine. I understand you've had problems before and this is why you guys are hesitant, and that is completely understandable and respectable, but I think it would be worth giving people a shot. The part about inactive mods, even though it's as you said 'ignorant, assumptive, disrespectful and insulting' it's also true. I mean hey, the mods could have needed a break which is a perfect reason to why they've been inactive, but at the same time. They've left without warning, not even saying 'Taking a break guys, life is a Bunny Lover' and just leaving. If say, you or another member of the staff had things going on in real life, you needed a break, etc. That would be a perfectly fine reason, and I, and the community wouldn't bother you about it. If people left a job like MCSG without warning it kind of makes them look like they just left, they're inactive, they haven't done anything. Regardless I see your points here.

The reasons we have an age limit is the same reason actual real life jobs have age limits. Although this isn't a real life job where staff are paid, we still want to keep a sense of professionalism. Real jobs have an age limit to ensure stress is less of an issue, have a more similar and compatibly staff and keep a good appearance.

Can't argue much with this, even though I'm 13 and getting a job this year, but that's completely irrelevant. Real life jobs, like working at a fast food place for example do have an age limit, and hell that's why they wouldn't accept 8 year olds. But this is online, behind the screen, a 13 year old could be mature and act like a 20 year old, it's behind the screen. Unlike real life, where things like this matter. For example, an 8 year old working at maccas (ew maccas) would be discouraged, in real life, there is a huge difference with age, people judge on age not maturity. Anyway, online an 8 year old could be extremely mature, and be maturer than 14/15 year olds, online if he talks and acts the same way as a 15 year old he wouldn't instantly be shot down. Anyway, let's say there are two 15 year olds, they are exactly the same. One is in their own body and one is in a 10 year olds, they're completely the same. One gets accepted and one doesn't. The only reason is because of age, you don't judge anything on maturity or other reasons.

Also, the 8 year old bit is for teh lulz, 8 = 13 okay?

Believe it or not, even though this is a volunteer job, it is still very, very stressful. I've seen many mods become overwhelmed by the stress and fall behind in their real life as well as their moderator life. We want moderators to have fun while still doing their job. If the stress becomes too much, it is not fun and it could ruin many things. This is not at all what we want, and not something we want to risk. Older people have a tendency to be able to deal with more stress and can manage it more. This might not be true with everyone but it is good enough. Younger people tend to have a bad management of stress and cannot maintain the many different obstacles. as I've said before, this could lead to many bad things. Being a youngster myself, I can say with experience that the stress has come to the point where things are beyond my control and everything just goes bad. If that were to happen to someone else, I would feel bad. I would feel as if I've failed my job to keep the other staff happy. Having an age limit will prevent this from happening more frequently. There will be some who do break under the pressure but it's easier to try and fix that than have to deal with multiple breaking down.

I agree with all of this, younger people are more likely to break down to the stress of a job more than an older person, which is why I think apps should be judged on maturity and not age.

It is no lie that the more similar people are to each other, they are more likely to work well together. Having an age range will help make our staff more similar and unified. This will mean the staff will be more efficient, which is a very good thing. Having a compatibly staff will overall ensure the productivity, motivation and reduce stress, which had been talked about previously. Sure people of younger age can be similar to those older than them but it wouldn't always mean this way. When it comes to staff, we don't want to take risks. We want to be sure that the staff will work together and not argue. Having an age limit will make this less of a risk

Overall, having a stable staff that works well together and are stress-free makes good appearance, which attracts more players. With many people showing they can be these things whilst being 14, we have made a decision to lower the age.

I understand you don't want to take risks, but stepping outside of the comfort zone a little won't hurt anyone hey? Anyway, this is why I said before, for a younger person to even be considered they would have to have a godlike app, and be well-known in-game and through the forums. Recently, I applied for mod at MCTF2, hoping I could get in because I thought they were more lax with the age. I was denied, no doubt for being 13. No other reasons, my app was well-written and all, but that one number, 13, not being a 14 ruined chances. That would really be a heart breaker, right? Anyway, not complaining about that. I agree having an older, more mature staff makes it nicer for the community to feel that MCSG isn't run by power-crazed 3 year olds, but as I said before. Behind the screen age doesn't matter as much.

Next moving on to the issue about inactive staff. I'm going to begin by saying that just because you cannot see it doesn't mean it's not their. Just because you don't see specific moderators being on or doing their job does not mean they don't. Assuming so is very disrespectful and insulting. Saying that 35 mods out of 80 mods are inactive is very rage educing considering you're pretty much saying they are dead weight. And the people who hired them, wasted time... on dead weight. Unless you know from multiple perspectives and know the reasons behind them not appearing more active, you should not jump to conclusions and say they aren't doing anything. Pointing out specific people is uncalled for and unneeded. As of late, the Sr. Staff have had some extra time available for cleaning the staff list and checking up on the mods. We messaged people who have been seen inactive(reason why you've seen some people look back on the forums) and to my surprise, there was a huge reason for it. Issues from the past had unknowingly effected certain people and in result of that, causing an issue here today. As for mods only being active in game and not on the forums, let me just point out there that a lot of the things we do as a moderator, are not seen by the public. When we lock a thread or deal with a spam bot, it does not show to everyone who did it. For me, when I lock a thread, I make sure to state why I'm locking it to set aside confusion. This is seen publicly and makes me appear as more active. Others might be working more of "behind the scenes" work and may be classified as inactive, when they're not.

I know where you're coming from here, but Half is kind of right too. Inactive mods shouldn't be mods, and by inactive mods, I mean mods that applied and did nothing. If a mod is study for an exam, or is caught up in real life I won't say they're inactive! I say they've had in real life things they need to attend to. I think 35 is a bit high, but I personally think mods with no posts and no play time are a lot less appealing than a 13 year old mod. Regardless, if any mod is 'inactive' because of work and their IRL lives, they're fine and shouldn't be pointed at and taunted, but if any mod is becoming inactive it would be nice for them to at least let us know, with a 1 minute written post saying they can't be at MCSG for a while because of life would be nice hey?

Anyway, just my responses to your answers. Good luck writing back!

If you guys expect me to read and consider all of the opinions and statements posted so far, I expect the same.

Here you go! I'll speak for Lulu!

 

[Sam]

Why is everyone in such a rush to become mod, if you are not old enough you can still help the community without being a mod. In a month I will apply for mod as I've been part of mcsg for many months and have tried my best to help my fellow mcsgers and I think I'm ready to take on the responsibility. I say learn from the Mods now so you can prepare yourself in advance. Just sayin'

 

[KiNNEY]

You don't HAVE to be a mod to help the community, there is no reason why you can't help the community in different ways without being a mod.

 

[Sam]

This is what I tried to say also in my comment

 

[Captain Dak]

You don't HAVE to be a mod to help the community, there is no reason why you can't help the community in different ways without being a mod.

This what I tell anyone who doesn't qualify or gets their application denied. This statement really hits the nail on the head. In some ways, actually in my opinion most ways, normal members of the community have more of an impact than the mods themselves because there are more of them, and the moderators can't do the job without their help.

So, to put it shortly, if you can't be an official moderator with the fancy tag and the red name in-game, don't be upset, but continue helping the community by posting in report abuse, poking moderators on teamspeak to inform them of hackers, and just be kind and helpful to everyone because in the end that's the important thing. Helping the servers, in whatever way you can, whether you can be a moderator or not.

 

[TaiserRY]

The problem with me is that i'm 15 so i reach the age limit but i don't, can't or want to use Teamspeak due to various reasons. so HalfSquirrel, do you think it should be compulsory to use teamspeak. i can understand that it helps alot with talking but i prefer to just play alone. i've never made a Mod app yet though .

 

[TehHater]

The St staff are only following rules by not making duckluv a moderator, im sure she could do a great job but if the SrStaff let a under aged person because a moderator this one time other under aged people who got denied in the past will think its unfair to them.

And in this community all mods, admins, devs, donators, normal players and even baccas get the same treatment

 

[KiNNEY]

The St staff are only following rules by not making duckluv a moderator, im sure she could do a great job but if the SrStaff let a under aged person because a moderator this one time other under aged people who got denied in the past will think its unfair to them.

And in this community all mods, admins, devs, donators, normal players and even baccas get the same treatment

I like the way bacca's are there own race now :3

 

[Le0]

Alright, you were wanting feedback on this, so here goes. I'm just going to write in reply to the points raised in the first two posts by HalfSquirrel first, and get to some of the other comments at a later date when my fingers have stopped bleeding.

First off, the reason that the age limit was lowered from 15 to 14 was NOT because of the fact that staff have been resigning lately. I would like to point out that MCSG has been running for a year now, and we can't hope to keep the same staff throughout. There will always be a flow of staff through MCSG- new mods coming in, and old staff resigning. So no, I wouldn't call it "lots of staff" resigning lately- we have had roughly the same amount of staff resign this month as we did to say, last month. But, back to the point. The reason the age limit was lowered was because we do agree with you fellow forumers, and the Senior Staff had been discussing this for a long while anyway. We knew that in the scheme of things, 14 year olds are still considered as "teenagers", and are nothing but 15 year olds that are a year younger. (ie. should still have the same maturity as 15 year olds, etc.-more on this later.)


As for having no age limit causing more mod apps- the honest answer to this is no, I don't believe that making no age limit would significantly raise the amount of mod apps submitted very much at all. At the moment, we probably get (on average) 20-30 different mod apps every single day. I would say that probably around 3/4 of the people on MCSG that want to apply for mod (as in prepared to write a mod app, etc) are over the age of 14, so in any case there wouldn't be that much of an influx. In any case, we would welcome more mod apps, as it would allow us to select more people, and/or allow us to only choose the better applicants if there was enough.

OK, this is probably going to be quite a controversial topic. While we would love to make extremely helpful, insightful members of our community moderators (ignoring any ages at this point) there will be issues with this. One that immediately sprung to mind is people being active on the forums just to get the mod position, and once they get it, abuse it. While I KNOW that 99% of you would NOT do that, there is the chance of it happening. And you may say that that could happen with moderator applications, and I agree. So I'll move to my next point: where do we draw the line? Some forumers may be selected over other forumers, and it could be looked upon as favouritism, bias, etc. It would force us to essentially choose between lots of great people, and leaving many great people behind simply because we can't accept them all.

Inactive staff members: Yes, we are probably more aware of these inactive staff members than you know, we update a google doc with all the staff members details and activity at very regular dates. The majority of staff who wish to leave the community tell us, but yes, some just leave without any messages, etc. You can understand that we don't want to derank any mods rashly- there may be circumstances preventing them from coming on, etc. But we do try to deal with inactivity. Aside from just immediately stripping them of their ranks, we do want to talk to make contact first- to see if they have intentions of coming back, why they haven't been on, etc. All of the staff mentioned have been questioned-we are waiting for replies.
Just a quick thing overview~
Col_Star is a new admin, he hasn't started yet due to being in holiday. He's a friend on Chad's, so hopefully we'll meet him soon.

IronFerret- One of the most beloved mods on the MCSG forums, lol. Everyone seems to wonder who he is xD He is one of Chad's personal friends who was given mod rank- and because Chad gave him mod, we can't remove it. It's a pet peeve of the Sr Staff, trust me. xD And that being said, it's like he heard us talking about him o.o :

Crazydude and Brilliantos, yes we are aware of their inactivity and are going to do something about it if they don't contact us soon.

Calebrox is no longer staff at MCSG, he just hasn't had the mod tag removed yet.

Wedtm- devs are only hired and relieved by Chad, so you'd have to bug him about it. However, if Chad ever wants his help or something again, that might be why his account still has the dev rank.

However, as Slasher said-it's not really your place to single out inactive staff. A lot of the inactive staff at the moment actually do have valid reasons, which they have not posted for the general public to view, some simply due to privacy.

And now, in response to the second part of the message (I'm going to not answer parts that I have already answered, for fear of this being the length of a G33ke post x10)

I'm just going to go straight to the crux: we are not going to lower the age limit, or take any exceptions. This has been explained many times across many different posts by many staff. The first reason is, even if the senior staff wanted to change it, we can't. A decision like that requires full support from the majority of the senior staff, which it does not have. Personally, I think some exceptions should be made- but that is not a view shared by the rest of the senior staff, and I respect and agree with their reasoning. The second reason: we have to draw the line somewhere. If we lower the age another year, there will always be a group just missing out. I know this seems unfair, but we have thoroughly thought this through. The third reason is yes, maturity. I don't particularly mean maturity in a sense of saying a 12 year old would kick an annoying bacca for killing them when a 16 year old wouldn't, I mean more of a maturity of how to handle certain situations. Some situations require extreme care, while others, excuse the language, are in which you are abused the crap out of as a mod. And I'm fairly certain, that me at a younger age would not have the maturity (in the sense of level-headedness and experience) to deal with it at a younger age.

So please, remember There are reasons for these things. We don't just stick an age restriction on for the sake of it, or because we don't like younger people. And the main reason we don't take exceptions, as stated above, is that it can be unfair on others. If we were to do that, it would just basically be like picking our favourite people. And then there are those people who may not be as active on the forums or in the community, or post an application as excellent or long as another's, but who's to say they are any less qualified than someone else?

Also, another point raised about having people who have mod apps accepted having a minimum number of posts on the forums in order to be accepted- we actually just discussed this among the senior staff, and came to the conclusion that no, we won't do this. Some points raised were that some members may just spam/talk about useless stuff/be annoying just to get the quota. Another was that this would severely cut the amount of eligible applicants, as a lot of our applicants to not have many posts, whether that's because they are server based or they are new to the community, we don't check. And, it may seem strange, but a lot of our current, active staff actually had zero or very few posts when they applied for mod.

Thanks for reading this, if you have. It's now 1am and I have a huge headache, so there is a high chance I have missed something out, or something.... so yeah. Ask away, I'm always happy to answer your questions.