Trilexium
Peacekeeper
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2014
- Messages
- 1,127
- Reaction score
- 981
I wanted to make the title of this thread "Community Discussion: Should there be a limit on how long someone has to have been in the community to apply for Moderator?" but as you can probably tell, that's way too long. I guess we'll have to settle for the title I set instead.
I've been prompted to make this thread by a status update made by ALL1DO1SW1N : "It's ridiculous how people apply for Moderator just for the rank and attention.. I'm not saying everyone does this but I find it unappealing"
The comments made me think about the issue and made me remember something that I've supported for quite a while: a limit on how long someone has to have been actively a member of the community for before being considered a worthy applicant for Mod.
Before I start, and I know this will be said; I'd like to first point out I am in no way, shape or form bashing the current Moderators who don't meet this standard I'm proposing. If you guys are here for the right reasons, that's totally fine. I'm more speaking out to the future Moderators of the community who are considering applying.
If you think about it, it makes a lot of sense for the Moderators of the community to be respected and known people in the community. We're not talking YouTuber status, we're talking about people from the community actually being able to say "Hey, I knew who that guy was before he was a Moderator".
It's often the Moderators who have been around in this community longer that are more respected. The community looks up to them more because they can relate to them more. They're not just some random Tom, Inappropriate body part on a male or Harry who's shown up at the party quite recently and decided from the get-go that they're going to be a Moderator. The respected Moderators are people who have been in the community for a long time. See where I'm getting at?
Would it then make more sense, for the community's sake, to be hiring staff members like this? Ones that the community are more likely to place trust in? A lot of people apart from myself think alike. How do we achieve this, then? We set a limit on how long people have to have been a part of the community for.
How would we define the limits though? Ultimately that would be the Administration's job, but I'd say a sensible figure would be actively part of the forum community for at least 6 months prior to applying. That's enough time for the community to acquaint themselves with these people. Note that I say active: this is to prevent people who have been on the forums for 6 months or longer but have only a couple of posts from applying, as that's hardly being an active member of the community. Over 6 months being active in the community, you should have at least 250 posts.
Of course, not every good Moderator is going to be a long-standing member of this community, so that's why I'd also propose a system similar to the previous age exception- let me introduce to you the Experience Exception. A way for applicants who believe they are at the same standard as their more experienced counterparts to prove that they do indeed have what it takes. The process will be similar to how one approaches an age exception: they will have to find the way to apply for an Experience Exception themselves. I'd say this would be fair, as it doesn't totally rule out their chances of being a staff member.
So, community, I pose this question to you: what are your thoughts on this? Would this be something that you would like to see implemented for the better of the community? We're here to have a civil discussion, folks: say what's on your mind. Even suggest some improvements of your own.
I've been prompted to make this thread by a status update made by ALL1DO1SW1N : "It's ridiculous how people apply for Moderator just for the rank and attention.. I'm not saying everyone does this but I find it unappealing"
The comments made me think about the issue and made me remember something that I've supported for quite a while: a limit on how long someone has to have been actively a member of the community for before being considered a worthy applicant for Mod.
Before I start, and I know this will be said; I'd like to first point out I am in no way, shape or form bashing the current Moderators who don't meet this standard I'm proposing. If you guys are here for the right reasons, that's totally fine. I'm more speaking out to the future Moderators of the community who are considering applying.
If you think about it, it makes a lot of sense for the Moderators of the community to be respected and known people in the community. We're not talking YouTuber status, we're talking about people from the community actually being able to say "Hey, I knew who that guy was before he was a Moderator".
It's often the Moderators who have been around in this community longer that are more respected. The community looks up to them more because they can relate to them more. They're not just some random Tom, Inappropriate body part on a male or Harry who's shown up at the party quite recently and decided from the get-go that they're going to be a Moderator. The respected Moderators are people who have been in the community for a long time. See where I'm getting at?
Would it then make more sense, for the community's sake, to be hiring staff members like this? Ones that the community are more likely to place trust in? A lot of people apart from myself think alike. How do we achieve this, then? We set a limit on how long people have to have been a part of the community for.
How would we define the limits though? Ultimately that would be the Administration's job, but I'd say a sensible figure would be actively part of the forum community for at least 6 months prior to applying. That's enough time for the community to acquaint themselves with these people. Note that I say active: this is to prevent people who have been on the forums for 6 months or longer but have only a couple of posts from applying, as that's hardly being an active member of the community. Over 6 months being active in the community, you should have at least 250 posts.
Of course, not every good Moderator is going to be a long-standing member of this community, so that's why I'd also propose a system similar to the previous age exception- let me introduce to you the Experience Exception. A way for applicants who believe they are at the same standard as their more experienced counterparts to prove that they do indeed have what it takes. The process will be similar to how one approaches an age exception: they will have to find the way to apply for an Experience Exception themselves. I'd say this would be fair, as it doesn't totally rule out their chances of being a staff member.
So, community, I pose this question to you: what are your thoughts on this? Would this be something that you would like to see implemented for the better of the community? We're here to have a civil discussion, folks: say what's on your mind. Even suggest some improvements of your own.
