The most important question I'm ever going to ask on this site.

[Mamiamato24]

I agree it shouldn't though it needs to be brought to attention not thrown aside like it has in the past.

I do agree. There are some moderators that have had the ranks for months but have been completely forgotten about and have done nothing or barely anything.

 

[Kaine]

I do agree. There are some moderators that have had the ranks for months but have been completely forgotten about and have done nothing or barely anything.

I believe we as staff, need to work harder or have a better system which would filter out the dishonest, corrupt and inactive Moderators. Obviously i wouldn't recommend regular players inputs because Moderators can make a lot of enemy's by just doing their job. Staff in their own regions know who is active and who does their job and in my opinion, have the best knowledge of that topic. It just frustrates me when staff position's are filled because of inactive or "corrupt" members while other players who would really love the job and dedicate hours of time receive less of a chance due to inactive members. The standard of moderating needs to improve also, Constant check ups by higher staff members may help resolve this, keeping all the Moderators focused. But as slasher said, this topic needs to be discussed. This is just my opinion so i may very well be wrong.

 

[slasherxtreme]

I agree it shouldn't though it needs to be brought to attention not thrown aside like it has in the past.

If a mod has been reported to us and there is evidence, the case is not thrown aside. It is dealt with ASAP. Just because a moderator is not instantly fired doesn't mean they weren't dealt with. Everyone makes mistakes and if we fired everyone for lightly screwing up once, we'd have no staff members.

I do agree. There are some moderators that have had the ranks for months but have been completely forgotten about and have done nothing or barely anything.

We'd rather focus on gaining more mods rather than letting go of inactive ones. When we have an ideal amount of mods, we'll address the issue of inactive ones. People who don't do anything are easier to deal with so it's a lesser priority. Things like a lack of mods are what we worry about.

 

[Mamiamato24]

I believe we as staff, need to work harder or have a better system which would filter out the dishonest, corrupt and inactive Moderators. Obviously i wouldn't recommend regular players inputs because Moderators can make a lot of enemy's by just doing their job. Staff in their own regions know who is active and who does their job and in my opinion, have the best knowledge of that topic. It just frustrates me when staff position's are filled because of inactive or "corrupt" members while other players who would really love the job and dedicate hours of time receive less of a chance due to inactive members. The standard of moderating needs to improve also, Constant check ups by higher staff members may help resolve this, keeping all the Moderators focused. But as slasher said, this topic needs to be discussed. This is just my opinion so i may very well be wrong.

That's why I mentioned a while ago, and I think CaptainJS made a thread about it, where new moderators should me monitored for a certain amount of time to see if they are doing their jobs. Maybe not in locks/kicks/bans, but generally helping out the community.

 

[WalkerRed]

(starts very long rant)
This thread, has to many lines for me to read.
(end of very long rant)

 

[Kaine]

That's why I mentioned a while ago, and I think CaptainJS made a thread about it, where new moderators should me monitored for a certain amount of time to see if they are doing their jobs. Maybe not in locks/kicks/bans, but generally helping out the community.

I have seen in recent weeks that new Moderators have been getting mentored from more experienced moderators, which i believe has increased the standards by a lot. It should be compulsory for all new mods if of course they have staff willing to mentor.

 

[Zeno]

Certain moderators may be dishonest and corrupt, but why should such a small percentage of such a large group of people reflect upon how all of them are?

It's the nature of humanity's view on groups of people. Take followers of Islam, for example. Even though the majority of them are peaceful, kind people, the small percentage of violent radicals that do exist have colored the American perception of Muslims in a distinctly negative light. The same thing has happened with the staff: though many of them have done nothing wrong, and, on a large scale, there is no 'corruption', there are a few mods that bring down the reputation of the staff team as a whole.

In my opinion, the issue with the staff at MCSG is not that they are doing anything wrong, persay. They are not corrupt. They are not 'out to get you'. Rather, it is the fact that they are doing nothing at all. In browsing over the list of staff, looking at their posts, their last date online, and considering whether or not I have ever actually seen them, I've been sorely dissapointed. We have very few active, mature, good mods these days, and the trend is not seeming to improve. Again, these mods aren't deliberately ruining things for the players on the server, but, through their inaction they are inadvertently ruining the reputation of the staff and serving to decrease community goodwill. We need mods who are active, who look out for the community, who do more than sit in TS and talk with their friends in a private channel where no one else can join. We need to look for quality in mods, not just quantity.

There are a few more issues I have with the staff, that, though they aren't as prevalent, are especially harmful to community goodwill. The first and most major point, which I believe everything else kind of falls into (so this may end up just being a single, extended point), is the way in which members of the staff react to criticism. In my time on these forums, witnessing and (regrettably) sometimes starting drama, I have very seldom seen a full, thought out, reasoned reply that truly makes me think that the staff member posting it has fully considered the points raised against them. Many times, what I see happening is that a staff member will take criticism as a personal attack (which it sometimes is), as opposed to the more ideal way, of taking the criticism and working to improve in the qualities which people have an issue with. I understand this is hard, it goes against basic human nature, but, as a staff member, it is the way you have to respond to criticism if you want to retain community goodwill.

You cannot lock threads if you dislike the content, or feel it 'might' start a flame war (as seen in Pixel's previous controversial threads, MCSG members are capable of avoiding them if given the chance). You cannot take criticism as a personal attack, and respond back with small, petty comments. You cannot make grand, sweeping generalizations, and ignore the feedback that is being directed at you, because, in the end, that's all criticism is: feedback. Just as the staff are not evil, power hungry monsters who want to rule our lives, nor are the members of the community who speak their mind attempting to do bring down MCSG, to personally abuse members of staff, or any other sinister ulterior motive. At the heart of every complaint is the desire to see MCSG improve. That is, in it's very nature, what criticism is: ideas on ways that something can improve. It's sometimes hard to take it that way, especially if it's presented in an antagonistic manner, but if you can, then a whole array of new possibilities for improvement are opened to you.

@slasherxtreme I just want to thank you for your response to this thread. Though I may not have agreed with all the points you made, reading that truly made me feel as if you thought about the issues that had been raised, and that you recognized it as something more than a personal attack. I appreciate you leaving this thread open for further discussion, and I hope it will continue to be so. I strongly approve of your reaction to this thread, and for that I thank you.

Sadly, I must now move back into the realm of my issues with MCSG (though remember, none of these are meant as a personal attack, but rather as ways in which MCSG can improve). One of the biggest and most pervasive problems MCSG faces, one which lies at the root of all the other problems, is a lack of communication between the staff and the community. G33ke said that informing people makes things worse. Always. Even though this is not exactly what he meant, let me tell you, it is entirely wrong. There is no more sure fire way to alienate a community then to keep them in the dark. Refusing to tell people information on sensitive topics only serves to increase the level of drama that happens, and, ultimately, results in a lack of trust between the community and the staff that renders future reparations rather ineffectual.

If you don't tell the community anything, then, as is only natural, they will jump to assumptions, latching on to rumors and small bits of facts, without ever knowing everything that's happening. If they try to protest about it, their complaints will be ignored and their threads locked because they don't know the full story. Tell me though, how are they supposed to know the full story if they aren't told what it is? This means of keeping the community in the dark allows for complete denial of any faults that the system possesses, because the community never has enough information to form accurate criticism. It doesn't decrease drama, because rumors will be taken as truth in the absence of fact, all it does is prevent the possibility for improvement.

If information was shared freely with the community, especially on sensitive subjects (unless, due to an NDA or other legal implications it cannot be shared), then, at least in my opinion, everything will work far smoother. There will still be complaints, yes, but they will be valid complaints, as opposed to uninformed ramblings. These informed complaints can then be addressed, and the staff team can improve, while the community opinion of the staff increases.

Look at it from our point of view. We don't know what's going on behind the scenes, so, when we see a host of inactive mods, another company sitting in locked channels on TS and not replying to pokes, and a third section on the forums, locking our threads and ignoring our criticism, we have no way to know that anything is being done about it, and, as we see it continue to happen, we begin to assume that nothing is being done about it. I don't believe this is true myself, but a lot of the fears, worries, and doubts of the community could be allayed simply by telling us what exactly is being done, as opposed to the large, overarching statement of: "We're doing things, you just don't know about them".

As it's now becoming rather late, and this post has become rather gargantuan, I'll begin wrapping up here (though, if you wish to challenge or respond to any section of this post, I will still be around to reply and expand on my ideas). I believe that the community and the staff need to work together in order for MCSG to truly prosper. In order for that goal to be achieved, the community needs to realize that the staff are not evil, nor out to get us. They're humans like any other, who just happen to be staff. Meanwhile, the staff needs to listen to the complaints of the community, however badly they may be phrased, and work to improve instead of denying their flaws. Both sides in this debate have strong points in their favor, and serious flaws, but the only way any positive outcome is going to come of this is if we all put aside our personal grievances and agree to work together in order to help MCSG.

 

[slasherxtreme]

It's the nature of humanity's view on groups of people. Take followers of Islam, for example. Even though the majority of them are peaceful, kind people, the small percentage of violent radicals that do exist have colored the American perception of Muslims in a distinctly negative light. The same thing has happened with the staff: though many of them have done nothing wrong, and, on a large scale, there is no 'corruption', there are a few mods that bring down the reputation of the staff team as a whole.

In my opinion, the issue with the staff at MCSG is not that they are doing anything wrong, persay. They are not corrupt. They are not 'out to get you'. Rather, it is the fact that they are doing nothing at all. In browsing over the list of staff, looking at their posts, their last date online, and considering whether or not I have ever actually seen them, I've been sorely dissapointed. We have very few active, mature, good mods these days, and the trend is not seeming to improve. Again, these mods aren't deliberately ruining things for the players on the server, but, through their inaction they are inadvertently ruining the reputation of the staff and serving to decrease community goodwill. We need mods who are active, who look out for the community, who do more than sit in TS and talk with their friends in a private channel where no one else can join. We need to look for quality in mods, not just quantity.

There are a few more issues I have with the staff, that, though they aren't as prevalent, are especially harmful to community goodwill. The first and most major point, which I believe everything else kind of falls into (so this may end up just being a single, extended point), is the way in which members of the staff react to criticism. In my time on these forums, witnessing and (regrettably) sometimes starting drama, I have very seldom seen a full, thought out, reasoned reply that truly makes me think that the staff member posting it has fully considered the points raised against them. Many times, what I see happening is that a staff member will take criticism as a personal attack (which it sometimes is), as opposed to the more ideal way, of taking the criticism and working to improve in the qualities which people have an issue with. I understand this is hard, it goes against basic human nature, but, as a staff member, it is the way you have to respond to criticism if you want to retain community goodwill.

You cannot lock threads if you dislike the content, or feel it 'might' start a flame war (as seen in Pixel's previous controversial threads, MCSG members are capable of avoiding them if given the chance). You cannot take criticism as a personal attack, and respond back with small, petty comments. You cannot make grand, sweeping generalizations, and ignore the feedback that is being directed at you, because, in the end, that's all criticism is: feedback. Just as the staff are not evil, power hungry monsters who want to rule our lives, nor are the members of the community who speak their mind attempting to do bring down MCSG, to personally abuse members of staff, or any other sinister ulterior motive. At the heart of every complaint is the desire to see MCSG improve. That is, in it's very nature, what criticism is: ideas on ways that something can improve. It's sometimes hard to take it that way, especially if it's presented in an antagonistic manner, but if you can, then a whole array of new possibilities for improvement are opened to you.

@slasherxtreme I just want to thank you for your response to this thread. Though I may not have agreed with all the points you made, reading that truly made me feel as if you thought about the issues that had been raised, and that you recognized it as something more than a personal attack. I appreciate you leaving this thread open for further discussion, and I hope it will continue to be so. I strongly approve of your reaction to this thread, and for that I thank you.

Sadly, I must now move back into the realm of my issues with MCSG (though remember, none of these are meant as a personal attack, but rather as ways in which MCSG can improve). One of the biggest and most pervasive problems MCSG faces, one which lies at the root of all the other problems, is a lack of communication between the staff and the community. G33ke said that informing people makes things worse. Always. Even though this is not exactly what he meant, let me tell you, it is entirely wrong. There is no more sure fire way to alienate a community then to keep them in the dark. Refusing to tell people information on sensitive topics only serves to increase the level of drama that happens, and, ultimately, results in a lack of trust between the community and the staff that renders future reparations rather ineffectual.

If you don't tell the community anything, then, as is only natural, they will jump to assumptions, latching on to rumors and small bits of facts, without ever knowing everything that's happening. If they try to protest about it, their complaints will be ignored and their threads locked because they don't know the full story. Tell me though, how are they supposed to know the full story if they aren't told what it is? This means of keeping the community in the dark allows for complete denial of any faults that the system possesses, because the community never has enough information to form accurate criticism. It doesn't decrease drama, because rumors will be taken as truth in the absence of fact, all it does is prevent the possibility for improvement.

If information was shared freely with the community, especially on sensitive subjects (unless, due to an NDA or other legal implications it cannot be shared), then, at least in my opinion, everything will work far smoother. There will still be complaints, yes, but they will be valid complaints, as opposed to uninformed ramblings. These informed complaints can then be addressed, and the staff team can improve, while the community opinion of the staff increases.

Look at it from our point of view. We don't know what's going on behind the scenes, so, when we see a host of inactive mods, another company sitting in locked channels on TS and not replying to pokes, and a third section on the forums, locking our threads and ignoring our criticism, we have no way to know that anything is being done about it, and, as we see it continue to happen, we begin to assume that nothing is being done about it. I don't believe this is true myself, but a lot of the fears, worries, and doubts of the community could be allayed simply by telling us what exactly is being done, as opposed to the large, overarching statement of: "We're doing things, you just don't know about them".

As it's now becoming rather late, and this post has become rather gargantuan, I'll begin wrapping up here (though, if you wish to challenge or respond to any section of this post, I will still be around to reply and expand on my ideas). I believe that the community and the staff need to work together in order for MCSG to truly prosper. In order for that goal to be achieved, the community needs to realize that the staff are not evil, nor out to get us. They're humans like any other, who just happen to be staff. Meanwhile, the staff needs to listen to the complaints of the community, however badly they may be phrased, and work to improve instead of denying their flaws. Both sides in this debate have strong points in their favor, and serious flaws, but the only way any positive outcome is going to come of this is if we all put aside our personal grievances and agree to work together in order to help MCSG.

I feel that this post, although it talks about staff not seeing other's points of view, doesn't see the point of the view from the staff's perspective. There is a huge difference between criticism and general hate. What I've seen from most of these "The staff are bad and low quality" threads are pure hate. The questions proposed on majority of these threads are vague and manipulative. In addition, they focus only on the bad. What's being said on these threads are mostly "The staff are corrupt. Don't you agree?" "If you don't agree then do you notice how certain people got staff because they have staff friends?". As you can see, this gives the staff nothing to improve on. All we are told is that we are inexperienced, corrupt and bias. It raises no possible cause to fix, nor possible fixes. This is when threads turn into general hate.

The "criticism" that was brought out to help the staff change becomes personal attacks on staff members. For example, in this very thread, tpem was brought up. So far, I don't see him banning people randomly or abusing anything. Why was he brought up? Why was a moderator specified if the thread is about all staff? I wouldn't be able to answer this on my own but if I were to guess, it would be because targeting specific people makes it easier to show or give an example of what they're trying to prove. It prevents people from seeing the picture as a whole. In doing so, they thread becomes a personal hate thread towards the staff or certain members. Which is why staff react in such ways.

The reaction of the person who posts the thread, or people who believe the staff is corrupt, is usually to make a new thread or twist the scene of things into negative things. With threads being locked, I usually see people disregard the reason of it being locked and making more assumptions. Despite majority of the lock messages saying it was causing drama or an argument, people ignore reason and solely look at the part where the thread about staff is being locked.

Regard G33ke's point on informing being bad, I agree with him, to a certain point. There are things that people shouldn't know of and there are things people should. If there is something someone wants to know, they can ask the staff and we'll try to answer. If it crosses the line and becomes something we can't or won't answer, we'll give a reason why. Most of the time we won't disclose something is because it's private information and doesn't concern everyone else. This is why new rules were made. People kept getting themselves involved in matters that shouldn't involved them in the first place. They don't know the whole story and we can't tell them the whole story so they go and make assumptions of what is happening. This ends up causing the most amount of drama. To sum up, there are things that the community best not know, because it doesn't involved them. But before someone complains about us not telling them anything, they should try to ask the question first and see what the answer is.

This leads on to my next topic, inactive mods. There may be mods that may not be very active on the forums, but that does not mean they are not active in game or on teamspeak. Our main priority is to have mods moderate the servers. This is because there are more people on the servers than on the forums, as well as more rule breakers. If a moderator is dedicating all their free time to the moderating the servers, then you can see why they won't be as active on the forums. In addition to that, they may be moderating the forums as well, just not posting public posts on non moderation posts. It's kind of like how sr staff aren't as active in game, but it doesn't mean they're not doing work. We can't just always tell people we're doing work, because most of the time, the work is private or doesn't involve them.

The issue I really see with people hating the staff is that people are not asking before they act. They are not making sure before they post something or about something. This misunderstanding could lead to drama. We realize these issues. This is why there were new rules set in place to specifically target these issues. The solution I propose to have a good trust between the two sides(which shouldn't be two sides) and have the least amount of misunderstanding is for members who are curious about something, to ask the the staff. This will result in less assumptions, rumors and accusations, which will make threads regarding issues with the staff more civil and easier to sort out. If the false information that are cluttering the real issues are gone, then the staff will be able to quickly and more efficiently understand the issue, reflect on it and improve.

 

[G33ke]

It's the nature of humanity's view on groups of people. Take followers of Islam, for example. Even though the majority of them are peaceful, kind people, the small percentage of violent radicals that do exist have colored the American perception of Muslims in a distinctly negative light. The same thing has happened with the staff: though many of them have done nothing wrong, and, on a large scale, there is no 'corruption', there are a few mods that bring down the reputation of the staff team as a whole.

In my opinion, the issue with the staff at MCSG is not that they are doing anything wrong, persay. They are not corrupt. They are not 'out to get you'. Rather, it is the fact that they are doing nothing at all. In browsing over the list of staff, looking at their posts, their last date online, and considering whether or not I have ever actually seen them, I've been sorely dissapointed. We have very few active, mature, good mods these days, and the trend is not seeming to improve. Again, these mods aren't deliberately ruining things for the players on the server, but, through their inaction they are inadvertently ruining the reputation of the staff and serving to decrease community goodwill. We need mods who are active, who look out for the community, who do more than sit in TS and talk with their friends in a private channel where no one else can join. We need to look for quality in mods, not just quantity.

There are a few more issues I have with the staff, that, though they aren't as prevalent, are especially harmful to community goodwill. The first and most major point, which I believe everything else kind of falls into (so this may end up just being a single, extended point), is the way in which members of the staff react to criticism. In my time on these forums, witnessing and (regrettably) sometimes starting drama, I have very seldom seen a full, thought out, reasoned reply that truly makes me think that the staff member posting it has fully considered the points raised against them. Many times, what I see happening is that a staff member will take criticism as a personal attack (which it sometimes is), as opposed to the more ideal way, of taking the criticism and working to improve in the qualities which people have an issue with. I understand this is hard, it goes against basic human nature, but, as a staff member, it is the way you have to respond to criticism if you want to retain community goodwill.

You cannot lock threads if you dislike the content, or feel it 'might' start a flame war (as seen in Pixel's previous controversial threads, MCSG members are capable of avoiding them if given the chance). You cannot take criticism as a personal attack, and respond back with small, petty comments. You cannot make grand, sweeping generalizations, and ignore the feedback that is being directed at you, because, in the end, that's all criticism is: feedback. Just as the staff are not evil, power hungry monsters who want to rule our lives, nor are the members of the community who speak their mind attempting to do bring down MCSG, to personally abuse members of staff, or any other sinister ulterior motive. At the heart of every complaint is the desire to see MCSG improve. That is, in it's very nature, what criticism is: ideas on ways that something can improve. It's sometimes hard to take it that way, especially if it's presented in an antagonistic manner, but if you can, then a whole array of new possibilities for improvement are opened to you.

@slasherxtreme I just want to thank you for your response to this thread. Though I may not have agreed with all the points you made, reading that truly made me feel as if you thought about the issues that had been raised, and that you recognized it as something more than a personal attack. I appreciate you leaving this thread open for further discussion, and I hope it will continue to be so. I strongly approve of your reaction to this thread, and for that I thank you.

Sadly, I must now move back into the realm of my issues with MCSG (though remember, none of these are meant as a personal attack, but rather as ways in which MCSG can improve). One of the biggest and most pervasive problems MCSG faces, one which lies at the root of all the other problems, is a lack of communication between the staff and the community. G33ke said that informing people makes things worse. Always. Even though this is not exactly what he meant, let me tell you, it is entirely wrong. There is no more sure fire way to alienate a community then to keep them in the dark. Refusing to tell people information on sensitive topics only serves to increase the level of drama that happens, and, ultimately, results in a lack of trust between the community and the staff that renders future reparations rather ineffectual.

If you don't tell the community anything, then, as is only natural, they will jump to assumptions, latching on to rumors and small bits of facts, without ever knowing everything that's happening. If they try to protest about it, their complaints will be ignored and their threads locked because they don't know the full story. Tell me though, how are they supposed to know the full story if they aren't told what it is? This means of keeping the community in the dark allows for complete denial of any faults that the system possesses, because the community never has enough information to form accurate criticism. It doesn't decrease drama, because rumors will be taken as truth in the absence of fact, all it does is prevent the possibility for improvement.

If information was shared freely with the community, especially on sensitive subjects (unless, due to an NDA or other legal implications it cannot be shared), then, at least in my opinion, everything will work far smoother. There will still be complaints, yes, but they will be valid complaints, as opposed to uninformed ramblings. These informed complaints can then be addressed, and the staff team can improve, while the community opinion of the staff increases.

Look at it from our point of view. We don't know what's going on behind the scenes, so, when we see a host of inactive mods, another company sitting in locked channels on TS and not replying to pokes, and a third section on the forums, locking our threads and ignoring our criticism, we have no way to know that anything is being done about it, and, as we see it continue to happen, we begin to assume that nothing is being done about it. I don't believe this is true myself, but a lot of the fears, worries, and doubts of the community could be allayed simply by telling us what exactly is being done, as opposed to the large, overarching statement of: "We're doing things, you just don't know about them".

As it's now becoming rather late, and this post has become rather gargantuan, I'll begin wrapping up here (though, if you wish to challenge or respond to any section of this post, I will still be around to reply and expand on my ideas). I believe that the community and the staff need to work together in order for MCSG to truly prosper. In order for that goal to be achieved, the community needs to realize that the staff are not evil, nor out to get us. They're humans like any other, who just happen to be staff. Meanwhile, the staff needs to listen to the complaints of the community, however badly they may be phrased, and work to improve instead of denying their flaws. Both sides in this debate have strong points in their favor, and serious flaws, but the only way any positive outcome is going to come of this is if we all put aside our personal grievances and agree to work together in order to help MCSG.

You see, this is what I was hoping you were going to do.

As a note, though, now that I know why you disagreed with me so heavily: This is all true, what you've said, but I still stand by what I said. By that, I mean, when I said that, what I meant exactly was that him informing the community that the staff is corrupt with no basis is never needed.

The staff informing us of issues that have effected the staff performance in a organized, professional manner, supported with evidence? Shouldn't be a problem! A regular user, making a thread with no evidence behind him, making broad claims of the staff being corrupt, looking to form a petition/etc.? Not so much. The latter won't solve any problems and just causes more issues for the staff to deal with. (And the group will never enjoy how the staff ends up dealing with it.)


Sorry if I was misleading, Zeno. I should have elaborated on it more. I was just trying to argue why regular players shouldn't try to "inform" people about issues that may or may not exist in an attempt to fix it through such means as this. That's a way in which "informing" people usually only causes damage. I have nothing against the staff informing people about issues more themselves, as long as it's in an organized manner. I didn't even think about that, since my argument was directed at members of the community like himself who don't even know the whole story. (Nobody knows the whole story, really.)

 

[Zeno]

Space reserved for reply. Tired now, will write later.

 

[G33ke]

Regard G33ke's point on informing being bad, I agree with him, to a certain point. There are things that people shouldn't know of and there are things people should. If there is something someone wants to know, they can ask the staff and we'll try to answer. If it crosses the line and becomes something we can't or won't answer, we'll give a reason why. Most of the time we won't disclose something is because it's private information and doesn't concern everyone else. This is why new rules were made. People kept getting themselves involved in matters that shouldn't involved them in the first place. They don't know the whole story and we can't tell them the whole story so they go and make assumptions of what is happening. This ends up causing the most amount of drama. To sum up, there are things that the community best not know, because it doesn't involved them. But before someone complains about us not telling them anything, they should try to ask the question first and see what the answer is.

I have to agree and disagree with some stuff said here, actually.
On one hand, it's a lot nicer to give the person who made a mistake a break, and tell nobody that he's been dealt with, so as not to mess with their reputation, but...
...on the other hand, nobody knowing just leads them to believe that it wasn't dealt with. Everyone just assumes it wasn't, and they also begin to assume that many more staff members do the same. After all, if it wasn't dealt with that one time, why would it be if someone else did it?

I think it would be right to at least find a good middle point for it. Who says you need to give a name? When a user is banned, make sure it doesn't tell them who banned them, and they are allowed to make a staff complaint of sorts, where the Sr. Staff take over, see who did it, and reassure the user that it's been dealt with, and the staff member talked to, etc.. (This is an example.)

The more the community knows, the better, and honestly, as of recently, the community has been left out on a lot of things. (The chest update announcement being days late, new maps being added without any noticeable announcement of such a thing in the most browsed places. (the forums.)) The more the staff can tell us, the better, and I do have to agree with Zeno that at the very least, we should address it. (Although honestly, I also feel that threads like these should also be dealt with in a much more organized manner. Every staff member handles these their own ways, and I'm almost never satisfied with the result of it. I feel like there is no designated way to do it at all, and they just kind of do it - I mean no offense to the staff, but I feel like there should be a more designated, professional guideline to dealing with these types of threads. Simply locking it isn't enough - if you don't show you seriously mean business by actually dealing with the users who started the whole thing themselves, (and those who took it to the extreme - blatant insults towards one another that don't contribute to the discussion.) there is nothing stopping them from doing it again - this particular thread being an exception, anyway, because of the fact mature discussion is actually taking place at the moment.)

 

[slasherxtreme]

I have to agree and disagree with some stuff said here, actually.
On one hand, it's a lot nicer to give the person who made a mistake a break, and tell nobody that he's been dealt with, so as not to mess with their reputation, but...
...on the other hand, nobody knowing just leads them to believe that it wasn't dealt with. Everyone just assumes it wasn't, and they also begin to assume that many more staff members do the same. After all, if it wasn't dealt with that one time, why would it be if someone else did it?

I think it would be right to at least find a good middle point for it. Who says you need to give a name? When a user is banned, make sure it doesn't tell them who banned them, and they are allowed to make a staff complaint of sorts, where the Sr. Staff take over, see who did it, and reassure the user that it's been dealt with, and the staff member talked to, etc.. (This is an example.)

The more the community knows, the better, and honestly, as of recently, the community has been left out on a lot of things. (The chest update announcement being days late, new maps being added without any noticeable announcement of such a thing in the most browsed places. (the forums.)) The more the staff can tell us, the better, and I do have to agree with Zeno that at the very least, we should address it. (Although honestly, I also feel that threads like these should also be dealt with in a much more organized manner. Every staff member handles these their own ways, and I'm almost never satisfied with the result of it. I feel like there is no designated way to do it at all, and they just kind of do it - I mean no offense to the staff, but I feel like there should be a more designated, professional guideline to dealing with these types of threads. Simply locking it isn't enough - if you don't show you seriously mean business by actually dealing with the users who started the whole thing themselves, (and those who took it to the extreme - blatant insults towards one another that don't contribute to the discussion.) there is nothing stopping them from doing it again - this particular thread being an exception, anyway, because of the fact mature discussion is actually taking place at the moment.)

When a member is staff is reported with evidence, the person who reported that person can freely ask if anything has been done about the member. Although it's not written in obvious places this is an option, people should always deal with private issues privately before taking them public, if at all. This is what we hope to change with the recent new rules. We want to encourage a process of dealing with curiosity by getting people to, out of habit, ask before they act. It's a principal we try to enforce on a moderators and we're trying on members.

Regarding your example, names of the moderator who has banned the user are never given out. Basically everything else is given to the banned user, or at least available to them. If they feel the ban is wrong, they can post a ban dispute to explain their perspective. If the dispute is upheld, they are given the evidence and reason why. If it's unbanned, we apologize and inform the banner of the reason for the unban, so they can improve. We understand there is a problem between members not knowing as much as they want to and we are working on that. It was the reason for introducing the minor announcement page. Although there hasn't been as much use for it yet, we have plans in progress and we need the members to understand and be patience until things are ready. If they have an idea to help solve these issues, they are free to post a feature suggestion. If it's civil and valid, we will definitely look into it.

The issue the staff have with the community is we don't know what they want to know about. We are rarely ever given questions to answer regarding things. Most of the time it's threads that say we're corrupt and don't answer questions, which is a problem in it's own as we don't know what to answer. With the users who start these kinds of threads, we haven't dealt with before as they often cast themselves as the vigilante, by saying things such as "I know I'm going to get banned for this but I want to speak my mind" or "This is going to get locked. No doubt". By doing this, people will believe what they say, even if there is no evidence to support it. Again with the new rules, we hope to be able to avoid drama as much as we can by having a set of written rules saying they shouldn't do this, this way and if they want to deal with the issue, they can do this. If they choose not to follow the rules and be civil, they will face the consequences and there will be solid evidence and reason behind their consequences.

Regarding how these kinds of threads are dealt, I agree, they are messy. Usually these kinds of issues should be forwarded to senior staff asap for them to deal with, which kind of happened, but there were different events that took place along the way with the staff. This is something we'll definitely work on and try to improve on.

Honestly I'm glad this thread was made. Although it started out horribly, I feel as if we are getting to the direct issues at this point and hopefully soon, solutions. The staff doesn't need people telling them that they re bad staff members, we need people to tell us why they think that, and how they suggest we solve it.

To set the gears of peacefully discussing these issues to motion, members who feel they are misinformed or that there's an issue with the staff, they should post resolutions here or in the feature suggestion sectiom.