Why Do This Staff?

[iDufferz]

Whenever some one has made a thread making a valid point against a staff members decision or about the staff member him/herself or basically anything bad to do with mcsg you just lock it and leave it at that, most of the time without even giving a valid reason.

 

[duckluv321]

Answer:

 

[inconceivable81]

Because, they don't have valid reasons. They are abusing their powers, and not even trying to cover it up. Demoting Philly, no reason. Enforcing the hub, to gain money. Banning me for "spam", a.k.a. Typing in a message once, and not replying o my ban dispute. Demoting some mods for saing he truth. Hypocrisy. Problem is, they don't deny it.

 

[The Arena Master]

This is true. This has been happening for too long now. If the staff doesn't agree with us they lock the threads, if we don't agree with the staff we get banned..

This needs to stop.

 

[shoottomaim]

Most of the time the points are valid, but the evidence backing it up is weak and sometimes isn't even relevant, if there is even evidence. You asked why we sometimes lock thread and leave it at that. It's because we know that if we were to leave it open, all hell would break loose with people pointing fingers at another, and flaming breaking out. We were given the rank of Moderator/Admin for a reason, and that was because we know what's right for the community. I don't speak for all of us here, and if I've said anything wrong I'm sorry, but if you have to question what we do then we're doing something wrong. We try our best to make this community as clean and as argument-free as possible, and sometimes locking threads without a reason is the reason why we do it: because we know that if we were to give a reason you would be sitting there going like "...what?" because we have experience. We usually know how threads turn out. If you make a thread pointing fingers at a staff member we know that's going to turn into a flame fest. Please, just trust us with our decisions. If you want to question our decisions at least bring it to a Sr. staff member instead of posting it publicly and letting rumors spread.

 

[duckluv321]

Most of the time the points are valid, but the evidence backing it up is weak and sometimes isn't even relevant, if there is even evidence. You asked why we sometimes lock thread and leave it at that. It's because we know that if we were to leave it open, all hell would break loose with people pointing fingers at another, and flaming breaking out. We were given the rank of Moderator/Admin for a reason, and that was because we know what's right for the community. I don't speak for all of us here, and if I've said anything wrong I'm sorry, but if you have to question what we do then we're doing something wrong. We try our best to make this community as clean and as argument-free as possible, and sometimes locking threads without a reason is the reason why we do it: because we know that if we were to give a reason you would be sitting there going like "...what?" because we have experience. We usually know how threads turn out. If you make a thread pointing fingers at a staff member we know that's going to turn into a flame fest. Please, just trust us with our decisions. If you want to question our decisions at least bring it to a Sr. staff member instead of posting it publicly and letting rumors spread.

I think what he meant was why we aren't given an answer. I totally understand why threads are locked, but if they're locked without reason, it just leads to more threads, and more questions.

 

[shoottomaim]

I think what he meant was why we aren't given an answer. I totally understand why threads are locked, but if they're locked without reason, it just leads to more threads, and more questions.

I have no answer for that then . I give reasons when I lock my threads... I can't speak for the others in this case.

 

[Rebound4]

...


ACA-AWKWARD

 

[Zeno]

Most of the time the points are valid, but the evidence backing it up is weak and sometimes isn't even relevant, if there is even evidence. You asked why we sometimes lock thread and leave it at that. It's because we know that if we were to leave it open, all hell would break loose with people pointing fingers at another, and flaming breaking out. We were given the rank of Moderator/Admin for a reason, and that was because we know what's right for the community. I don't speak for all of us here, and if I've said anything wrong I'm sorry, but if you have to question what we do then we're doing something wrong. We try our best to make this community as clean and as argument-free as possible, and sometimes locking threads without a reason is the reason why we do it: because we know that if we were to give a reason you would be sitting there going like "...what?" because we have experience. We usually know how threads turn out. If you make a thread pointing fingers at a staff member we know that's going to turn into a flame fest. Please, just trust us with our decisions. If you want to question our decisions at least bring it to a Sr. staff member instead of posting it publicly and letting rumors spread.

Though I applaud you for coming out and saying this, and taking the time to write a decently long piece on the subject, I have to disagree with you. Moderators are selected because they are experienced and know (to a certain degree) what is best for the community, but that does not include locking threads without giving a reason. At times, threads must be locked, yes. They may devolve into flame wars, be full of hatred, swearing, or other violations of the rules. That is not a point that I disagree with. But if a thread is to be locked, you MUST have a reason to lock it. You can't just lock a thread for the reason that, "We know how this thread will turn out". If you ever come to the point where you are locking a thread, you must have a reason that can be written down and explained to the members who were participating in the thread, and anyone who might read it. You must answer the questions raised instead of ignoring it. If you lock threads without leaving a response, you are not decreasing drama, but rather increasing it, strengthening the community's opinion that the staff censors information. If an issue is large enough for a thread to be written about it, it deserves a response, not a lock or deletion with no reply to the problem at hand.

 

[inconceivable81]

We were given the rank of Moderator/Admin for a reason

Really?

And that was because we know what's right for the community.

You mean you used to...

Please, just trust us with our decisions.

We've done enough of that, you make too many mistakes.

 

[shoottomaim]

Though I applaud you for coming out and saying this, and taking the time to write a decently long piece on the subject, I have to disagree with you. Moderators are selected because they are experienced and know (to a certain degree) what is best for the community, but that does not include locking threads without giving a reason. At times, threads must be locked, yes. They may devolve into flame wars, be full of hatred, swearing, or other violations of the rules. That is not a point that I disagree with. But if a thread is to be locked, you MUST have a reason to lock it. You can't just lock a thread for the reason that, "We know how this thread will turn out". If you ever come to the point where you are locking a thread, you must have a reason that can be written down and explained to the members who were participating in the thread, and anyone who might read it. You must answer the questions raised instead of ignoring it. If you lock threads without leaving a response, you are not decreasing drama, but rather increasing it, strengthening the community's opinion that the staff censors information. If an issue is large enough for a thread to be written about it, it deserves a response, not a lock or deletion with no reply to the problem at hand.

I won't reply to that because I can't speak for the rest of the staff members and their decisions. .

 

[iDufferz]

Get Chadthedj up in dis joint.