People's choice

I for one believe atleast one of our mods should be voted on not appointed by other mods. This would help stop the thought that our moderator team is a dictatorship. Also if a mod is inactive remove immediatly and bring in a new active one, the stagnant moderation team is one very big reason why the loyal community believes the game is dying. Or continue to do nothing it's up to you guys.

No, that would be a shitty choice.
but instead we should have a mod that represents the scenario's version of the community [and he should handle the scenario ban appeals] and anything related to the scenario part of the game, as a counterbalance to this he should not have any saying in competitive-related matters.

Kirjoittanut Tundy, 23.07.2015 at 22:53

No, that would be a shitty choice.
but instead we should have a mod that represents the scenario's version of the community [and he should handle the scenario ban appeals] and anything related to the scenario part of the game, as a counterbalance to this he should not have any saying in competitive-related matters.

That's not how it works, they are one team on one forum doing one job, I believe the community should of an elected individual.

Kirjoittanut Helly, 23.07.2015 at 22:59

Kirjoittanut Tundy, 23.07.2015 at 22:53

No, that would be a shitty choice.
but instead we should have a mod that represents the scenario's version of the community [and he should handle the scenario ban appeals] and anything related to the scenario part of the game, as a counterbalance to this he should not have any saying in competitive-related matters.

That's not how it works, they are one team on one forum doing one job, I believe the community should of an elected individual.

I don't want a competitive player taking decisions in matters related to map making when they barely even touch the map editor. just like how i don't like a non-competitive player fucking the meta-game by boosting RA into a op status. people should be elected into mod for their knowledge in the game, not for being nice people. There has to be a balance, you can't just choose them all because they are popular for being nice and friendly.

This is why i would never choose myself to be a mod, i am just nice.

Support the idea, but more than everything I support this one:

Kirjoittanut Helly, 23.07.2015 at 22:48

Also if a mod is inactive remove immediatly and bring in a new active one, the stagnant moderation team is one very big reason why the loyal community believes the game is dying.

The inactivity had always been an issue among mods, and it speaks bad of the team. Their argument is that not always there's a good choice for mods, well is not like having inactive "wise mods" helps anyway. I know It's a hard decision...

Establishing a limit to inactivity and after that remove modship would solve the inactivity. Maybe 20 days inactivity for whatever reason, if he comes back then he can regain his mod position if mods haven't elected any other to take it.

Oh, forgot to add: Mods will never allow this to happen.

The best we can get here is Meester waiting us to choose a mod, then giving reasons about why it shouldn't happen. If I remember right, this happened in the past in croat's thread...

Agree, but try we must because inaction is to admit defeat, and I'm not done till the game is dead.

MY TIME, WAFFEL 4 MOD!

Definitely fucking no.

Kirjoittanut Guest, 24.07.2015 at 09:13

Definitely fucking no.

But you voted yes ;_; it was 6-6 now 7-6

Kirjoittanut Waffel, 24.07.2015 at 09:20

But you voted yes ;_; it was 6-6 now 7-6

I voted earlier but didn't post.

Kirjoittanut Guest, 24.07.2015 at 09:22

Kirjoittanut Waffel, 24.07.2015 at 09:20

But you voted yes ;_; it was 6-6 now 7-6

I voted earlier but didn't post.

Nice having the urge to post after my post D: stalk0r

Kirjoittanut Waffel, 24.07.2015 at 09:12

Kirjoittanut Tirpitz406, 24.07.2015 at 05:25

MY TIME, WAFFEL 4 MOD!

Lmao no.

Clovis or El**** or soldier would be so much better! They licked for it D: they deserve.

Btw my anwser: no.

oooooooo nu plz i didn't lick some old illyrian mod-s *** on main channel, and sang weird songs with my untalented writing skills.

i ever wanted to become mod ? LOL don't make me laugh

My time has come

Kirjoittanut chill, 24.07.2015 at 09:33

My time has come

Kirjoittanut chill, 24.07.2015 at 09:33

My time has come

• Simple poll:

- Who are people?
> Non premium players
> Alternative accounts
- would be random choice based on who noticed the topic

Then who can get nominated at all and by who ...i think someone with 1000+ upvotes should be a good choice joke

• Voting made by Columna (of course it would be made by Columna ):
- who gets to chose who are the voters (people)

Fuck you democracy... who is people?

But most important question is... would the new mod have the authority to mute Clovis from the forums preventively, when he loses the election?

Kirjoittanut Goblin, 24.07.2015 at 17:03

- Who are people?

only map makers are people, non-map makers are subhuman.
now lets vote tik-tok into the mod team ;E

Kirjoittanut Tundy, 23.07.2015 at 23:05

Kirjoittanut Helly, 23.07.2015 at 22:59

i am just nice.

lol?

This topic won't come to be, it simply can't happen.

Definitely yes. This can balance things a little.
Why a small group of people decides who to appoint, it's not like they are inhuman they are full in personal interests in most cases like most humans, because they mostly offer people they know as friends and not because of their quality, what does it matter if it will not be under their control, and instead it will be the community voice that decide the appointment of new mods? Mods can choose which players they want to be candidates for the elections, and the community choose who they want and on this basis to be the new mod. If the selected mod fails in his role he can be replaced, most people when given a specific responsibility coordinate their behavior depending on the role and responsibility placed on them so it should not be a problem.

Kirjoittanut Abraham, 25.07.2015 at 11:06

Mods can choose which players they want to be candidates for the elections, and the community choose who they want and on this basis to be the new mod.

5/5 proposal.

Kirjoittanut chill, 24.07.2015 at 09:33

My time has come

best comment 2015 xd go chill go!

Kirjoittanut Tundy, 24.07.2015 at 17:14

Kirjoittanut Goblin, 24.07.2015 at 17:03

- Who are people?

only map makers are people, non-map makers are subhuman.
now lets vote tik-tok into the mod team ;E

no lifers want to be mods xd

Why i'd wade into this is beyond reason... but let me just add something... [and i'm not speaking as a mod here]

There have been incidents in the past where a mod has 'turned to the dark side', and damage control was a concern.

Mods have to have confidence that the incoming mod isn't going to be a disruptive choice...

THAT said,

This proposal would have a better chance {right now it doesn't have a special snowflake's chance in warm place}
IF the suggestion was that players voted for a moderation candidate...

That candidate could be presented to mods for consideration, and if there are a few mods supportive, and a few on the fence, it could tip the scales.

[disclaimer... mod hat definitely off on this... i am not speaking on behalf of mods, or as a mod, just as a player with a bit of added information]

I voted yes within 5 seconds of reading the question but i regret .

I think NO because everyone would try to vote for his friend and not for the one who really deserves it.

Kirjoittanut AlBoZzZ, 25.07.2015 at 22:05

I think NO because everyone would try to vote for his friend and not for the one who really deserves it.

Yes I also though about this, and I agree. Once I made a thread with the same line - the results were horrendous trolling acts.

---

Kirjoittanut brianwl, 25.07.2015 at 21:52

There have been incidents in the past where a mod has 'turned to the dark side', and damage control was a concern.

Mods have to have confidence that the incoming mod isn't going to be a disruptive choice...

How about if we change the mechanics. Any mod that get more than 3 cry thread against is automatically out of the team.

On the bad side:
- Too harsh on mods.
- Mods can be wronged by the player. Maybe mods start to be "scared" of the community since we can make them lose their status and reputation.
- A player could try to bribe a mod or else "he make a cry thread".

On the good side:
- Mods WILL HAVE to listen to the player since they definitively want to get an agreement with him.
- The player MUST receive his attention, else he's encouraged to post against that mod.

---

In this way, the only side that can lose are the mods. The community always win. And if you ask me, this is a pretty good scenario. With admins support we can reconsider to change the cry threads to one of the following features in moderator's profile:

1) A upvote/downvote button with the question: "Am I doing a good job as moderator?". 75% bad opinion with more than 50 votes is automatically out of the team.
2) A report button. No. This would only work if the admins had time for.

Oh I forgot, also to encourage mods to get good reputation there could'be some kind of reward.

Also, to make sure the formula is hard to farm, mods rep could have a variation of the formula I've suggested. A formula that includes the player's reputation after implementing my fame system. So if a well-know and honoured player vote wrong against that mod, then he for sure is doing a bad job.

It is time ! CLOVIS FOR MODE 2015

This could only work if mods proposed 3 guys to become future mod, or once the community finishes with voting, mods choose if the played is worthy of the position, as brian sad