+- Dinkleberg's GMod (https://www.dinklebergsgmod.com/site)
+-- Forum: Community (https://www.dinklebergsgmod.com/site/forumdisplay.php?fid=5)
+--- Forum: Community Discussion (https://www.dinklebergsgmod.com/site/forumdisplay.php?fid=17)
+--- Thread: Addressing Staff Transparency In The Community (/showthread.php?tid=13846)
RE: Addressing Staff Transparency In The Community - GM Nate - 03-09-2021
imagine actually thinking that the 'committee' being 'disbanded' will affect the small minority who decide everything continuing to make controversial decisions.
RE: Addressing Staff Transparency In The Community - Mana - 03-09-2021
(03-09-2021, 05:53 PM)GM Nate Wrote: imagine actually thinking that the 'committee' being 'disbanded' will affect the small minority who decide everything continuing to make controversial decisions.Do you reckon you have an actual solution that isn't just turning every single goddamn wall into glass?
RE: Addressing Staff Transparency In The Community - Cactus - 03-09-2021
(03-09-2021, 05:53 PM)GM Nate Wrote: imagine actually thinking that the 'committee' being 'disbanded' will affect the small minority who decide everything continuing to make controversial decisions.you know this is a Gmod server right? that's kind of there thing...
RE: Addressing Staff Transparency In The Community - Nicol Bolas - 03-09-2021
(03-09-2021, 05:53 PM)GM Nate Wrote: imagine actually thinking that the 'committee' being 'disbanded' will affect the small minority who decide everything continuing to make controversial decisions.
I was given my position by Dink because he trusted me to make decisions regarding staff applications and unbans that benefit the server. If you want to be really technical, it's Dinks server and he can choose to have it run however he sees fit. Regulars will indeed have less say in things than staff or admins because they are just regular players. That is because there is a ladder of trust and authority established by the owner and upheld by admins. This isn't meant to demean or make it seem like regular players are worth less however. I always review and consider as many suggestions and input as possible from all members of the community as I (and Dink) want the server to be the best it can be. Not everyone will always be happy with every decision that is made and I've accepted that as part of my position.
You're not exactly spouting out suggestions, and the ones you and a few others have already suggested have either been tried before in the servers history or are too impractical to manage. Plenty of ideas look fantastic on paper but still fail in the long term. However you're more than welcome to continue suggest things to improve the server and I'll continue to consider each I review.
RE: Addressing Staff Transparency In The Community - Tedgp908 - 03-09-2021
Back in 2015 we did staff elections, this failed though. The admins and Dinkleberg would specify how many Trusted, Test Mod, and Mods we needed at that time. Then the staff trusted - admin would vote on which of the applications they wanted to approve. They would have a 24 hour period of time to vote which all votes could be seen by fellow staff members. However, Dinkleberg and Admins would veto the staff's votes on occasion this would create some outrage but honestly the vetos of required. The majority doesn't always know what's best they don't see the whole picture. This system fell apart for many reasons.
- Long turnaround from the application to decision. We voted every 2 weeks, and you had to apply by a specific date to go into the upcoming election. This created a possible 3 - 4 response on applications. This is far too slow and was also an issue with committees
- Less deserving staff members would get promoted. This was caused by two things. Having a vote for promotions made it a popularity competition. You could have one clique have a majority that would vote in their friends increasing their majority even if they would not be good staff members. The second reason is that in one election cycle we could have a bunch of shitty applicants, however, staff would vote in the least worse of the group who still was not worthy of staff. Then some weeks we would have multiple good applicants but because there is such thing as to many staff which creates its own problems this results in good candidates getting left out because they aren't popular enough.
- Staff vote in more of the same people, and reject those with differing opinions. The staff will vote in people who are like themselves, instead of people who want to make changes even if those changes are beneficial and are needed. They see these as threats.
- Outrage when Dinkleberg/Admin's veto an election. This server is owned by one sole person, Dinkleberg. He has sole authority to make decisions about his server, if he doesn't want someone as staff that's a decision he can make. People don't respect that.
Admins select staff. As Nicol said Dinkleberg has entrusted the admins to run the day-to-day operations of the server. This is something that an owner should not be involved in. It's not how it works in the real world and isn't how it works here. Ultimately the admins have the knowledge and experience to make these decisions, and it doesn't work out so an applicant gets a lot of -1's and they get promoted if you have good admins, which we do. This system does not work if community member's from guests to staff don't give their thoughts on the forums, and don't relay what they see and hear. Everyone's opinion is valuable. This is the system we used when I was admin and almost the entirety of the decision on who got promoted was based on the comments on the application. It is critical to reply to the applications and tell the truth and provide insightful information if a community member feels for some reason that they cannot post their thoughts on the application please tell the admins about it. They do listen to all feedback on applications and read all of it.
Now I don't think having a single admin, is the best solution, a group of two or maybe three decide. Honestly being a single admin puts you in a shitty situation, and is not great. It's not my place to suggest admins, so I will not do that. However presently we have a single admin, and he is good, we have had bad admins, and co-owners in this community; Nicol is not one of them. Now that we have established we have a single admin what the community needs to do is what I outlined above, give good quality feedback and if you have any doubts about an applicant tell the admins. Informing and explaining your thoughts to the admins is the best way because if there are serious issues with an applicant they aren't going to get promoted.
Now with that, I think an element of transparency is needed, staff applications, controversial ban requests, unban requests needs to dealt with in a timely mannor. This is something that has been lacking. When a staff application is denied especially if it's a popular candidate, there needs to be a decently sized explanation as to why, what the admin's concerns are, and how they can improve. It needs to be really clear, and not just a "you're not ready yet" and people need to respect these decisions. Overtime the respect between the players, and staff has decreased. This is not the cause of one group but is both a problem with staff and players. However this is a much longer conversation that I'm not going to have as part of this thread, nor might ever post. I might not play a lot on the server but I observe, learning more information. I have been doing this for the past 7 years, you learn a lot being around this long. The community is like a circle, the same issues, similar situations with staff, and players occur over and over again. Learn from the past.
-Ted
RE: Addressing Staff Transparency In The Community - GM Nate - 03-09-2021
my point isnt that there should be total democracy. My point is that it is an impractical ideal.
RE: Addressing Staff Transparency In The Community - thunderwalrusinnthebar - 03-09-2021
(03-09-2021, 08:56 PM)GM Nate Wrote: my point isnt that there should be total democracy. My point is that it is an impractical ideal.Whats your idea of a solution
RE: Addressing Staff Transparency In The Community - GM Nate - 03-10-2021
(03-09-2021, 09:39 PM)thunderwalrusinnthebar Wrote:This conversation has happened a million times. A server is the brainchild of it's owner. Everyone knows the owner doesnt care. In an ideal system the owner is actively paying attention and staying on top of rules, new content, and big decisions. They pay attention to the community and implement the things that are widely wanted. Since that's never gonna happen there isn't a solution. It's a take it or leave it type situation and if you have strong feelings that things should change for the better youre just setting yourself up for disappointment.(03-09-2021, 08:56 PM)GM Nate Wrote: my point isnt that there should be total democracy. My point is that it is an impractical ideal.Whats your idea of a solution
RE: Addressing Staff Transparency In The Community - poop MANIAC(fecal frenzy!!!!!!!! - 03-10-2021
First and foremost, I apologize to the staff for making a post which you felt was necessary to delete. I realize things must be stressful right now, with all the words being typed and read over the last few days.
Frankly, I could not care less who is a moderator or administrator. It is my firm belief that the issues endemic to the union are not directly the fault of the staff team; rather, they are the consequence of the rules which they are charged with enforcing. It is important that the people have a say in what constitutes the law of the land, not solely the unseen executives and omnipresent judiciaries which preside over them. Often it is said that these executives take into consideration what the common man has to say on the matter, but I think I'm not the only doubter who feels our worries fall on deaf ears, and that assurances to the otherwise are merely bread and circus.
RE: Addressing Staff Transparency In The Community - fanta - 03-10-2021
You guys do understand this is a online gaming community right? Shits not serious at all.