ITT we discuss why you staffers can't moderate Microsoft's Window

1) We have been discussing that already, like, this week, and today.

2) We always know it is a problem. As Tails said that he posted a thread a long time ago, we do discuss this as we realize it becomes a problem.

3) There is no good excuse why we don't do it. If you assigned me to it, I might watch it for like a week and then I'd abandon it because I don't have an XBOX and I frankly don't really give a shit enough to read posts about XBOXs and XBOX games and the like. I get that you are saying, "Well, you're a mod, read the posts anyway asshole!"

Let's say that ANGST was the undermodded forum. You wanna read every post in that forum? It's harder to do when you really don't give a shit about the topic.

I think only one moderator on the entire team owns an XBOX product.

4) Rotating mods is not a good solution to success in a forum. You gotta know the posters, the trends, the styles.

5) As Pang pointed out, there is a lot of shit in XBOX because there are a lot of shitty posters who want to talk about the XBOX. This kind of limits our pool of mod candidates to fill that hole with -- it always has.

6) If Pang wants to mod huge XBOX posts I am IN FAVOR.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Would you guys be fine if we just gave Pang access to ban people? He wouldn't even have to delete posts; who would go back and look at old XBOX threads anyway?

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Vote to delete Microsoft's Window: Y/N

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Vote to delete all XBOX related threads and cool.php those who post about it: Y/N

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Well, look, there are two solutions. One is that one of us can moderate it, which none of us want to do. The other is to make a new moderator out of someone, which we have been discussing in the Hut. We're looking at several people and I think a decision will come sooner than you think, until then, we're stuck with the report-post-fix thing that's been going on.

I was speaking idiomatically.

Let's just say there is/are poll(s) in the Hut (and were before this thread).

How ya doing, buddy?

I am FOR PANG.

1-0, you win!

FELIPE NO

Originally Posted by nadienne

BM has a tendancy to jump into discussions about staff and just stir things up..I don't think we need any more of that, particularly.

I am a mod for the people!

like pang would have been ;_;

or lurker

Originally Posted by Colonel Skills

I also don't see why moderators have to be promoted to super mods after 3 months, especially when all that's needed is someone to moderate one small section of gaming.

Consider it this way:

We only hire super mods, because we only want people considered to be good enough to be super mods on the team. The first few months is more or less a trial period to make sure that someone doesn't go and, like, fuck everything up I guess.

There's no such thing as "only good enough to mod MW".

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

Well, I think it would help if we actually posted the moderator assignments, no one really knows who does what right now. I mean, I know I follow the computing forums and Nintendo, but it's not written down anywhere, and it needs to be.

To be perfectly honest, if we explicitly assigned a current mod to MW, even if we weren't all super mods, I bet that person would stop moderating it shortly after.

Originally Posted by of pom

Well maybe you don't need every moderator to become a full out supermod. I wouldn't see the problem with having subforum frequenters only be a moderator of that particular forum, and possibly be a s.mod later on. But a little second-tier moderator section with certain people in certain forums might be an ok idea.

No, no, that's true, I understand that part.

BUT

If I don't consider someone good enough to be a full moderator, I don't want them in charge of even one forum. The rest of the mod team may feel different, but that's my opinion.

Jam it back in, in the dark.