i have an idea: future mods in training! take younger kids (5-17) and give them no permissions at all except walk, and make them listen and follow around a mod for a day, learning about all the rules. also, pure boredom since they wouldnt get to do much. (mods get to do the fun, the kids get to watch, get it?) this would be punishment for the younger players who misbehave.
well how young do you think the youngest player on emc is? i mean they cant be that young. i was 6 when i started playing halo i think it was. (something like halo probably not actually halo)
that's not what i meant. i meant as a punishment, and a joke. no power, just the humiliation of being called a "jr. mod in training,"
I think that idea is nice, lol. No seriously, the idea should seriously be implemented. Perhaps the ban limit could be a hour. I think the commands should be famaliar to /ban [player] [time] Puts in /ban [wrong player username] Text: 'type /ban [player] [time]' /ban [player] [too much time] Text: 'A mini mod is only able to do up to 1 hour bans' Ofcourse it could be achived by a simple plugins and should only be given to active members. Moderators, staff and admins, please take this idea into mind, it has great potential.
I think they should just be what's listed on /help chatmod. So pretty much that, just they can tempban for up to 1 day.
Can we get a moderators opinion on this? Explain why this will be implemented or why not? I think the discussion has come to a close and we have concluded that; Chat mods/minimods only have the power to do short bans or kick. All of these powers can be seen in /help chatmod. Nothing longer than 1 day. No forums moderation powers? Not sure if this was discussed. I believe that reports from chat mods should be instantly sent to the top of the flag list on Square. This would be great. Everyone gets their way, I mean - mods don't have to be on as much (they do a great job when they are on, and I know that situations are dealt with better when a mod is on to give warnings but as we know, they can't be moderating 24/7. - Everyone in the community could benefit from this. Less begging in chat (harsher punishments for it - kicks), less caps, swearing, spamming, ect. - New members would be more inclined to stay. New members are often lost in regards to rules, how to start and other members aren't always keen to help (not everyone doesn't help). Sure, we have the Empire Guide but pfft. Chat mods? Even better! So.. moderators.. what do we think?
Chat moderators is a wonderful idea. Now it's summertime for most people but normally I used to see ALOT of spammers on smp5. There was times when there was no staff online to contact, so we just had to deal with the spammers (ignoring them) Now we are almost 45k registered players and there is only 24staff members (I havent seen few of them before) There could be some spammers spamming now, and you know what? There is no staff online to stop it (They could be on the console tho) My point is that we've grown alot. When I started there was 25k registered and now there is near 45k, and getting some chat moderators won't harm the community. In my opinion Chat moderators should ONLY have permission to /kick and /tempban (30mins only) I also think that the staff team should pick the chat moderators, maybe 2-3from EACH smp. Or each staff should get there OWN chat moderator as a helper. Who ever came up with this idea big ups to you my friend, lovely idea. And I think it's a worth the try. =)
I suggested something very similar, a few weeks ago. I think it's a great idea. Except, I don't like the term "mini-mod" - I'd go for "trainee mod", or "chat mod", or something. As for the previous problems with confusion regarding supporter - I think that's easy to resolve. Maybe make their names light-green. Yes, I know, ShaunWhite is light-green, but maybe he wouldn't mind selecting a different colour. These very limited powers would be unlikely to cause problems, and if they did, they'd be easy to remove. So why not trust some of the users that you know to be sensible, with simple powers to kick and issue short bans? Mods keep saying they're doing their best, but they don't have enough time - so, OK, let us help you out!
It would really come down to Justin or ICC to make the decision on this, but maybe I can offer an insight into it from the mod side. To preface this, I'm going to focus on the negative / devil's advocate part of this. Don't take it personally as I'm against or saying nay to the idea. Obviously if everything runs smoothly it will work great, but I'm a plan for the worst and be surprised by the best kind of person I think the benefits have been pointed out, so someone needs to put in the negatives. Still, I don't think its a bad idea, but I'm sure it was removed for a reason. To my knowledge this was implemented before, and ended up causing confusion. The players that were chat mod's ended up becoming full fledged mod's. Obviously all of the chat mods would have to be approved in the same manor as regular mods, and I think that may be why they were removed. If the chat mod powers are given to a player because they've shown they are responsible enough to handle it, why not the full mod powers? Something to point out on square is that the # of reports controls where it appears on the list. Highest number of reports goes to the top. Mod's can claim reports that they are working on (that require research, such as griefing, hacking, or x-ray) and there's a general queue of reports. There are currently 20 reports claimed by different mods, and 2 in the general queue. The report going to the top isn't going to help much. On top of that, the programming to change the system is time that could go to the future updates. I won't deny there are times when no one is on (moderator wise). Many of us have particular windows of time we can be online. I keep square open 8-5 CST on my work machine, keeping an eye on the reports. I'd say I check it on average every 30 minutes. I'm sure everyone else has similar scenarios as well. The issue at hand is if the players aren't reported, with evidence (key point), I for one can't really do much. We can't see PM's (only senior staff can), so reports for issues PM have to be handled by ICC or Shaun unless screenshots are provided. I think the biggest point I have to make though is this. Responsible reporting non-moderation players are the key to finding the rulebreakers. Players need to warn the person, then report. Rarely does someone break the rules when a moderator is online, it's when their offline. Several times I've seen an argument going on in chat that is getting out of hand, I log into the server and just go about my business for 10 minutes. The argument stops, because they know they are being watched. I think the same thing will happen with the chat mods. Sure their name won't be green, but it will correlate eventually. I think it's already discovered that I sometimes play on krysyy's account to scope people out, for the same reason as above. Eventually the rulebreakers will know that Playername is a chat mod, so watch out. Outside of that, I think we all need to be a little more sensitive as a community. If someone uses caps once, or PG-13 curses, let it slide, and let them know. When I first became a mod, I was probably a little harsh on people for language, when really the rule is: "8. Thou Shalt Not Use Excessively Foul Language". Probably once a login I double say something, once in local chat / supporter chat and then again in town chat, so to whoever sees the first message, I'm spamming. A lot of players come from servers where it isn't clean, or you have to spam all caps to get it read, so the new players might not understand it completely even if the rules are there (just because there are rules doesn't mean they are enforced - IE jaywalking in real life). Which sort of dovetails to this: If chat's mods role in addition to chat moderation was to help out new players, I think it would be great. But why do you need to be a chat moderator to do that? Like I said, overall I like the idea. I wanted to point out the negative view of it, because it's all strictly positive in the thread before me. Hopefully the insight helps.
