[Denied] Change to mod application

To play devil’s advocate: by making this point, you’re implying that you are not involved with the Sythe marketplace itself (given that you’d have to gravedig to get 1K posts). How are you expected to moderator a forum when you have little/no experience and activity within the marketplace you’re moderating? I guess it’s possible, but it doesn’t seem optimal. Again, I’m not insinuating you need to be running a full fledge business and have 50K worth of sale/buy thread bumps. Heck, I think that could even be worse sometimes because it can lead to people applying for ulterior / business motives. However, 1K post count is super easy to get given the applicant is engaged with the marketplace to any degree.

@Doled, truth be told, I don’t think this is a bad suggestion and I am somewhat on the fence despite my seemingly strong support for leaving it as is. I just really think that the moderator applications need to have SOME sort of requirements. As of now, the standard is pretty low @ 1 year old account and 1K forum posts. If you had some ideas to bolster the requirements with something that would be a better indicator of a good applicant than post count, I’d be in favor.

 

You make a good point in regards to activity outside the market. Unfortunately this is a market website first, and the community outside of it is not a reflection of the activity you see in the marketplace. You can contribute to raise activity levels by posting more. You shouldn’t see it as a race to 1k. It will come passively.

 

Maybe change it to 1,000+ posts being a guideline rather than strict requirement? If someone with 100 - 200 posts does apply then they'll likely be declined anyway as they'd probably be new or just not posted that much.

 

That is where things get tricky as many people pointed out sythe is a marketplace forum now so I understand where you are coming from and I respect your opinion. When I joined sythe it was a cheating website that when you posted it was almost like the sorting hat on the forum board scene you would meet people with different interests(bug abuse, macoring/scripts, roleplaying) and we would all chat on the forums as discord and other messaging apps were not relevant back then. The reason I am suggesting lowering the count or changing the guidelines is I know personally of a few people who asked me to remain Anon that do free advertising for the forum boards and I am positive there are many more who could be huge assets but do not want to make "fluff" posts and actually contribute. Before the auto bumping and people getting paid to bump posts the count meant something a long time ago it was an indicator for trustworthiness if you were active on the marketplace my memory is a bit fuzzy maybe an admin can clarify but I believe there was a change in the rules that allowed for the auto bumps.

That being said I am trying to think of potential solutions that would work for everyone I will post later. Thank you everyone for all the replies.

 

I can support this suggestion to a degree.

I wouldn't recommend lowering it drastically as then there would just be copious amounts of people applying for the sake of reaching the "guidelines" and maybe not necessarily for their actual interest in being a productive overseer of the daily operations. With that being said though I also feel as if someone with say, 400 quality posts, in the public eye, qualifies in every regard except perhaps the post count should not be prevented from a fair chance at applying for a position if they're going to be beneficial for the community. I am not sure as far as stipulations go with the applications but maybe have it set the same but allow exceptions to noteworthy applicants.

Mind you this is of course just a "what if" sort of response. Otherwise, I can appreciate your attitude toward your suggestion, you respected everyone's opinions on the matter and clarified each point! Kudos to you. +1

 

Support - there shouldn't be a requirement. Look at @Pikachu, he went MIA for months, came back and was active for a couple of weeks, and became a moderator.

 

Basically sums up my feelings. I can't think of a single person who put in a reasonable application for mod who didn't have 1,000 posts but whatever, may as well remove it if we're not using it.

 

Thank you everyone for your suggestions and ideas I am working on a idea I think everyone will like will post it hopefully before the end of the month!

 

Support, I believe mod applications shouldn't be judged on post counts and more on integrity and the value they bring to the community.

 

Hey everyone I got an rough idea if anyone can add on it please do! There are some people that are still on the fence so I suggest instead of removing the 1k posts minimum add onto it with another option such if you do not have 1k posts you can create a thread where you must get support from other community members almost like a vouch or reference that way people will not abuse the system with fake vouches lest they ruin there reputation which would be horrible as many have pointed out Sythe has turned into a marketplace forum mainly. Maybe even add requirements like the total peoples vouches must have total posts equal over 2-5k posts that way its scaled and fair and not a 1:1 ratio. Let me know what you all think

 

I support, we had a moderator back in one of our clans forums and he had like 800 posts, but was one of the most looked up to/listened to moderator. He had some really constructive ideas
So yeah quality > quantity any day.

 

I'm all for lowering it, though I'm against removing it. It's a requirement for people to apply, not a reason for people to vote against/for an application, because there's no voting taking place at all if they don't meet the requirements.

The requirement on itself isn't that useful, however it does give you a nice idea of what the user is interested in, where his experience is and where his focus might be on. If those posts are all autobump posts (which is pretty easy to see) the requirement might've been met, but the possibility of getting voted against is big, because you'd have shown no community interaction etc.

Sure the requirement is annoying when you're not the kind that posts alot, but it is a great way for staff for getting to know you better - which of high importance.

 

Interesting suggestion Doled. While I think it is something that could definitely be looked into more, the problem I foresee is that it doesn’t solve the issue of being a completely “fair” system. For example, say that there is a total 5k post count requirement for the individuals “vouching” a person applying for a staff position. Candidate 1 receives the required vouches from five individuals who all have 1k post counts, meeting the 5K total post count requirement. On the other hand, Candidate 2 manages to get the vouches from 10 individuals who all have roughly 500 post counts. How do we judge which candidate is better? The one which knew other individuals that were more “community engaged” (given their higher post count) or the the who had a larger number of supports based on the number of individuals that gave their vouches.
*Note* I’m aware that a higher post count doesn’t necessarily equate to being a more engaged community member. However, it is a common bias and perspective that higher posts = more engaged member.

I completely agree with Wortel that the post count requirement shouldn’t be completely removed but rather lowered. I think that Zora’s suggestion of 500 sounds about right. Personally I was going to suggest somewhere between 500-700 sounds fair. With the rule that perhaps 70% of the posts have to be non-bumped posts.

I would like to ask, why do you believe that Discord isn’t a very valuable indicator for a person’s character and capabilities? I would argue that you can get a much better sense of someone (especially VC) rather than a post on a forum. I believe that there is more personality and actual character when talking with someone through Discord.

 

I support, But posts should still be checked over, even a quick browse. if someone applies with say 300 posts and 50 of them are from arguing with someone over something trivial, then they might not be the best choice. like mentioned several times before qaulity>qaunity.

 

I'm fascinated by the amount of input in this thread. Practically speaking, I believe this suggestion won't make any difference. So, given the marginal impact, I'm indifferent