Whole of Staff Feedback

Re: Regarding the right to vanish

I feel like this should extend to scam forum posts a user makes against themselves. The obvious example right now is Bert / GP Casino Dispute which states obvious wrongdoing by OP. If Bert had reported Shin, the post would remain unhidden; why should the post be treated any differently simply because Shin wrote the OP?

Regardless of the report's outcome, I feel like the OP of this thread should be unhidden. Otherwise you leave room for a loophole where wrongdoers report themselves, pay back whatever debts exist, and edit their threads such that non-staff can't see what happened in retrospect.

 

1) I'm pretty sure we only used to edit titles to say things like "resolved" without editing the contents of the threads. If that's changed in the last few years then I'm uninformed. There's also a distinction to be made between someone mistakenly reporting a user and that user (not mistakenly) making a thread saying they did something wrong.
2) Has this case been resolved though? (I'm only using that report as an example because it's recent and salient; I mean for the suggestion to apply more broadly)

I get your point that people should be able to edit their posts, and I agree with it. But I also feel like the rule's protections should end when those posts are self-reported RASC threads that affect other users. To your point about giving less freedom to users, I'd argue Bert's freedoms are being infringed by Shin editing a post detailing wrongdoings against him. Similarly, other users that may want to do business with Shin are harmed because they are operating with less-than-full information since they can't see the report against him.

 

Maybe the easiest solution here is just to make it such that you can't report yourself. That way threads about your wrongdoings can't be edited by you, yourself. As is, there's an obvious conflict of interest in letting users self-report.

 

And my point is that requiring the wronged party to post the report in the first place prevents the wrongdoer from editing out the details whenever they see fit. I think Bert should have been required to make the post in this case.

 

I'm waiting for bert to post a dispute/complaint then we will finalise judgement and outcomes

 

@Bert if you weren't aware ^

 

Have you ever heard of affirmative actions? We can't have 0 females administrating sythe! (even though, Gen might feel like a female at a times).

However, thank you very much for your feedback. As you can see, we take it seriously and try to reply in a mature manner.

 

It's kind of difficult for changes like that to be made when Shin's technically the head admin and decisions like that go through him and/or Richard (and Richard usually focus on other stuff while he lets Shin handles staff side of things as far as I know). I've seen some measures taken to remove sectionals/global mods that were very inactive in the past, so that's good, but ultimately it is a bad look on the team when nothing is said about admins (who've seemed to been inactive for way longer from what I can see). Rotations happened like one time in the past 2 1/2 years or so from what I recall as well. They should be utilized more.

The reason this gives me a bitter taste is because Champ was rotated down from Admin randomly because of a few week period of inactivity where he mentioned that he was going to be busy during the holidays with his family, etc, and then went back to doing what he has been since he originally got staff for a few weeks, then randomly was rotated down to global mod. I don't know the details of how it happened/was discussed, but the way it was handled was petty and immature. Meanwhile, Shin has been quite inactive for pretty much 2 years or more at this point and Charlotte has had multiple periods of inactivity for months on end in the past year, which whether you have a legitimate excuse or not (because for the most part we all got problems/obligations in life at the end of the day) is unacceptable.

At the end of the day I'm not disregarding the work you guys put to get to where you are, but take some time away from staff if you know you won't be able to dedicate some time here. It really isn't a big deal and people wouldn't get this negative perception of you guys if you didn't continue doing this for however long it's been at this point.

 

Did you even read Chloe's post? Either way, you're not really in a place to tell other people how to feel about things that have happened to them.

Someone who isn't posting after midnight tell me why this is a bad idea: We should just make a staff performance assessment forum and give every current staff member a thread with a poll with "change your vote" enabled. All current and ex staff can vote on their performance (approve/no strong feeling/disapprove) with justification required to change your vote. If things swing negatively (total inactivity, someone gets banned, makes a terrible decision, etc.), they get warned/demoted. Seems like it would solve a lot of problems?