Mods, Admins and.....

[Tim]

I've actually known some forums that have this "trusted member" feature (or, as they call it, "distinguished member"), and I actually like this idea.

 

Though, shouldn't other titles get priority? For instance, "retired staff", and a picture and text color for "clan official" and "IRC channel staff".

Clan official isn't much of a "special rank". I wouldn't mind seeing a "retired staff" rank though.

There is, only one member has it though, cant remember who it was. Think Honest1 had it.

 

@ Cowman_133, the heck? As usual Events Staff dont count as staff as usual. (Cant see "Zidane CT" on that)

[tripsis]

I've actually known some forums that have this "trusted member" feature (or, as they call it, "distinguished member"), and I actually like this idea.

 

Though, shouldn't other titles get priority? For instance, "retired staff", and a picture and text color for "clan official" and "IRC channel staff".

Clan official isn't much of a "special rank". I wouldn't mind seeing a "retired staff" rank though.

There is, only one member has it though, cant remember who it was. Think Honest1 had it.

 

@ Cowman_133, the heck? As usual Events Staff dont count as staff as usual. (Cant see "Zidane CT" on that)

That's just because it's the custom rank he chose when he left staff. It's not an official rank or anything :)

[SkillingWoo]

Yeah....no. Give people power, they abuse it. Look at George Bush, Prime example.

 

Hey look, you don't know how the United States' political system works! Note that I don't like George Bush. It's just that it takes either a mentally handicapped person or someone who doesn't know what they're talking about to think that the President really has a lot of power. You see, there's this thing called "Check's and Balances". It means that no one branch of government (President, Senate, and House) can have too much power, because each branch checks the other. Which means, you guessed it - the only power the President holds is the power that the House and Senate let him hold.

 

BY THE WAY, go Google the vote on invading Iraq. It was something like 452-1, in favor of it. (Or something like that. I forget the total number of members of Congress, but I do know only one person voted against it. I thinks. :-P)

 

---

 

Avatar/Signature sizes don't have as much to do with trust as they do with making the site more accommodating to more people. This idea doesn't make much sense, to be honest. If the Admins and Moderators can take care of things, why give more people needless responsibilities?

[Ouchy]

This will not work. For one, it is favouritism. The admins might not like someone, then they don't get it, while someone they do like but isn't deserving will get it. The avatars/signatures thing isn't really that great...I see no benefits in it. And, isn't it the moderators job to manage Sub-Forums. If the admins feel they need more mods, then they will add them.

[Epic]

I think when people are trusted on the forums, and the current Admins and Mods see potential in them... those members become Mods/Admins/Staff themselves eventually...

 

If you're interested in more responsibility, help out around the forums more, in Website Updates and Corrections, Help & Advice, etc., before you expect a special rank or title.

 

This new "middle ground" seems kind of redundant.

 

Edit: Just to clarify, when I say "You," I'm not meaning you specifically, Hex. I mean users in general.

 

Perhaps have it only for Ex-Staff members, or people that have turned down staff positions?

 

This will not work. For one, it is favouritism. The admins might not like someone, then they don't get it, while someone they do like but isn't deserving will get it. The avatars/signatures thing isn't really that great...I see no benefits in it. And, isn't it the moderators job to manage Sub-Forums. If the admins feel they need more mods, then they will add them.

 

Solution to favourtism: Have just a few (10-15) people put in this group to start out with, then let them vote on allowing new members in. This makes it so that people that have proven that they're mature enough to get all of these people's attention (in a good way!) will be allowed in.

Also, as another suggestion to add to advantages... Lower the timer, or even totally remove (We trust these folks, remember?) the flood control timer.

 

Over all, I support, but I think there's plenty of things to be cleared up and discussed before it is tried.

Ciao

[Cowman_133]

o_O This thread is quite old - did you check the dates before posting?

 

I think when people are trusted on the forums, and the current Admins and Mods see potential in them... those members become Mods/Admins/Staff themselves eventually...

 

If you're interested in more responsibility, help out around the forums more, in Website Updates and Corrections, Help & Advice, etc., before you expect a special rank or title.

 

This new "middle ground" seems kind of redundant.

 

Edit: Just to clarify, when I say "You," I'm not meaning you specifically, Hex. I mean users in general.

 

Perhaps have it only for Ex-Staff members, or people that have turned down staff positions?

 

If people had turned down staff nominations, this means they aren't suitable for the responsibilities that go with the role of staff. Moderators are generally community leaders - if someone is not deemed suitable for a community leader, odds are they are not suitable for 'special treatment' or whatever from this new proposed usergroup.

 

Still have no support for this idea.

[Epic]

o_O This thread is quite old - did you check the dates before posting?

 

I think when people are trusted on the forums, and the current Admins and Mods see potential in them... those members become Mods/Admins/Staff themselves eventually...

 

If you're interested in more responsibility, help out around the forums more, in Website Updates and Corrections, Help & Advice, etc., before you expect a special rank or title.

 

This new "middle ground" seems kind of redundant.

 

Edit: Just to clarify, when I say "You," I'm not meaning you specifically, Hex. I mean users in general.

 

Perhaps have it only for Ex-Staff members, or people that have turned down staff positions?

 

If people had turned down staff nominations, this means they aren't suitable for the responsibilities that go with the role of staff. Moderators are generally community leaders - if someone is not deemed suitable for a community leader, odds are they are not suitable for 'special treatment' or whatever from this new proposed usergroup.

 

Still have no support for this idea.

 

Sorry about resurrecting it, I noticed the last post was in December, and didn't think to look much further than that. I simply thought that the idea had merit, and had not been discussed in full yet.

 

When I say "people that have turned down staff positions" I mean someone that has been asked if they would want to be staff (Since my understanding is that they are asked, not ordered) and turned it down, if only because they don't want that responsibility. Also, when first deciding on who would be the first "Trusted Member" you could have your staff members post a list of people they think would be acceptable, and then have a vote on the top 15 people. Then you just let those 15 decide on if there is anyone who has proven that they are mature enough to be give such a title.

Ciao

[dsavi]

That could get really ugly. It sounds good on paper but in practice I can imagine the staff would get endless complaints.

[Epic]

That could get really ugly. It sounds good on paper but in practice I can imagine the staff would get endless complaints.

 

Why? I mean, if this is something that you have to prove yourself as, and then it is voted on where no one but people that have already been accepted, what would you complain about? Also, just make it so that you cannot ask to become a Trusted Member, and if you do, you lose all chance. Asking HOW to become one is different, obviously. Also, perhaps there would be certain chances, like if it's obviously a new member, and the staff member honestly thinks that they don't know that by asking to become one, you get blacklisted, then perhaps that will be their one get out of jail free card, regarding that. Make it so that this is a position of prestige! Look for people who are mature, and helpful, and really know their Runescape stuff (This is a Runescape site, after all) and let that be the baseline of their rank. IF they abuse it, they're out faster than you can say "STEEEERIKKKEEEE THREEEEEE!!!!" and they don't get another chance.

[hide]

Random_Person1: Someone else got to be Trusted Member and I'm not... Make me one or I'll leave!!!

Staff_Member: Sorry, but the people who are made into Trusted Members are voted on, and to become one you have to show certain qualities, such as maturity, Runescape knowledge, and general helpfulness. By sending this PM, you obviously don;t have the first or the third. Quit if you want, but please remember that I don't control who is a Trusted Member or who is not.

Random_Person1: Then who do I have to ask to be one?

Staff_Member: If you ask to become a Trusted Member, then you will automatically be stripped of all chances of becoming one...

[/hide]

How does that look? Seems alright to me...

Ciao

[obfuscator]

It gives the impression that some users are superior to others which is simply not true. As darkdude said it plays to favoritism - the mods and admins have no favorites. As well, an offer of a staff position is something that is dealt with privately between the user and the admin team, and not something that needs to be public on the board.

[dsavi]

That could get really ugly. It sounds good on paper but in practice I can imagine the staff would get endless complaints.

 

Why? I mean, if this is something that you have to prove yourself as, and then it is voted on where no one but people that have already been accepted, what would you complain about? Also, just make it so that you cannot ask to become a Trusted Member, and if you do, you lose all chance. Asking HOW to become one is different, obviously. Also, perhaps there would be certain chances, like if it's obviously a new member, and the staff member honestly thinks that they don't know that by asking to become one, you get blacklisted, then perhaps that will be their one get out of jail free card, regarding that. Make it so that this is a position of prestige! Look for people who are mature, and helpful, and really know their Runescape stuff (This is a Runescape site, after all) and let that be the baseline of their rank. IF they abuse it, they're out faster than you can say "STEEEERIKKKEEEE THREEEEEE!!!!" and they don't get another chance.

[hide]

Random_Person1: Someone else got to be Trusted Member and I'm not... Make me one or I'll leave!!!

Staff_Member: Sorry, but the people who are made into Trusted Members are voted on, and to become one you have to show certain qualities, such as maturity, Runescape knowledge, and general helpfulness. By sending this PM, you obviously don;t have the first or the third. Quit if you want, but please remember that I don't control who is a Trusted Member or who is not.

Random_Person1: Then who do I have to ask to be one?

Staff_Member: If you ask to become a Trusted Member, then you will automatically be stripped of all chances of becoming one...

[/hide]

How does that look? Seems alright to me...

Ciao

Even if the user would take it so calmly as that during discussing it with the mod/admin, when the staff member tells them that last bit that's the point at which the user would explode.

 

And anyway, this violates the principle that Tip.it is moderated with principles. This goes way into the specific rules and loopholes territory.

[Epic]

It gives the impression that some users are superior to others which is simply not true. As darkdude said it plays to favoritism - the mods and admins have no favorites. As well, an offer of a staff position is something that is dealt with privately between the user and the admin team, and not something that needs to be public on the board.

 

It's not favoritism if it is a majority vote, is it? This would not be the choice of the staff, unless a staff member has been voted into this group.

 

That could get really ugly. It sounds good on paper but in practice I can imagine the staff would get endless complaints.

 

Why? I mean, if this is something that you have to prove yourself as, and then it is voted on where no one but people that have already been accepted, what would you complain about? Also, just make it so that you cannot ask to become a Trusted Member, and if you do, you lose all chance. Asking HOW to become one is different, obviously. Also, perhaps there would be certain chances, like if it's obviously a new member, and the staff member honestly thinks that they don't know that by asking to become one, you get blacklisted, then perhaps that will be their one get out of jail free card, regarding that. Make it so that this is a position of prestige! Look for people who are mature, and helpful, and really know their Runescape stuff (This is a Runescape site, after all) and let that be the baseline of their rank. IF they abuse it, they're out faster than you can say "STEEEERIKKKEEEE THREEEEEE!!!!" and they don't get another chance.

[hide]

Random_Person1: Someone else got to be Trusted Member and I'm not... Make me one or I'll leave!!!

Staff_Member: Sorry, but the people who are made into Trusted Members are voted on, and to become one you have to show certain qualities, such as maturity, Runescape knowledge, and general helpfulness. By sending this PM, you obviously don;t have the first or the third. Quit if you want, but please remember that I don't control who is a Trusted Member or who is not.

Random_Person1: Then who do I have to ask to be one?

Staff_Member: If you ask to become a Trusted Member, then you will automatically be stripped of all chances of becoming one...

[/hide]

How does that look? Seems alright to me...

Ciao

Even if the user would take it so calmly as that during discussing it with the mod/admin, when the staff member tells them that last bit that's the point at which the user would explode.

 

And anyway, this violates the principle that Tip.it is moderated with principles. This goes way into the specific rules and loopholes territory.

 

Well, then the principles of this group are that it is for people who have proven themselves mature, and thoughtful. Name it "Mature Members" if you want, as proof. And if someone is asking to get added to this group, then they're obviously not mature enough to be in it anyways. Obviously staff would have access to this group's forums, because no matter how mature someone is, there's always the chance that they'll change, and need some true moderating.

 

This would also be something that would be asked, not ordered. Just like staff (I presume) are asked to be accepted, before the official announcement, these people would have the option to turn it down at any time. Make this a group that people want to be in, because other people look up to, as mentors, and guides. Let these people be the true representatives of what a true member of Tip It will act like. Make these people the example, and give them a feeling of pride, in their position. Let them know that they're an example, and that they are the ones who have to show the other members a good idea of being kind, and warm. Let them be the people that guests see posting, and think "Hey, that guy's really cool.. I wanna meet him, and ask him some questions." and have them join as well. Let them be the people that everybody thinks of with a smile, and a warm fuzzy feeling. (Not me, obviously!)

 

That's just what I think...

Ciao

[Cowman_133]

This would also be something that would be asked, not ordered. Just like staff (I presume) are asked to be accepted, before the official announcement, these people would have the option to turn it down at any time. Make this a group that people want to be in, because other people look up to, as mentors, and guides. Let these people be the true representatives of what a true member of Tip It will act like. Make these people the example, and give them a feeling of pride, in their position. Let them know that they're an example, and that they are the ones who have to show the other members a good idea of being kind, and warm. Let them be the people that guests see posting, and think "Hey, that guy's really cool.. I wanna meet him, and ask him some questions." and have them join as well. Let them be the people that everybody thinks of with a smile, and a warm fuzzy feeling. (Not me, obviously!)

 

What people are trying to get across here is that people do NOT need a special title to give off this same effect. I can think of plenty of decent staff and users who I'd say are great community members and are people to look up to. Do those users need a special rank to let everyone know? No. It would look extremely arrogant and create an unnecessary division amongst the community members. The bottom line is: people shouldn't require a rank to give off that effect.

 

The system you proposed another post above is extremely complicated and the mock staff member/user correspondence extremely arrogant-sounding. First off, the administrators have enough troubles dealing with the forums in its current state. And the other staff are all fairly tied up in their respected areas. How would any member of staff have time to keep track of every single person who has ever asked to be a special user or every single qualified user, keeping in mind all tipit staff positions are voluntary? It would be virtually impossible to do this without making it a full-time paying position, which is not feasible at this time nor worth it in my opinion.

 

And again with the correspondence, it would make me extremely embarrassed if staff were talking down to others like that. Staffers are also users, and not really ranked over them in this community. As I've already said, the qualities you've listed to be a matured member are identical to those that should be surrounding every staff member on this site - there is no need to over-complicate the community with more and more labels.

[Gamerr]

I propose we have a new type of person, The trusted member.

The trusted member is a member who has been trusted in the forum, only admins can give this title. it allows them to do things that they normally wouldn't be allowed to do such as have bigger sig sizes or avatar sizes and become specific owners of subforums. aswell as that its a nice to be told that your trusted :)

These people will be made responsible for representing the forum and must active.

 

So what's the use of that? It will create seperation & favoritism between users, without a decent reason. I think it's fine now as it is.

All the bigger avatar & signature size things are a bad idea, I believe its best to keep everybody - from Member to Admin - on the same line concerning that. The only extra power moderators, crew members, ... have is - well, duh - moderating powers. Creating ranks based solely on voting, and basicly not voting on certain skills like it's done for moderators, is just asking for drama, accusations of favoritism & needless discussion.

 

I just think it's more of an achievement to stand out as a member, between thousands of other members just with your qualities rather then needing a rank for it to proof "You're really trusted!". If you browse the forums, follow the rules & have an opinion I'm sure you don't even need a rank to be considered as trusted.

 

I'm also not in favor of senior member, honoured member, ... ranks like RSCommunity have, because it's firstly tip.it, and so we don't have to copy RSCommunity & also because I'd rather see 2 groups of members - staff members & members. Here on tip it it's easy, or you're a mod/crew/admin/TET, or you're a regular member. No confusion, no separation and everybody has the chance to become everything. It might not look like that, but then it's maybe because of the individuals their qualities rather then the "favoritism" of not being picked.