This topic contains 72 replies, has 0 voices, and was last updated by  mooic 11 years, 1 month ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #33551

    BOY
    Participant

    For the sake of argument, lets say admins are not needed to save the world or anything.

    So why do players want new admins? Do the current admins suck?

    #33552

    Willis
    Participant

    @boy wrote:

    76% of voters want more admins at beginners

    I’ve said it in private and I’ll say it here… the only agreed reason to see new admins is becuase mandy and apache are alone. Not because theres a problem, not becuase there needs to be server cops.

    So ignoring these ideas to change beginner server, change who’s an admin and who’s not, change the structure of admins in general…

    We’ve had suggestions for who would be an admin.. 4 people… I won’t post who, here.. but someone should ask them if they would like to be, and see if gavin will add them. I still say beginner-server only, but becuase thats not what people have expressed.. so be it.

    Then we’ll be finish this discussion.

    EDIT: Didn’t see BOY’s most-recent post.

    Like I jestured, the one common thing is people can accept that apache and mandy are the only ones at the beginner server. Everything else is either not true or a matter of persepctive.

    #33553

    cbx550f
    Participant

    @boy wrote:

    Here seems to be the main problem.

    76% of voters want more admins at beginners

    admins simply shake thier heads and say “why?” or “No, you dont need them”

    resolving the ‘want’ and ‘need’ seems to be a major problem.

    I never said “why”, although I did ask a few times “What’s the goal?”

    And no, it is not the same thing: I wanted to know what people were looking at as a “perfect world” fix, in a sense. Obviously, we all want “the games to be fun and fair”, I was just looking for any points that might lead me to agree that there is a need for more admins.

    I don’t feel that we need more, but I could be easily convinced, but nobody has given me any reasons that made me feel that we need more, really. I appreciate the point that Apache, and moreso, Mandy, are pretty much it in the beginners, and that if they left there may be a big hole to fill, but they have not left and I do not see that coming any time soon. Before my wife left I didn’t get more women ready to take her place – there is time after.

    BB, I appreciate your comments about the problems there has been with the way the admins have (or have not) worked, but really, nothing that has been discussed lately addresses that in any way, in my opinion.
    That is just my opinion, I do not decree that it is Right, I just give my opinion

    cbx

    (Just now read your post here, Willis, comments to that may follow ;))

    #33554

    apache64d
    Participant

    hmm what info did I miss? where did it say 76% wants more admins in the Beginners? (pure question) I see that 16 players wants admins (25, 66%, yes to more admins+9, 45%, think they should be at both servers)
    CBx this is what the community asks for . more game admins and demened it.
    If this community ask for it and we as the admins here r in charge of being in connection with players community and as thier trusted members. We should make it>>pick up more admins. I think now it is not about what U think needed it is about “serving” and listening to the the players community and to give them what they need.
    The admins usualy tell ppl here what to do and what not do right? why won’t we, at least one time, GIVE THEM what they need?

    #33555

    BOY
    Participant

    the voting has just recently jumped I think, It was 4 votes for no admins, but now it is 6 for NO and 14 for yes (70% yes)

    primarily @ cbx:

    My interpretation of the overall goal here:
    Change itself is the goal. No matter what the intrinsic need for new admins really is, the players seem to want a change of some sort.

    My personal Goal: To facilitate change. To bring the community the support from the admins that they feel they are missing.

    edit: what I am saying by this is, I don’t think anybody can prove the need the way you are asking them to. Change for you, cb, will probably always boil down to appeasement.

    #33556

    Thrax
    Participant

    Want what i think?

    Beginner server?.. use Beginner level weapons.
    Cap the weapons to level 6. Disable’s funky’s, DH’s, Heavy-hog, and
    Hot-napalm…

    If there’s over-kill twits in there, they won’t leave till they have a
    reason to.
    If they want full weapons, there’s a server right next door.. Leaves
    the Newb player’s with more than enough weapons to learn with.

    #33557

    BOY
    Participant

    genious idea actually. So good in fact that no one will ever agree on it. For instance, the famous flip-flop argument.

    ie

    “smaller weapons are for skilled players not for beginners, why not do that at the main server instead….” 😉

    which is of course, right, but also wrong, which means that Spock must die.

    #33558

    JiNx
    Participant

    likes the idea of less weapons but that will then force more people onto main which is cool

    but in doing that new admins need to cover both servers which is still required

    #33559

    cbx550f
    Participant

    @boy wrote:

    primarily @ cbx:

    My interpretation of the overall goal here:
    Change itself is the goal. No matter what the intrinsic need for new admins really is, the players seem to want a change of some sort.

    I completely agree. It seems to me that the desire for a more efficient administrative process is the most common want of the players.

    My personal Goal: To facilitate change. To bring the community the support from the admins that they feel they are missing.

    Well said. The only real change I would make to that for myself is that my personal goal would be first to determine if change really needs to take place, and if so, what should those changes be?

    edit: what I am saying by this is, I don’t think anybody can prove the need the way you are asking them to. Change for you, cb, will probably always boil down to appeasement.

    If changes are made that I don’t agree with, that’s fine with me. However, I’d be doing myself a disservice, and all of us a disservice, if I did not express my opinions.

    btw: I’m away for the weekend, so you’ll likely be able to enjoy a low number of posts from me over the next few days. 😉

    cbx

    #33560

    BOY
    Participant

    😕 😕 😕 😕 😕 😕

    Streamlining the process is exactly the root of the issue.

    I’m really at a loss for words here, because I feel we are about to go in circles. So as not to quote myself, I’ll reiterate it this way:

    Shuffling/adding responsibilites for admins is the proposed solution, you can either agree with that, or disagree. To go back and determine the problem leads right back to the same solution. Because no determiniation of a problem can be agreed on, the new solution will again be the same: find someone that can agree!!

    I agree all opinions should be heard and I admire your efforts to find a common ground here. I dont want to sound above debate, but at this point I don’t personally see the use of further debate. 😕

    #33561

    BigBear
    Participant

    @cbx550f wrote:

    BB, I appreciate your comments about the problems there has been with the way the admins have (or have not) worked, but really, nothing that has been discussed lately addresses that in any way, in my opinion.
    That is just my opinion, I do not decree that it is Right, I just give my opinion

    After trying to decypher this comment for days now I decided to just ask (doing a course in cryptology next month but I can’t wait that long ;)). What on earth are you trying to say? Please elaborate for the sake of a mindnumbed student with to many other distractions.

    #33562

    cbx550f
    Participant

    @bigbear wrote:

    @cbx550f wrote:

    BB, I appreciate your comments about the problems there has been with the way the admins have (or have not) worked, but really, nothing that has been discussed lately addresses that in any way, in my opinion.
    That is just my opinion, I do not decree that it is Right, I just give my opinion

    After trying to decypher this comment for days now I decided to just ask (doing a course in cryptology next month but I can’t wait that long ;)). What on earth are you trying to say? Please elaborate for the sake of a mindnumbed student with to many other distractions.

    Well, it seems to me that all of the bickering of late on needing more admins etc all started with concerns that the admin process sucks. With the exception of the talks about restructuring the game admins (possibly having admins with different levels of priviledges etc), I can’t think of anything that is being discussed that really addresses the process problems.

    Hope that is more clear. 😉

    cbx

    #33563

    BigBear
    Participant

    @cbx550f wrote:

    Well, it seems to me that all of the bickering of late on needing more admins etc all started with concerns that the admin process sucks. With the exception of the talks about restructuring the game admins (possibly having admins with different levels of priviledges etc), I can’t think of anything that is being discussed that really addresses the process problems.

    Hope that is more clear. 😉

    Thanks for the clarification. I don’t know what to say other than I did my part to start a discussion but noone seems to want to touch that post (1st page in this topic)with a ten feet pole. I for one would have have loved any response, no matter if it was good or bad.

    #33564

    imported_gcamp
    Participant

    @bigbear wrote:

    * The admin group should be split between game/forum admins. No restriction should be imposed on acting as both, but I don’t think you should be by default.

    Agreed, see proposed changes post.

    * Beeing a forum admins is mainly an administrative role that doesn’t need many members. As I see it a small group could stay fixed for as long as they read and moderate the forums on a regular basis.

    Agreed, see proposed changes post.

    * Game admins is a different issue. There should be some sort of requirements list in terms of game activity, acting on issues during games , contributing to admin discussions and so on and so forth. If one of the admins does not live up to the requirements they will be given a ‘warning’. If the admin still cannot live up to these requirements they would be replaced. They would still be eligable as a candidate for the open spot. These requeiments should be applied on current admins too. However loosing game admin privileges won’t necessary imply that he/she would loose his forum admin powers. In addition I believe the different timezones should be better represented. Perhaps by dividing the world in 3 ‘time slots’ relative to GMT and having equal admin representation for people playing in each ‘slot’. It doesn’t matter where the admins are located as long as there are enough people in each ‘time slot’.

    Not sure. So long as the person is level headed why remove them (unless they say they are leaving), if we need more admins just get more. I also think we should be regularily promoting people to admins, making sure we got a good coverage and not putting the strain on too little people.

    * Clear guidelines for admin conduct needs to be implemented. The current guidlines are too ambiguous. For example right now a player could be banned for using foul language even if by common sence nobody will be. Perhaps some “generic” definitions when a certain “punishment” should be applied would be in order. For example banning should be discussed (perhaps polls on game admin private) before carried out to avoid disagreement and damage control from unlawful bans. Obviously you cannot cover all the possible cases which is why such guidlines need to be a living document that adapts with new situations.

    This should already happen, although we should write it down to make sure.

    * The admin group should consult between themselves before posting or making anything “offical”, like official polls or announcements. Those issues need to contain a clear message saying that this poll/issue is the “official”. Any new thread can be started about the argument, but the reference for all the members would still be the official one (execpt a few rare cases wich would be revisited).

    Sounds good, but we need to reach a consus within the admins for that.

    *An issue CANNOT be brought up multiple times “officially”. I belive people get tired of repeating the same opinions continously. In any case the original issue will still be open for additions.

    Agreed.

    * Once an admin take action against a player, no further action can be applied to that player for the same exact offence (revisiting penalties after new events is a different issue, but i belive this should be discussed by all the admins first).

    Agreed.

    * When it comes to selecting game admin candidates I have a suggestion. Candidates would be presented by starting an official poll (preferably through the in game polls). To be accepted the candidate would need support from a qualified majority (2/3) of the active players (played more than 2 hours during the last month which should be easy to validate).

    Not sure, but we do need to start choosing more people.

    #33565

    Irishbandit
    Participant

    @gcamp wrote:

    @bigbear wrote:

    * When it comes to selecting game admin candidates I have a suggestion. Candidates would be presented by starting an official poll (preferably through the in game polls). To be accepted the candidate would need support from a qualified majority (2/3) of the active players (played more than 2 hours during the last month which should be easy to validate).

    Not sure, but we do need to start choosing more people.

    I like that idea!!!

Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 74 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.