Check Your Team Members. Contact "Non-Posting" Members

by **admin** » Wed Feb 20, 2008 2:12 pm

And when you say "I've got my eye on them." Why not do a little something about them? Moderators who continually bash the site and the way it is run don't seem to be productive staff members if you ask me. Why not step in and talk with them.

If there is something wrong with one of your Moderator/TM, please PM me with a short description of the problem, a link to their profile, and your suggestion.

Why not step in and talk with them.

Those who start these threads just have a lot of time to waste

Fanmail

by **admin** » Wed Feb 20, 2008 2:02 pm

Code: Select all

Cernan's right; a lot of other sites have far fewer moderators, yet the sites run smoothly. I would agree to getting rid of the TM/JM system. I can't remember exactly how it was like before, but I would say that we should be more selective about who becomes "moderators-in-training." That means, not everyone can apply and become one. I like the age restriction idea. 17 seems great (even though I'm 16-- I'll be 17 in April). The only downside is that people can lie about their age online

The site runs smoothly

There are just 3 or 4 moderators who spend their time here starting threads just to say that everything is wrong with the forums

I can't remember exactly how it was like before, but I would say that we should be more selective about who becomes "moderators-in-training."

Before the Trainee Moderators were selected by TheCollector and me. Now each Overall Moderator chooses his Trainee Moderators.

Fanmail

by **admin** » Wed Feb 20, 2008 1:53 pm

I know a forum like that too! I think they ban your IP if they catch you with illegitimate multiple accounts.

We won't do it here

Fanmail

by **ldy josie x** » Wed Feb 20, 2008 1:58 am

nowandagain wrote:For example, BABii_ANG3L and Josie would probably be living in similar/the same time zones, so they'll normally only be able to get on the forum around the same (as I believe you're both still at school?).

Actually, BABii_ANG3L's timezone is 3 hours ahead of mine, so she goes on the forum earlier than I do (yes, we're both still attending school

) But you're right; our timezone is very close, so we would both be online at around the same time.

nowandagain wrote:I don't see any point in having multiple accounts. I know on another forum they actually implemented a forum to "weed out" multiple accounts. Moderators were checking accounts, and duplicate accounts would be deleted unless there was a valid reason.

What is the point in having more than one account here anyway? Why would you even be replying to your own posts in the first place? It is ridiculous as specific threads will become more active, whereas legitimate threads will be lost amongst threads that keep getting bumped by the same person on multiple accounts.

I agree 100% with that. There really is no reason to create multiple accounts (unless a sibling uses that account, which is like my case). I know a forum like that too! I think they ban your IP if they catch you with illegitimate multiple accounts.

by **nowandagain** » Tue Feb 19, 2008 10:28 am

admin wrote:I find a dozen of threads without reply everyday

admin - part of that might stem from the fact that we all live in different time zones.

For example, BABii_ANG3L and Josie would probably be living in similar/the same time zones, so they'll normally only be able to get on the forum around the same (as I believe you're both still at school?).

admin, you might only access the forum at a time other than when BABii_ANG3L and Josie are not online, and this may be hours between when they last attended the forum to when you log on. Between the time BABii_ANG3L and Josie logged off and you logged on, there may have been a number of new threads posted - and other moderators may not have been online to reply - which would explain why there are threads that haven't been replied to.

rpbluesman wrote:When you say the site is active, it's because of the multiple accounts. One person with 3 different accounts can make an entire thread light up like a Christmas Tree.

And as for why? Well why not? What honest purpose does having 3,4, and 5 multiple accounts do for the forum? It would have been one thing for you to have multiple accounts when the site first started so that it would appear more active, but now there are a lot of members that seem to make a new account almost weekly.

I don't see any point in having multiple accounts. I know on another forum they actually implemented a forum to "weed out" multiple accounts. Moderators were checking accounts, and duplicate accounts would be deleted unless there was a valid reason.

What is the point in having more than one account here anyway? Why would you even be replying to your own posts in the first place? It is ridiculous as specific threads will become more active, whereas legitimate threads will be lost amongst threads that keep getting bumped by the same person on multiple accounts.

nowandagain [rockon]

by **ldy josie x** » Sun Feb 17, 2008 11:54 pm

nowandagain wrote: The good thing about what BABii_ANG3L is doing is that replies in the feedback forum are being attended to promptly.

However, by the time we log on to go through the feedback ... they've all been taken care of so we're wasting our time finding posts that haven't been attended to.

Yes, that's true. But I've also seen her (and some other mods too) ignore the posts without scans. They enter all these people in, but leave us to answer the posts without scans. I'm not sure if what I'm saying here is exactly relevant; I just want to bring it up

nowandagain wrote:It would be nice to give the other moderators a chance, but you can't exactly tell her to back down ... can you? It'll probably be a bit rude to say "you've posted too much, give the others a chance" in the nicest terms possible. Just give it a bit of time, as she can't go on like this forever ... What do you think Josie?

You're right, that would be somewhat rude.. and weird

I guess we can just wait it out; I think it was the same with a lot of new CP moderators back then.. they get all excited, then it kind of "dies down."

nowandagain wrote:P.S. Regarding my previous post. I just wanted to add that many of the Trainees look more like they're there more for the status rather than with the specific intention on becoming a moderator. I am seriously doubting whether the remaining trainees in my team would go on to become Moderators. I just don't see the potential in some of them right now. The same must go with the trainees in your teams as well.

Same here! I think only one of my trainees have the potential to become a Moderator (Lizanne), but apparently, a lot of the moderators oppose that idea

Cernan's right; a lot of other sites have far fewer moderators, yet the sites run smoothly. I would agree to getting rid of the TM/JM system. I can't remember exactly how it was like before, but I would say that we should be more selective about who becomes "moderators-in-training." That means, not everyone can apply and become one. I like the age restriction idea. 17 seems great (even though I'm 16-- I'll be 17 in April). The only downside is that people can lie about their age online

cernan wrote:Many of the younger TM's do not have the time that they can put forth in order to become Mods. If you are a Mod on this site, you are expected to dedicate a certain portion of your time to it, and twelve and thirteen year olds who are hindered by their parents telling them to stop spending too much time on the computer will not accomplish much.

That's right. I don't think they take their positions seriously at all-- maybe they think it is just some online game where they can just hang out, doing whatever, etc.
Simply put, twelve and thirteen year olds just don't have enough experience and potential.
In a way, moderators are like employees (or volunteers) at a job. We have enough to deal with; we don't need TMs to goof around and cause more trouble for us.

by **cernan** » Sun Feb 17, 2008 6:33 pm

I agree with rpbluesman and his idea of implementing an age requirement.

Many of the younger TM's do not have the time that they can put forth in order to become Mods. If you are a Mod on this site, you are expected to dedicate a certain portion of your time to it, and twelve and thirteen year olds who are hindered by their parents telling them to stop spending too much time on the computer will not accomplish much.

I do think that 17 is the perfect age. I know that there are a handful of Mods (including myself) who are younger than 17, but for future hiring purposes, I do think that 17 is a good cutoff age.

by **ozzman** » Sun Feb 17, 2008 6:21 pm

I agree with all of you. I would much rather go with the way it used to be. The 2 or 3 members who are doing the complaining dig up stuff on this site to complain about.

by **rpbluesman** » Sun Feb 17, 2008 6:19 pm

Here's the list of people that should be demoted just for not being active on the site. This doesn't even begin to include the members who should be demoted due to inexperience or the members who have no shot at even becoming a mod anyway.

Trainee Mods

matskulainen
babii blue
BaseballCardz
RayLewisBP11
Taxi_06
CarrieUnderwood1Fan
Danny
lov fergie
modelgirl_socute09

There are others that haven't been active since December, but I thought not to include them.

Moderators

starreyes
onebuffcop
Aimee OC
dancingirl

Again, there are others but I thought not to include them since they were last on in December, which isnt that far back

I can't even begin to list all the pointless TMs there are, but I think it should be self explanatory

by **rpbluesman** » Sun Feb 17, 2008 6:10 pm

admin wrote:What could replace the actual TM system?

As cernan already said, go back to the way the site was before the TM/JM system. Simply eyeball good and productive members. The site used to get by fine without all the trainee moderators, so I don't see why it would be a great loss to lose the entire system. The TM system is good on paper, but horrible when applied. A member can join on Monday and be promoted Tuesday (if not sooner). If the TM system were to ever work, only select members should be allowed to join it. Not every Tom, Dick and Harry who signs up for the site. There should also be an age criteria for the applications. A great many of the TMs are around 13 years old if not younger. Perhaps the age limit should be like 17 or something.

admin wrote:It does not make the site look active. The site is active
How do you want to prevent people from having 2 accounts? and why?

I know another forum I go to, has an automatic thing that will scan for multiple accounts. I think it should be something like that. Check the IPs and then assign moderators to go and get proof that the members are either the same person or different people. I'm not sure if this is doable on here, but I think it's a good idea.

When you say the site is active, it's because of the multiple accounts. One person with 3 different accounts can make an entire thread light up like a Christmas Tree.

And as for why? Well why not? What honest purpose does having 3,4, and 5 multiple accounts do for the forum? It would have been one thing for you to have multiple accounts when the site first started so that it would appear more active, but now there are a lot of members that seem to make a new account almost weekly.

And when you say "I've got my eye on them." Why not do a little something about them? Moderators who continually bash the site and the way it is run don't seem to be productive staff members if you ask me. Why not step in and talk with them.

Here's a good topic that you should read into.

http://www.fanmail.biz/mboard/viewtopic ... 33&t=85788

Check Your Team Members. Contact "Non-Posting" Members

Post a reply

Expand view Topic review: Check Your Team Members. Contact "Non-Posting" Members

Re: Check Your Team Members. Contact "Non-Posting" Members

Re: Check Your Team Members. Contact "Non-Posting" Members

Re: Check Your Team Members. Contact "Non-Posting" Members

Re: Check Your Team Members. Contact "Non-Posting" Members

Re: Check Your Team Members. Contact "Non-Posting" Members

Re: Check Your Team Members. Contact "Non-Posting" Members

Re: Check Your Team Members. Contact "Non-Posting" Members

Re: Check Your Team Members. Contact "Non-Posting" Members

Re: Check Your Team Members. Contact "Non-Posting" Members

Re: Check Your Team Members. Contact "Non-Posting" Members


Fanmail.biz	Message Board