AF wrote:There is no process for raising issues with new moderators. When peet was newly made a moderator, I pointed out a huge list of things he had done which should mark him out as anything but a moderator, however nobody took it seriously. Nobody even considered what I had said, and blindly defended their new moderator despite proof. A process needs to be put in place where the community can comment beforehand, and if something happens after the moderator is given power, they can be taken down if found to be irresponsible.
Other than your absolutely hilarious PM to lordmatt, did you actually TRY to do anything other than complain months later, lol?
Moderators can be clan members. (...) Moderators and admins should be banned from joning or affiliating with clans. They are by definition impartial, and should not eb shown to favour politicaly a subgroup.
Any rules against that would be ridiculous. Moderators want to play with friends like everyone else, removing that would be removing another reason for them to stick around.
Criticisms are usually met with a dismissal or something akin to what swiftspear is saying, aka blaming the technology and not actually doing anything new or different
Taking that sentence word for word would lead me to say that the problem is SwiftSpear....but then again he was just expressing interest in making some major changes. So I'll just settle for calling you an idiot over this point.
If we could see who banned/kicked who and why it would go a long long way to fixing this. Moderators who are inept would become blatantly obvious and their removal would become pretty much necessary. Users should be able to view moderation complaints against other users too, If I demanded jazcash or wombat be banned for com bombing, anyone on the server should be able to see that demand and comment on it without me baing to write a bot to auto-cast it every 5 minutes in the popular channels.
The moderators and their actions are not accountable to the community, they are accountable to the administrative leaders. I really do not believe a democratic system run by the community at large would have good results in the long run.
If I had ignored iamacup, not started AFLobby or AFS, and kept in peets good books, I would be a moderator now.
That is a hilarious
sentiment. I think it had more to do with the fact that you were always pissing off Betalord.
Is it a coincidence that those who regularly joined #peet over several years all managed to acquire moderator status?
Not in the least! The habitants of that channel are part of a large conspiracy to create an illuminati-like leadership team for the community. OR perhaps it was more due to the natural tendency for like-minded people to flock together, and many of those people just happened to be moderator material. Plenty weren't. Some were purged.
Or that most exploits and attacks where discovered or engineered by people in that channel? Yet nobody will even investigate this? The fact nobody is willing to actually challenge and vett is a testament to how bad things are.
People who become intimate with the workings of a system and have no malicious intent often gain sanctioned control over that system...this is not an uncommon occurrance in the world and is not limited this community by any means.
I have ideas and plans which would help moderators enormously. I can negate the swiftspear point completely and utterly if I wished, but until the flaws in moderation are taken seriously I have no intention of doing any of it because it would preserve an inherently corrupt and flawed system, I do not see either why this system is being defended by the very people who complain about it.
I agree there are problems....but I highly doubt adopting your attitudes will aid anybody.