Do you like the new site changes?

What do you think about the recent site changes?


  • Total voters
    86
Status
Not open for further replies.

frostwhisper

Media Manager
Level 38
Joined
May 25, 2007
Messages
4,076
Let's go like this.

- Forums being moved around/merged: I refrained from voting, as moving forums around doesn't affect the overall functionality of the site (as long as there's organization). I do have to get used to the new layout, but that's not such a big issue for me.


- Staff ranks (Resource mods have same powers as forum mods, almost impossible to distinguish between resource, forum, global mod, or admin): I don't like this very much. I've already heard confirmed complaints of newly appointed resource moderators giving tons of perma infractions for offenses outside of their area of moderating. I have refrained from voting here too, however, as the system has it's pluses.


- Loss of colored names (all bolded): Strictly against. Fact is, one cannot distinguish a global mod from a resource mod. I believe these should be returned if any form of hierarchy is to be retained.


- Staff titles are now link-less and image-less: I find this a good change. The pictures were a tad confusing and overkilled the mods' profiles. I think the system w3c has (the one we've adopted now) works better at showing who does what.
 
Last edited:
Forum moving/merging - like: Why? Easier to appoint moderators and to know who is responsible of what, simpler - better. Also, there is better organization instead of mess we had before (50 sections on the main forum page).

Staff ranks being rearranged - like: Why? This is communism now. People have rights just as they deserve them, and there is no such stuff as "resource moderator" title. All moderators are equal, and there are no slaves. All moderators have the same permissons (in their own domain, be it forum or resource section), though most moderators also have their appointed forum now. It is easier for site to work like this, as well for administration, but if you want to contact global mod or admin (Ralle), all you need is to use Admin Contact.

Loss of colored names - like: Thanks god.

Staff rank titles being image and link-less - like: Why? Because you know exactly what a moderator has power over, and know whom to contact if you have problem in certain section (though it is still best to use "Report Post" feature).
 

Rui

Rui

Level 40
Joined
Jan 7, 2005
Messages
7,496
Forum Moving/Merging: I liked some things, I disliked others, so I voted for both the options. I am VERY happy to see The Arena and the Off-Topic forums back on top, however, there are some extra things that could have been done, and I also didn't like the change on the Staff Forums.

Rearranged Staff Ranks: I (somewhat) like the new ranks. Although I preferred if the Hive chose it's moderators carefully (like in Wc3search), stopping the distinguishing between Resource, Forum, and Global moderators was a nice thing to do, it makes everyone feel equal.

Loss of colored names: I dislike. Not like they have to mean anything, I preferred if Wc3 Modders (Map & Spell makers, JASS coders, or moderators of any the Warcraft III Modding forums) received a color, and the Artists (2D/3D designers, including Art) received another color, as well as Administrators with a third color, and Global Moderators with a fourth.
That would distinguish between Modders & Artists, globals, and the people of the administration, without creating any type of ranks.

Staff Rank titles being image and linkless: - Hum, there must be an error here, they were images but they contained a link to Forum Leaders. Anyway, I think these images could be restored for the purpose I said above^^
 
Level 46
Joined
Jun 3, 2005
Messages
6,986
Forum Moving/Merging: Fine with it.

Rearranged Staff Ranks: Some parts are okay....which things would be more fancy like image labels instead of text.

Loss of colored names: Dont like, give colour back, stupid decision to remove as it categories people easy and sets them apart.

Staff Rank titles being image and linkless: Lame, give it back
 

frostwhisper

Media Manager
Level 38
Joined
May 25, 2007
Messages
4,076
Sooner or later. I think that some of the Resource Mods are not qualified to have power in the forums, which is why they were RESOURCE mods and not FORUM mods in the past.

Quoted for truth. Also, by handing global powers over to the resource mods, one might say he simply brought the boundaries between the areas in need of moderation. Forum and resource moderators had different jobs. Now... it's all just a big mess.
 
Forum Moving/Merging: Fine with it.

Rearranged Staff Ranks: Some parts are okay....which things would be more fancy like image labels instead of text.

Loss of colored names: Dont like, give colour back, stupid decision to remove as it categories people easy and sets them apart.

Staff Rank titles being image and linkless: Lame, give it back

My thoughts exactly.
 
Level 9
Joined
May 27, 2006
Messages
498
Staff ranks - i like this, cause it removes inactive moderators -> gives active users a chance to break inside the Hives' mystical&mysterious staff.

Staff titles - good change, i disliked the images that were showing who's taking care of what. They were showing a suggesting thing, like map image for map section moderators, but that's the only thing you could have been sure of. In other cases you've had to move cursor above the image to read the description.

Bolded names - bad. As people above said, it was much easier to know who's a moderator and who's an admin when the nicknames were colored.

Forum merging - as almost everyday, i entered the Hive forum site and clicked on the User CP link. Then i looked at the new posts at subscribed threads. After i read them all, i wanted to look for some new threads i haven't visited yet. I click on the Triggers & Scripts link and wait for the page to load. Then - W00T! Where the hell is the GUI section? Who kidnapped the Spells and Systems?! Instead of those clear four subforums i've seen one huge, ugly page filled with threads with bolded names such as GUI or JASS. So, my word on this matter - VERY bad. Most new users won't bother with selecting proper prefix. This is gonna create lots of chaos and mess.
So:
GIEF GUI/JASS/SPELLS & SYSTEMS/AI SECTIONS BACK!
 
Level 14
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
804
Forum Moving/Merging

  • This is all for the better. The site had too many forums on the front page and was too overwhelming. Thanks to the merging, things are clumped together to allow for easier searching and so forth. Regardless, you all forgot to make mention that the new mixed JASS/AI/GUI section now has prefixes that distinguish which type of thread. I'm glad Ralle took this suggestion, because ultimately it will allow for internal indexing of an awesome degree in those forums.

    You also need to recall that this is a modding site, so off-topic discussion should be kept to its own isolated area (Refer here). This change is better because it tells users that "Hey, this is a modding site, but if you insist on discussing random things, there's a corner you can do it in." This makes the site appear more professional in its primary use.
Rearranged Staff Ranks

  • This is a step in the correct direction, though obviously it is not perfect yet. This is a prelude to what is hopefully to come, a full staff purging and redo. Regardless of that fact, I do agree that some of the titles are a bit overwhelming and that new organization should be considered. The biggest problem is that certain users simply moderate too much, which is a direct result of there being too much to moderate in the first place. The entire site needs to be condensed down to a more manageable level, though I imagine if everyone keeps complaining about the smallest of forum changes, this will unfortunately never happen.

    What people also fail to comprehend is the obvious; before, the staff looked like this:
    User -> Mini-Mod -> Resource Moderator -> Forum Moderator -> Global Moderator -> Administrator​
    That is way overwrought, too complicated, and the lines between half of the ranks are blurred anyways. What exactly is a global mod? People say that a global mod is an admin for all intents and purposes, but without access to the admin cp. Well let me ask you this, if you can trust a user to moderate every single section on the website, why can't you trust him with at least limited access to the admin cp? The reality is that this distinction makes no sense, so I vouch that global mod be removed altogether. This is the first good thing that's happened.

    Also, consider what the difference between a resource mod and a forum mod are. Are the resource areas not similar in structure to a forum? Does this distinction exist because of a technicality in how the resources are wc3s styled rather than forum-driven? I say that the distinction is utter bollocks and that a forum moderator and a resource moderator are the exact same thing as far as it matters. Therefore, this distinction should be removed as well, and thankfully it has.

    This is now the staff structure:
    User -> Mini-Mod -> Moderator -> Administrator​
    Look how much more condensed and less-confusing that is. Now you don't have any silly and truthfully obligatory distinctions, now you have only to redo the staff list itself and everything will fit together like it should.
Loss of Colored Names

  • The only purpose the colors served was to make you feel special when you got promoted or something stupid like that. The reality is that the only legitimate value of colors was on the main page (Not main forum page) so you could browse profiles according to staff rank. Really, though, this served no actual value as that is why these forums exist.

    Anyone that makes up complaints to the color being removed is just bitter because they feel like they aren't as cool anymore. Get over yourselves, this is a website that has to be run in an organized fashion, not a God damned popularity contest.
Staff Rank Titles Being Image and Linkless

  • Moot point, I say; the links would have been a valid point if they linked to the forums that were being moderated themselves. However, though, the links were just to the staff list, which makes no sense and doesn't help users at all. If you are so worried about new users being unable to find the link at the bottom of the forum page that says "View Forum Leaders," then you should just provide an additional link in your signature. Still, though, it's incredibly easy to add the html links into the staff titles without making it an image, so losing links really doesn't constitute a problem in the first place.

    The images are just a similar issue as with the colors above. I mean "Ooooh, cooool, he's got a WYVERN ICON AMG!" is ridiculous. They served no purpose whatsoever, and the logic behind the titles being text is infallible. The titles as text allows users to see exactly which forums the specific moderator moderates. This is valuable because then they can know exactly who to turn to when they have concerns in those forums. Additionally, this allows the administrators to delegate certain responsibilities to the moderators within specific forums. God forbid the moderators might actually have to do something now.

    Other than the mistakes and sheer mass of forums that some users moderate, the new method is unquestionably superior to the old method.

Now I guess I have a list of random concerns that people had that I have to address somehow. Great, well, if all you cared about was my opinion on the topic at hand, stop reading now.
frostwhisper said:
I still believe that some moderators should be restricted of higher powers (infraction giving for example) to prevent power abuse. Because we all know it's going to happen sooner or later.
If they would abuse power like you suggest, they should be removed as moderators in the first place. This goes along with the need for the staff to be purged in order to come full circle in a total staff reconstruction.
brad.dude03 said:
Sooner or later. I think that some of the Resource Mods are not qualified to have power in the forums, which is why they were RESOURCE mods and not FORUM mods in the past.
What you need to understand is the following: All that has been changed is the nomenclature. The forum mods and resource mods were virtually identical in purpose before anyways. If a mod isn't qualified to have power in a certain forum, then don't give him power in that forum. It's a very simple solution, one that goes perfectly along with what I was saying earlier: the staff needs to be purged and redone entirely. Some people are terrible representatives of the site and the staff, but they do moderate resources pretty well. That is why the mini-mod rank still exists, because it allows people to help in the resource moderation without having the power to totally screw things up. Bingo, perfecto, exactly what you wanted in the first place.
frostwhisper said:
Also, by handing global powers over to the resource mods, one might say he simply brought the boundaries between the areas in need of moderation. Forum and resource moderators had different jobs. Now... it's all just a big mess.
One might also say that you're falling into the identical trap that Brad did. They still have different jobs, all that has changed is the nomenclature. Separating resource mods from forum mods in the infrastructure of the website is a ridiculous notion, but of course it makes sense that some people are better qualified to moderate forums than resources and vice versa! You'll notice that there are some users that indeed do only moderate resources, though they are called a moderator! Clear your mind of the fallacies with which you're thinking and it'll make perfect sense!
raft_pi said:
Most new users won't bother with selecting proper prefix. This is gonna create lots of chaos and mess.
I also wanted to discuss this a little bit..

Consider that whether a question has to do with GUI or JASS or AI has little actual impact on what the solution to the question may be. In reality, these prefixes aren't even needed because now people will probably yell at each other for using the incorrect prefix. Regardless, though, consider that a GUI question may have a JASS answer, or that a JASS question might result in an answer that makes more sense to the user in GUI! The very distinction between a trigger question in GUI and a trigger question in JASS is blurred in the first place, so by virtue of splitting the sections up you have limited the range of given solutions to the problem! Now by putting them together, suddenly you've created a world where GUI and JASS are not so different; Were they ever? They're both programming, just one is less intimidating and the other makes lots of stuff easier for those that know it. Regardless of that discussion (Wrong place, as far as I'm concerned), this blurring makes things infinitely better in the long run, every other concern should be taken with a grain of salt.


So please, consider that these changes are for the better regardless of what you might think currently. With a little more focus and a lot more support from the users and the staff, the hive may yet become better still; but ultimately, this cannot happen if the users do not support the admins. Please, for the site's sake, support them.
 
Last edited:
If they would abuse power like you suggest, they should be removed as moderators in the first place. This goes along with the need for the staff to be purged in order to come full circle in a total staff reconstruction.
Some users who would make good resource mods I would NEVER want to see with powers to infract and ban. Being able to neg-rep is one thing, and being a resource moderator got you used to that. Now, if somebody is promoted, they are overwhelmed with all this power and don't know what to do with it. Septimus, for example, gave someone 9 permanent infraction points to someone who spammed. Once we told him more about infractions, he more understood how they are to be used. The old ranks were good for that. Letting someone get more power in each stage of promotion. Now, there's only three stages, so the learning curve is much steeper.

The forum mods and resource mods were virtually identical in purpose before anyways.
Wrong. We only had the power to reject, approve, etc resources. We could not delete resources, delete posts, or edit posts. Forum mods CAN delete threads and edit/delete posts. That is a massive difference right there.

the staff needs to be purged and redone entirely.
What, so you can be admin? Oh please. You've done enough damage already.

Some people are terrible representatives of the site and the staff, but they do moderate resources pretty well. That is why the mini-mod rank still exists, because it allows people to help in the resource moderation without having the power to totally screw things up.
We need more map moderators, not more moderators with the power to ban and such.

exactly the opposite of what you wanted in the first place.
Fixed.

Regardless, though, consider that a GUI question may have a JASS answer, or that a JASS question might result in an answer that makes more sense to the user in GUI!
Wrong. GUI questions get GUI answers (except for maybe some custom script) and if people ask JASS questions, they're going to slam their head on the wall if people give them responses in GUI.
The very distinction between a trigger question in GUI and a trigger question in JASS is blurred in the first place
YOU HAVE GOT TO BE FUCKING KIDDING ME.
Now by putting them together, suddenly you've created a world where GUI and JASS are not so different; Were they ever?
Yes, they have always been very different. Ask anyone who lurks in the systems/spells section. OH WAIT, YOU GOT THAT REMOVED. MY BAD.
this cannot happen if the users do not support the admins. Please, for the site's sake, support them.
You mean admins + global mods? Because in your eyes, they're exactly the same.
 
Level 14
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
804
Pyritie said:
Some users who would make good resource mods I would NEVER want to see with powers to infract and ban.
If you would entrust them to review resources but not do things a mod should be capable of handling, that is why the mini-mod rank still exists. I've discussed this at length with Ralle and he was the one that explained that to me. If you have any specific names, send them to Ralle and he will likely take care of it after discussion with the rest of the staff.
Pyritie said:
Wrong. We only had the power to reject, approve, etc resources. We could not delete resources, delete posts, or edit posts. Forum mods CAN delete threads and edit/delete posts. That is a massive difference right there.
Only in the areas they moderate, which I elaborated on in detail in my last post. If it isn't that way now, it should be and I will likely suggest to Ralle that it become that way.
Pyritie said:
What, so you can be admin? Oh please. You've done enough damage already.
I have been offered more than a half-dozen times by your administration to join the Hive's staff and help out tremendously. Do you know how those offers ended? No, all you know is that I apparently declined because of how I'm not a moderator right now. I declined politely citing that I would rather help from the shadows than be thrust into some environment I am not comfortable in and have things expected of me. Regardless of the fact that my loyalties lie elsewhere, I am here typing these things because I want to help and see the Hive blossom into something great.

If by some misguided illusion, though, you think that my suggestions to help improve the site are being made to secure me a spot in the administration, you only exemplify the ignorance and naivety that people have come to expect from the hive. Your attitude and your ignorant and arrogant comments are the very reason why suggestions such as mine are being taken seriously by the administration. They want to improve the site, whereas you apparently want to shunt all potential improvements and keep it the same way it's always been forever. That's your opinion and no one can take it away from you, but realize that the site needs to improve one way or the other; if you won't support me, at least support the admins' right to make their own decisions in the matter and trust their judgment as you've come to do in the past. I am only here to help, I want no staff position, I want no title, I want no rep, nothing at all.

I'd respond to the rest of your points, but your post degraded to random cursing and flaming so I'd prefer not to.
Thank you for the response. :)
 
Last edited:
Level 17
Joined
Jun 17, 2007
Messages
1,433
- Forums being moved around/merged
I preferred when the off-topic section was lower, so I could browse all gaming categories, + computer tech at the same time, although this is a personal preference, and I'm sure I'll adjust in time.
- Staff ranks (Resource mods have same powers as forum mods, almost impossible to distinguish between resource, forum, global mod, or admin)
I basically know the rank of every moderator, so It has no real impact to me in that sense, but the ranking seems to be rounded know, with each mod being treated equally. However, a lot of mods don't deserve to be treated as fairly as others.
- Loss of colored names (all bolded)
I'd probably be pretty pissed off if I had one, because I think they looked awesome, but I don't, so my vote is null. I know this doesn't really matter, but a lot of mods avatars went with the colour
- Staff titles are now link-less and image-less (Like how I am just "Model Moderator", for example)
I'm not even fucking going to bother, as the last three of the changes listed are linked so much it's pointless.
 
Level 34
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
8,869
If you would entrust them to review resources but not do things a mod should be capable of handling, that is why the mini-mod rank still exists. I've discussed this at length with Ralle and he was the one that explained that to me. If you have any specific names, send them to Ralle and he will likely take care of it after discussion with the rest of the staff.
Mini-Mods can't do all that much. They can give a thumbs upon a resource, and change tag and categories. They cannot approve a resource. Therefore we need Map Moderators to approve them. Now what the other members are saying is that they don't want some to have much power, but trust them with moderating maps. Mini-Mods are even lower. They aren't trusted with any power really. Some users can be trusted with taking care of resources, but not giving out punishment. Having the power to punish another user is usually where problems arise.

Now if you were to change Mini-Mods so that they could approve, and had Resource Moderators that oversaw their given area, that would make more sense from your point of view. So a Map Moderator would have full power in their area, and the Mini-Mods would just do what the Map Moderators do now without the powers to punish.

I have been offered more than a half-dozen times by your administration to join the Hive's staff and help out tremendously. Do you know how those offers ended? No, all you know is that I apparently declined because of how I'm not a moderator right now. I declined politely citing that I would rather help from the shadows than be thrust into some environment I am not comfortable in and have things expected of me. Regardless of the fact that my loyalties lie elsewhere, I am here typing these things because I want to help and see the Hive blossom into something great.

If by some misguided illusion, though, you think that my suggestions to help improve the site are being made to secure me a spot in the administration, you only exemplify the ignorance and naivety that people have come to expect from the hive. Your attitude and your ignorant and arrogant comments are the very reason why suggestions such as mine are being taken seriously by the administration. They want to improve the site, whereas you apparently want to shunt all potential improvements and keep it the same way it's always been forever. That's your opinion and no one can take it away from you, but realize that the site needs to improve one way or the other; if you won't support me, at least support the admins' right to make their own decisions in the matter and trust their judgment as you've come to do in the past. I am only here to help, I want no staff position, I want no title, I want no rep, nothing at all.
Well that came off rather arrogantly. To me, that came across as, "I'm better than all of you, and my ideas will improve your site, even though I may not be very active at all." Now I'm not saying you know nothing about the site, or that you indeed think you are better, but I wouldn't come to another site and tell the users (especially highly regarded members) that their site isn't very good, and that you are going to make it better, but not post or be involved in any way. Instead of flaming and telling staff and users off, how about trying to work with them? It seems to me, you think your ideas are the only good ones, and that because the admin apparently loves you, we have no say, and you re going to run this show.

I'd respond to the rest of your points, but your post degraded to random cursing and flaming so I'd prefer not to.
Thank you for the response. :)
Get off your high horse.
 
Level 14
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
804
Gilles said:
Now what the other members are saying is that they don't want some to have much power, but trust them with moderating maps.
So give them moderating power in only the resource areas. I do not see what merging the nomenclature of Resource Mods together with Forum Mods has anything to do with where the specific user can moderate.
Gilles said:
Well that came off rather arrogantly. To me, that came across as, "I'm better than all of you, and my ideas will improve your site, even though I may not be very active at all." Now I'm not saying you know nothing about the site, or that you indeed think you are better, but I wouldn't come to another site and tell the users (especially highly regarded members) that their site isn't very good, and that you are going to make it better, but not post or be involved in any way. Instead of flaming and telling staff and users off, how about trying to work with them? It seems to me, you think your ideas are the only good ones, and that because the admin apparently loves you, we have no say, and you re going to run this show.
You obviously don't know me very well (As I had imagined would be the case for a lot of people here), so I can't really expect it to come off any differently. The reality is that I just don't care for sugarcoating things, if you asked me to point out the flaws in anything on this or any other site (Including ones I do frequent) they would appear in the same fashion. It is not a subjective analysis I'm performing, I'm trying to keep it as objective as possible without infringing in an area that I don't belong.

My ideas aren't the only good ones, and as a matter of fact these changes are only half my suggestions in the first place. I did not recommend to Ralle to remove the images and links, he did that on his own. I did not recommend to Ralle to remove the staff colors, he did that on his own. Maybe you think I've been subverting everyone else here, but I've actually been having these "suggestion" discussions with Ralle in a rather public fashion over on THW chat. I've chatted with Brad, Hindy, Werewulf, Hakeem, Ghan, HT, Wyrmy, Ralle, Archebald (Archian), and Poot about it at some time in the past. So in reality, this is a cumulation of opinions that I'm presenting to you here, not one man's word against the world's.

Please, understand that I'm not on some 'high horse.' Pyritie threatened to ban me in the chat over my suggestions, claiming that I'm destroying the site. That's the attitude that has to go away -- Even if you don't know who I am or don't care, understand that I am not forcing anyone's hand here. If your admins didn't agree with me, it would have never gotten this far in the first place, that they did is their decision, one I subjectively think will make the site a better place.

If you don't agree with that analysis, then that's your opinion. You are entitled to it, as is anyone else, but ultimately it is the admins' opinions that get things done. We must place our faith in their decisions and trust that they've been doing this for a long time and know what they are doing.
 
Level 14
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
804
The truth is that if you can't trust the user to do that, I don't see why you'd want him representing the site at all in the first place. Besides, every moderator has different permissions anyways -- I see no reason why that user has to change from just approving/ignoring maps to being a forum moderator in the first place, all that's changed structurally is that a "Resource Moderator" and a "Forum Moderator" both are now called a "Moderator." Everything else besides that is probably just a promotion gone awry.
 

Ralle

Owner
Level 69
Joined
Oct 6, 2004
Messages
9,584
My main problem is that someone who would previously approve or ignore a map is now in charge of running a Map Development forum.

I really don't like that situation at all.
Most map moderators moderate what they did before. They haven't suddenly been added to the whole wc3 modding forum.

No man, these guys are focusing on maps only which makes them more effective.
 
Level 34
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
8,869
So give them moderating power in only the resource areas. I do not see what merging the nomenclature of Resource Mods together with Forum Mods has anything to do with where the specific user can moderate.
I don't quite understand you, but since I have nothing against anything going on with the Moderating positions and privileges, I'll leave that alone.

You obviously don't know me very well (As I had imagined would be the case for a lot of people here), so I can't really expect it to come off any differently. The reality is that I just don't care for sugarcoating things, if you asked me to point out the flaws in anything on this or any other site (Including ones I do frequent) they would appear in the same fashion. It is not a subjective analysis I'm performing, I'm trying to keep it as objective as possible without infringing in an area that I don't belong.

My ideas aren't the only good ones, and as a matter of fact these changes are only half my suggestions in the first place. I did not recommend to Ralle to remove the images and links, he did that on his own. I did not recommend to Ralle to remove the staff colors, he did that on his own. Maybe you think I've been subverting everyone else here, but I've actually been having these "suggestion" discussions with Ralle in a rather public fashion over on THW chat. I've chatted with Brad, Hindy, Werewulf, Hakeem, Ghan, HT, Wyrmy, Ralle, Archebald (Archian), and Poot about it at some time in the past. So in reality, this is a cumulation of opinions that I'm presenting to you here, not one man's word against the world's.

Please, understand that I'm not on some 'high horse.' Pyritie threatened to ban me in the chat over my suggestions, claiming that I'm destroying the site. That's the attitude that has to go away -- Even if you don't know who I am or don't care, understand that I am not forcing anyone's hand here. If your admins didn't agree with me, it would have never gotten this far in the first place, that they did is their decision, one I subjectively think will make the site a better place.
No I don't know you, and I had no idea all that had taken place. I was merely stating how your post came across to me. It sounded more like you thought, or were, pushing things. If you indeed are trying to help, and taking into consideration our opinions, I'm all for it. Thanks for clearing that up.

If you don't agree with that analysis, then that's your opinion. You are entitled to it, as is anyone else, but ultimately it is the admins' opinions that get things done. We must place our faith in their decisions and trust that they've been doing this for a long time and know what they are doing.
This post overall sounds much better (than your previous). I don't really have anything against your opinions, or any changes, just your previous posts.
 
Level 25
Joined
Mar 25, 2004
Messages
4,881
Pyritie, I think you are over reacting. Forgive me when I say this, but I don't think typing in caps-lock will prove your point any better. Just makes you look angry for a not small purpose. So calm down and take it easy. Rising_Dusk is entitled to his opinion as everyone else is - as he had also said so in his post too - and what he is trying to do is convince us all that things are wrong and is trying to pursuade us to make them right. Though in a lot of cases, he is right, perhaps he's not entirely correct about the type of power we should give moderators. This part, semi-agree with Pyritie. Rising_Dusk is implying we give moderators whom Ralle thinks can do the job well enough the power to ban, kick, and all that other stuff a great moderator can and would do... well, has Ralle not chosen people whom he believes is right for their position? If not, why the hell are they moderators? Thus makings that portion of the post a little confusing. And if Ralle isn't the one in charge of that - which is unlikely since he pays for the site/forum - who would be in charge of choosing the right people for the job? Users? Moderators? It's one big circle of jack-offs (no offense) who would rather vote for theirself or a friend. Honestly, corruption has reached the Hive and it is noticable, even by those who are not moderators or administrators such as Rising_Dusk himself.

However... I do agree that NEARLY the entire team of moderators (mini-mods, admins, global mods, etc.) should be purged and rethought by the king of the Hive, Mr. Ralle himself. Why? Well apparently the people - users - are very unhappy with moderators of choice and how they work and so, as the moderators are meant to clean the forum and keep it USER-FRIENDLY, this is crucial. People who I think deserve the right to stay - off the top of my head - are Bob27, Wolverabid, MasterHaosis, Brad.Dude03, and General_Frank. Not a very large list, but I've had only two hours of sleep last night so its hard to process the names of everyone who I personally think is fit for the job. I'd mention the people I am not comfortable with being moderators, but that'd just instantly lead up to flame war which I really cannot be bothered with, so I'll keep quiet as talking about that would do me no good.

Rising_Dusk seems to know what he is talking about. He wants to turn this into Wc3Campaings 2 - not literally... - by the way everything is ran, and that much I disagree with. Frankly, this is a discussion which should be spoken in an instant messanger conversation; not even in Hive Chat. At that, I rest my ranting case.

If you disagree with me to, flame me. Its just the type of behavior we are to expect now as Rising_Dusk, once again, mentioned and is somewhat true. He posts an opinion, Hive moderators put him down. Have we no civility nor decency around this forum anymore? We always talk about how great and helpful we are, then when the time comes - such as this - we totally blow it and contradict our claims. Meh... I'm a little sick of Hive Workshop to be totally honest and very tired, so I'll just shut the hell up right here.

~Craka_J
 
Level 27
Joined
May 30, 2007
Messages
2,872
All the other things I am neutral towards, so I did not vote for or against them.

I want the colors back.
Anyone that makes up complaints to the color being removed is just bitter because they feel like they aren't as cool anymore. Get over yourselves, this is a website that has to be run in an organized fashion, not a God damned popularity contest.
You are wrong. The results show that many regular users voted to have the colors back. Colors is, at press time, simultaneously, the least liked, and most disliked, change.

I liked the colors, they let me know ranks easily, and they looked cool. The admins don't look the same not gray, the global moderators don't looks the same not blueish, and the moderators don't look the same not orange. Of course we could just throw out all the themes and use plain text instead. It'd free up bandwidth too. Hey, why not just do that?

I might not be here today if this site was black and white all over.

Now, I think a site should be set up like this:
  • Owner: *
  • Admin: Moderates users and forums.
  • Global Moderator: Moderates all the forums
  • Hive necessary:
    • Moderator: Moderates some subset of forums that have special needs/rules.
    • Resource Moderator: Moderates resources, not forums or users.
Moderators should not have access to IP addresses, or the ability to give infractions, and ban a user, this is what admins are trusted to do.

Recently there was a user banned by a mod at the "request" of a user. I do not see that the moderator should be demoted, but that the ability to ban should be revoked from all forum moderators. Banning is something to be trusted to an admin.

If I am to understand the infraction system, moderators can give infractions, of any point value, at any time, and 10 infraction points results in a ban. This gives moderators the ability to ban. Sure it was TheDivineBoss, but that was just today. Who will it be tomorrow? In my opinion, if you want a user banned and the current admins are not fulfilling their duties adequately, then you need to find someone who can be trusted to be an admin.
 
Level 8
Joined
Nov 29, 2007
Messages
371
I don't think TDB should have been banned at all. A stern note and a couple of infraction points would have been enough IMHO.

I like the forum changes, but they don't really have that much effect.
I have no opinion on the staff changes. Those are a matter for the existing staff to work out, I have confidence in Hive to pull through this transition. I won't comment more on that.
I dislike the loss of coloured names and the images, not for any particular reason except that they looked good. The images looked professional and fitted with the theme of the site.

The most important change here is obviously in the staff. I seriously think that the banning of TDB should be reviewed. However, as I said, I have confidence in the staff that they will ensure that the new mods are trained correctly.
 
Level 14
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
804
Hakeem said:
You are wrong. The results show that many regular users voted to have the colors back. Colors is, at press time, simultaneously, the least liked, and most disliked, change.
Just like how eye candy wins the show in 99% of spell contests, pretty colors win the show with the vast majority of users. I don't think most users even recognize the benefits of the colors, they just think they look pretty and will follow whatever the person before them used as the logic. Regardless of that, though, Ralle did the colors, so I don't know why I'm stuck defending his decision, but let's roll with it since that seems to be what I'm here for.

I mentioned earlier somewhere that they were good on the main page because it helped you pick people apart, but that's about the only real benefit I see. I think it's a little naive to claim that you wouldn't be here today if the admins weren't gray or the global mods weren't blue, but who am I to say -- I know no better than you the machinations of fate.

Currently, my only real concern is the lack of ability to tell admins apart from moderators. I agree that something should be done there, and if you want it to be colors than more power to you (Though for me they were an eyesore). I can't actually think of any legitimate reason why colors shouldn't exist, but then again I can't really think of any reason why text effects don't work either. So long as you can tell admins from mods, it really doesn't matter. Unfortunately, a lot of users are way too unused to change and are now flipping out about it. In the end, though, it's really up to Ralle and the admins with how they want to distinguish mods from admins. I definitely don't think being extremist is logical, though, so your point about the black and white was rather moot.

Hakeem said:
Moderators should not have access to IP addresses, or the ability to give infractions, and ban a user, this is what admins are trusted to do.

Recently there was a user banned by a mod at the "request" of a user. I do not see that the moderator should be demoted, but that the ability to ban should be revoked from all forum moderators. Banning is something to be trusted to an admin.

If I am to understand the infraction system, moderators can give infractions, of any point value, at any time, and 10 infraction points results in a ban. This gives moderators the ability to ban. Sure it was TheDivineBoss, but that was just today. Who will it be tomorrow? In my opinion, if you want a user banned and the current admins are not fulfilling their duties adequately, then you need to find someone who can be trusted to be an admin.
Okay, yeah, alright? Was that directed at me or just a general comment on the powers available to mods? I agree that admins should be the only ones to ban and that infraction is a pretty stupid idea. I mean really, people dish out 9 things of refraction to users for stupid reasons; ask HT, he knows. What you need are admins that do things with the public and interact with the public frequently; I have no idea who that would include, but that sounds like something that certain members of the current staff need to work out. I think everyone so far has agreed on a staff revamp; that is inevitable, I would imagine.

Shit I'm tired, I hope that post makes as much sense to you in reading it as it did the moment I typed it.
 
Level 27
Joined
May 30, 2007
Messages
2,872
I think it's a little naive to claim that you wouldn't be here today if the admins weren't gray or the global mods weren't blue, but who am I to say -- I know no better than you the machinations of fate.
No, but I might not be here if not for how awesome the site looks.
Currently, my only real concern is the lack of ability to tell admins apart from moderators.
Hmm. I didn't notice that. If someone is promoted or demoted in the current system, it's hard, if not impossible, to tell.
I definitely don't think being extremist is logical, though, so your point about the black and white was rather moot.
Subtle logical fallacies can be magnified by use of an extreme example. Why bother even bolding a staff members name if they have the extra user title? (Actually, that's not a half bad idea, but I still liked the colors as they helped me see who has what powers very quickly.)
Okay, yeah, alright? Was that directed at me or just a general comment on the powers available to mods?
I'm tired
You must be. :p
I put a spacing bar of width 256 between my response to your post and my general comments.
 
Level 28
Joined
Mar 25, 2008
Messages
2,955
For the color thingie - it's all about eye candy, right.
In most forums, colors are described supposed to make clear that certain users belong to a group, like moderators are e.g. orange, globals lime-green and so on.
That really helps discovering out what group the single user belong to..

Remaking the staff brings up heavy problems sometimes:
Competent staffmembers could leave, incompetent could be approved working as staff. The only thing i'd do if i was admin, would be to give something like an ultimatum to every single inactive moderator, global, ect..
And if they don't fulfill it (get back to activity) they will be down graded but with a special remark that if they apply in future they have better chances to get re-upgraded.. if you know what i mean :D
 
Level 36
Joined
Mar 15, 2006
Messages
7,947
I don't think TDB should have been banned at all. A stern note and a couple of infraction points would have been enough IMHO.

Not to sound rude or anything, but you're really not in a position to say. TDB has been a repeat offender, he's been getting infractions since several weeks after he joined. He's already been banned at least once to my knowledge, and there comes a point where enough is enough. He KNEW he was crossing the line when he did what he did, but for some damned reason that I can't understand he must have talked himself into thinking that we would oblige under his half-assed warping of the rules. Not a chance. He's out, and it's for 2 weeks. Next time it'll be permanent.
 
Level 14
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
804
Hakeem said:
No, but I might not be here if not for how awesome the site looks.
Well, I know that aesthetics matter the least when deciding if I want to stay at a site or not. It's like only playing a game for its eye candy and valuing said looks more than actual game play or something. Matter of opinion, of course, but I think you will agree that you're here for either the community or content rather than just how pretty it looks.
Hakeem said:
Why bother even bolding a staff members name if they have the extra user title? (Actually, that's not a half bad idea, but I still liked the colors as they helped me see who has what powers very quickly.)
Maybe the colored names works for the hive because there's only one theme and not twelve, since that's what I'm used to. Bolding is just to differentiate between mods and admins, really. I think colors were good when you had 6 different ranks in the staff (Owner should be included in an admin slot, they shouldn't be dissociate), but now that you have maybe 4, it really isn't that valuable. Some distinction should be made, though, between admins and mods -- That's the only real recommendation I can give with absolute certainty here.
Squiggy said:
Competent staffmembers could leave, incompetent could be approved working as staff. The only thing i'd do if i was admin, would be to give something like an ultimatum to every single inactive moderator, global, ect..
And if they don't fulfill it (get back to activity) they will be down graded but with a special remark that if they apply in future they have better chances to get re-upgraded.. if you know what i mean :D
I really think that activity isn't the only commandment of being a moderator. You have to represent the site in a dignified manner (Which I think only applies to about half the staff right now). I mean, some people in the staff might make good friends, but I would never consider them for staff positions myself. I'd give all of those people mini-mod in whatever sections they're good at, then recycle and be selective in other areas. Remember, five amazing moderators is much healthier and beneficial to a site than fifteen shitty ones.
 
Level 34
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
8,869
Rising_Dusk, you do agree with separating the Admin from the Moderators, but you don't like the idea of colored names. Any other ideas? I honestly think colored names are the most clean and visually appealing way to do it.
 
Rising_Dusk, you do agree with separating the Admin from the Moderators, but you don't like the idea of colored names. Any other ideas? I honestly think colored names are the most clean and visually appealing way to do it.

The lack of colored names is both the least liked and most disliked out of all of the options in the poll.
 
Level 14
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
804
Gilles said:
Rising_Dusk, you do agree with separating the Admin from the Moderators, but you don't like the idea of colored names. Any other ideas? I honestly think colored names are the most clean and visually appealing way to do it.
Yes, actually, you can do it in a purely textual manner. Notice how right now, every user has an underlined name and that anything moderator and up has a bolded name. Take those both away, make normal users have normal text for their name, moderators have underlined names and a staff title, and administrators have bolded names and a staff title. Voillah, se bón.
 
Level 34
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
8,869
Yes, actually, you can do it in a purely textual manner. Notice how right now, every user has an underlined name and that anything moderator and up has a bolded name. Take those both away, make normal users have normal text for their name, moderators have underlined names and a staff title, and administrators have bolded names and a staff title. Voillah, se bón.
I would still prefer colored names, but that is not a bad idea. I could easily live with that.
 
Level 25
Joined
Mar 25, 2004
Messages
4,881
Actually, I think colored names should be applied to Hive Workshop staff. However, they should not have a variety of colors like green, blue, purple, etc. It should be set to one color. This is not to keep the site looking pretty, its to help point out who has authorization. Not sure if removing color from people's names of those who had donated money would be a good idea though, as it is one of the reasons they may've donated in the first place.

~Craka_J
 
Level 25
Joined
Mar 25, 2004
Messages
4,881
I totally forgot about Forum themes, lol. I use the Hive theme and always had. But still, the color of names of moderators and admins should change then depending on what theme, but should not be the same as a regular user to indicate who wears the pants at the Hive party. :)

If you want a colored text name to look 'cool', then the only word I can muster up is "wow".

~Craka_J
 
Level 14
Joined
Oct 27, 2007
Messages
1,395
The forum has 3 themes, wc3sear.ch, Night Elf, and vBulletin. It's at the bottom left of the screen. I use wc3sear.ch cause it looks the best. Unless that's completely not what you were talking about o_O

Anyway, It would be nice to have more than bolded names for Moderators.
 
Level 14
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
804
Craka_J said:
Actually, I think colored names should be applied to Hive Workshop staff. However, they should not have a variety of colors like green, blue, purple, etc. It should be set to one color. This is not to keep the site looking pretty, its to help point out who has authorization. Not sure if removing color from people's names of those who had donated money would be a good idea though, as it is one of the reasons they may've donated in the first place.
If you're going to half-ass it, you should go all the way. If all of the staff are one color and all of the users are another, it would be more confusing than just all text manipulation or all color differentiation. A hybrid of the two will not suffice in this case.

I'd make some snide comment about the donations, but that is certainly external to the scope of this discussion and so I will refrain.
Arvedui said:
The forum has 3 themes, wc3sear.ch, Night Elf, and vBulletin. It's at the bottom left of the screen. I use wc3sear.ch cause it looks the best.
They all share the same basic color scheme (Except for v.Bulletin, but you'd have to be retarded to pick that one over the others), so it's relatively moot anyways. Colors only work if you've got a single color-theme for the site themes, otherwise they'd be ridiculous. It would also be confusing as hell to have different moderator/administrator colors for different themes.

Ultimately, the admins seem pretty against the reinstitution of colors, as can be seen here. It's really their choice, but I imagine if absolutely everyone on the site had a temper tantrum, it might come back. I guess the question you need to ask yourself is how badly you want them back?
 
Level 25
Joined
Mar 25, 2004
Messages
4,881
Wait. Are you against colored names in the Hive Workshop Chat Rooms or in Hive Workshop Forums?

The chat rooms is a place which I look upon as 'the live off-topic area'. Discussions there are usually pointless to pay attention to other than the fact that they may be entertaining or somewhat interesting. It's not really a place where seriousness is taken strictly and I personally like that. Its a comfortable place to get away from Hive B.S. that may be pissing you off; even though the admins can see everything if they review the chat logs. Colored names in Chat should remain in my opinion because... well... I have no real logical answer for that, however, if Hive wants to take its course to a more professional look/approach, then removal of colored names - or better yet, make colored names applied to staff only as said in my previous post - is necessary.

Allowing a variety of colors for names should not be the decision for forums though. ESPECIALLY if users can get colored names too - other than the default color I mean - since everyone would want their own color for their name and the forum would look fruity and confusing. Keeping very few colors (A maximum of 3 colors) for names, one color per group, is pretty nice though to differentiate the people's status in the Hive Workshop Community. I'm not asking for this to make staff members look cooler and look more highly, I'm for this because it makes things simpler. Its more difficult - though not by a lot - to notice a bold underlined name than it is to notice a bold, underlined, colored name. That's about as detailed as I can describe what I am talking about to get you to realize what and why I am for it.

~Craka_J
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top