I'm a mini-mod! Yipii...

[Vestras]

Yeah. It's a bug. I've never done anything else than crap, so..

 

[donut3.5]

If you're talking about the maps section, I believe that everyone was made a mini-mod of there. This will allow moderation of maps to be left up to the users, with maps rated 3 and above getting automatic approval (given they follow the Hive rules).
--donut3.5--

 

[Vestras]

If you're talking about the maps section, I believe that everyone was made a mini-mod of there. This will allow moderation of maps to be left up to the users, with maps rated 3 and above getting automatic approval (given they follow the Hive rules).
--donut3.5--

Not just maps, everything.

 

[Ribenamania]

Yeah, everthing.. it may be a bug.. or maybe is some kind of UserVoteApproval system..
Anyway, it should be named to Vote Approval and not mini-mod if it's a system..

l0l I'm so happy that I'm a mini-mod suddenly.. all in all it's a bug xD

 

[Zombie]

I took this screenshot from the models section. Strange.

 

[Rui]

As donut just said, everybody can now cast their vote on resources' status. I'll be honest: I dislike the idea, since most people around here tend to overrate resources, but the call was made without the possibility of asking questions.

 

[Zombie]

I don't think that was a good idea either. That also means that the mini-mod status is forgotten?

 

[Ribenamania]

Yeah, that's why it should be named user vote approval instead of mini-mod vote.

 

[Devine]

Honestly,I think it's one very bad idea.
I second what RUI said.

 

[syltman]

This happened to me also.

 

[Linaze]

I agree with Rui, users do tend to overrate stuff, and because of that, I am against this change.

 

[Kuhneghetz]

I agree. That's the most horrible idea I've ever seen in this forum.
Users already have the able to rate the resources, so there's no need for them to vote too.
And since some people tend to abuse the rating system, I wouldn't like that the vote system becomes abused too.
I say, this feature should ONLY be limited to staff members, former staff members and respected users.

 

[Zombie]

Indeed, but I don't really get it.

Are users able to determine if a certain resource will be approved or not (so it gets auto-approved after a certain number of votes) or these are thumbs are just suggestions to moderators, that they can refuse?

 

[TheBlooddancer]

I like the idea, but i dont think that it will work, cause any forum noob, will count as much as some guy who'm been here for ages.

I vote this as: Fail.
(But i like the idea. The power should only be given to people with 150 rep+ or so, though.)

 

[Zombie]

The power should only be given to people with 150 rep+ or so, though.

Rep shouldn't be the one determining this, since it doesn't determine the intelligence level or moderating skills of a certain user, and also, the rep system is abused as it is.

I preferred the mini-modding thing we had before, because people were chosen who had some skill in moderating, and if not, they could be stripped from their privs.

 

[kewlthis]

As donut just said, everybody can now cast their vote on resources' status. I'll be honest: I dislike the idea, since most people around here tend to overrate resources, but the call was made without the possibility of asking questions.

Agreed. This is bad.

 

[Pyritie]

I don't like this either. I can see why something like this is necessary in the maps section due to the sheer amount of resources, but for other sections (although maybe spells) it's not necessary.

 

[TheBlooddancer]

Zombie, tru dat, but atleast, people who have that much rep, cant be 100% stupid. They must so something right.

 

[Squiggy]

I like the idea, but i dont think that it will work, cause any forum noob, will count as much as some guy who'm been here for ages.

I vote this as: Fail.
(But i like the idea. The power should only be given to people with 150 rep+ or so, though.)

Yeah and with 400, you'll get promoted to mod, with 800 you'll be smod abd with 9001 you'll get admin?

I refuse to take this right to vote for a maps' approval..

 

[kewlthis]

Yeah and with 400, you'll get promoted to mod, with 800 you'll be smod abd with 9001 you'll get admin?

I refuse to take this right to vote for a maps' approval..

with curent system that wouldnt work, since rep is given pretty randomly.

 

[Newuser]

I don't like this either. I can see why something like this is necessary in the maps section due to the sheer amount of resources, but for other sections (although maybe spells) it's not necessary.

Yeah, agreed, I think it should only apply to the map section.

Since maps simply need to work and not have anything "offensive" in them to be approved, makes sense for map section. Thumbs up if the map works properly, thumbs down if the map doesn't work or crashes too often or something, makes sense.

But for other sections such as spells for example,(meaning, people having to check for leaks in the spells before it can be approved) it shouldn't have "anyone can vote to approve" type thing since not everyone knows how to check for leaks and stuff and those people might approve spells which may seem to work but have several flaws such as huge leaking, which may not always be noticeable ingame until excessive use of the spell starts causing huge lag.

Recap:

Map-user approval system - Good idea, simply thumps up if the map works, thumbs down if it crashes too often or doesn't work.

Other sections-user-approval - Shouldn't be there, especially not for spells or models. Like I said, people might not be able to properly check the triggers for the spells to make sure if it works fine and they might "overrate" and approve a spell that actually has several flaws in the triggers.

For models, it could possibly be corrupt or something and might cause a map which imports it to not be able to be "opened" properly when saved, again, users might "overrate" and approve a corrupt model or something without even properly testing it.

So I suggest(at least for models and spells, especially models), they shouldn't be able to be approved by "just anyone", as a lot of users may overrate or approve things without properly testing them.

You could technically say the same thing about maps(overrating), but with maps, if it crashes, it crashes, no harm done to any of your possessions, at least as far as I know.

But for spells/models, if a person imports a corrupt model or broken spell into "their" map, and they save, it might cause problems(such as you can't open the map anymore) which is why models shouldn't be approved by a user voting system.

 

[TheDivineBoss]

For a minute I thought I got promoted to a mini-mod, looked in my profile, still a Peon rank. It was weird.

I vote no to this useless 'new' feature.

I list all pros and cons:
Pros:
- NONE.
Cons:
- Overrating abuse.
- Useless.
- Less room for scripting(?).
- More mess to tend to.
- And so on and so on.

Who's idea was it anyway?

 

[Zombie]

Zombie, tru dat, but atleast, people who have that much rep, cant be 100% stupid. They must so something right.

Well, still better than letting every user rate, but even above 150, there are people who don't give a decent critique to a certain resource, only because it was made by one of their friends.

I'd prefer people for that job who can divide friendship from their job, and would keep the 5-scale rating system for the regular users.

 

[TheBlooddancer]

Why dont we make, so that only mods can give rep? *duh*.[/sarcasm]

Rep is controlled by users (And mods) and this has led to..
If maps/spells/icons/resources in general was, it would lead to: ..

 

[D a w n]

I think this feature is really useless, because mods had the possibilty before this feature to take a look at the comments for that resource.
And now I´m still writing my comment and then i just cnp my post into that mini mod field :>

Pure fail.........

 

[Rising_Dusk]

The mini-mod position has been dissolved and now the power is being given to the people. The mini-mod position was quite useless and to be fair, there were no mini-mods that actually did anything with enough regularity to merit its continued existence. Rather than remove the system altogether, Ralle and I discussed its merits and decided we would open it up to the public to review resources. Then the moderators can look at the reviews, see which mean anything, and consider them appropriately.

This is not a bug, nor is it going to be changing anytime soon. Thanks for your (lack of) support!

 

[ragingspeedhorn]

So wait, there is now zero quality control, in any sections, not just the map section? That's really poor. Hive accepted enough trash as-is.

 

[X.e.r.e.X]

Rather than remove the system altogether, Ralle and I discussed its merits and decided we would open it up to the public to review resources. Then the moderators can look at the reviews, see which mean anything, and consider them appropriately.

I guess it makes some sense after all.

 

[Pyritie]

The mini-mod position has been dissolved and now the power is being given to the people. The mini-mod position was quite useless and to be fair, there were no mini-mods that actually did anything with enough regularity to merit its continued existence.

That's bullcrap. Lord_T, for example, posted minimod reviews all the time.

 

[Rising_Dusk]

The minimod reviews do not approve resources. They are recommendations to the moderators who still have the final say in reviewing the submissions.

 

[Pyritie]

If I'm too busy to moderate resources myself, I sometimes copy and paste his review into the mod comment field. In a way, it's like giving power to people but moderating said power.

 

[Rising_Dusk]

Exactly. And if you trust the minimod review, or in this case the user review, you can do the same with any resource. If anything, this only expands your ability to do your job if you happen to be really busy at the moment by allowing more people to contribute.

 

[Septimus]

I strongly oppose this idea as majority of the user rather vote a resources based on how nice it was rather than ensuring the resources is safe enough to be used.

The voting system is strongly for respected user and mini moderator, given it to ordinary user are likely to mess it up. User that have grudge against other user would simply put a thumb down over it and give a crappy excuse about it.

 

[Zombie]

Well, mods so far trusted the mini-mods and listened to their suggestions, but since everyone can mini-mod now, I think they'll just either ignore them, or search trough the multiple reviews and as they become annoyed with them, and then they ignore the new reviews.

Also, this system can help people become moderators easier, which is good.

This system has multiple pros and cons if we think about it, and I'd like to say I changed my negative opinion.

 

[Pyritie]

Exactly. And if you trust the minimod review, or in this case the user review, you can do the same with any resource. If anything, this only expands your ability to do your job if you happen to be really busy at the moment by allowing more people to contribute.

Except I trusted Lord_T and other minimods. Now that everyone is a minimod, you get the same opinions as the comments. There's no quality control.

Well, mods so far trusted the mini-mods and listened to their suggestions, but since everyone can mini-mod now, I think they'll just either ignore them, or search trough the multiple reviews and as they become annoyed with them, and then they ignore the new reviews.

Exactly.

 

[Mr.Goblin]

k this was a good idea... but why tell Hell are we doing when we rate a skin? 1-5 ? if the skins or the models get a 1 as for a rank.. than it meens.. NOT! THIS THING SUCKS!

no? than why do we have mini-mob power..

 

[Ash]

If you're talking about the maps section, I believe that everyone was made a mini-mod of there. This will allow moderation of maps to be left up to the users, with maps rated 3 and above getting automatic approval (given they follow the Hive rules).
--donut3.5--

Oh good god...

Can I just point everyone to the retardism that was seen within The Lone Panther's thread?

Heck, even the map mod got caught up on the band wagon; auto approval == auto fail, say good bye to any tiny piece of quality that existed within the hive to begin with.

 

[General Frank]

I really dislike the new system seeing that unqualified people want to give a objective statement on a resource.
Rating is good, but voting not. Yes, were are not Wc3c, but we have to maintain a level of moderation and mini-modding to qualified people only.

 

[Rui]

(...)
Heck, even the map mod got caught up on the band wagon; auto approval == auto fail, say good bye to any tiny piece of quality that existed within the hive to begin with.

I know CMarket's work well enough to know that it's approvable. It was Septimus who changed the rating to 5/5.

~Thread Moved to Site Discussion

 

[donut3.5]

I thought this was a last resort for maps only, because maps are far behind on the moderation. Everything else was fine, and now that I'm seeing it being dissolved into the users, I now oppose this.

This is not a bug, nor is it going to be changing anytime soon. Thanks for your (lack of) support!

So even though every user thus far has pretty much rejected the idea, as well as several moderators and admins, you're going to blatantly ignore them without a second thought? Not to mean any offense or anything, but that's not only rude but disrespectful to the community as a whole.
--donut3.5--

 

[Kuhneghetz]

So even though every user thus far has pretty much rejected the idea, as well as several moderators and admins, you're going to blatantly ignore them without a second thought? Not to mean any offense or anything, but that's not only rude but disrespectful to the community as a whole.
--donut3.5--

Quoted for truth.


And I still go for that the voting system should ONLY be limited to staff members, former staff members and respected users.

 

[Ash]

I know CMarket's work well enough to know that it's approvable. It was Septimus who changed the rating to 5/5.

Septimus wanted to get a 'sub zero' rating for it; and to think, frank's unhappy with 'unqualified' people handling the reviews.

This is not a bug, nor is it going to be changing anytime soon. Thanks for your (lack of) support!

Which retard said this? It couldn't of been dusk, it's so out of character.

So even though every user thus far has pretty much rejected the idea, as well as several moderators and admins, you're going to blatantly ignore them without a second thought? Not to mean any offense or anything, but that's not only rude but disrespectful to the community as a whole.
--donut3.5--

This isn't a democracy, as has been shown several thousand bazillion times, although I will back you up that, on some level, the community needs 'to be heard'.

As opposed to being so standoffish, why don't the higher ups work with the community on reaching a compromise?

 

[donut3.5]

This isn't a democracy, as has been shown several thousand bazillion times, although I will back you up that, on some level, the community needs 'to be heard'.

As opposed to being so standoffish, why don't the higher ups work with the community on reaching a compromise?

Still, I think that if the entire community rejects the idea, then something has to change. Exactly how you suggested, we're hoping for some sort of compromise, and not.. this:

This is not a bug, nor is it going to be changing anytime soon. Thanks for your (lack of) support!

--donut3.5--

 

[Linaze]

The hive isn't nor has ever been a democracy, you got that right, Ash. If the community and even several staff members disapprove of this, perhaps it's time too reconsider, eh?

 

[Ash]

The hive isn't nor has ever been a democracy, you got that right, Ash. If the community and even several staff members disapprove of this, perhaps it's time too reconsider, eh?

When it boils down to it, this is ralle's website. If he wants to, he can tell you all to fuck off, and then pull the plug. This site, along with every other site in the world, can not, and will not, function as a democracy.

Ralle's a decent guy, he wouldn't do that, though.

 

[ragingspeedhorn]

This doesn't seem like Ralle's decision, but Rising_Dusks decision. It looks like another Ghan_04-like situation is beginning to take shape.

"Rising_Dusk attacks community for 1000 damage"
"Community is defeated"
*DING*
"Congratulations your Rising_Dusk has evolved into Rising_04"

 

[Ash]

Rising_04, I nearly shit myself laughing.

I don't think Dusk has the potential to be Ghan, although I can see their links.

Rising is more... Hinting things to ralle, and he's picking what he likes, imo. Whilst that is a good thing, dusk is a very experienced and well-gifted community manager, the community should still be involved within decisions.

 

[TheBlooddancer]

Actually, Its 'Wait, your Rising_Dusk is evolving' D:

Anyhow, The 'minimod' thing should stay, but so should the ratings.

 

[donut3.5]

Actually, Its 'Wait, your Rising_Dusk is evolving' D:

Quick, everyone jam B!

Whilst that is a good thing, dusk is a very experienced and well-gifted community manager, the community should still be involved within decisions.

I'm quite glad Rising is helping out with the site, and I find his contributions helpful for the most part, but I just think he can't blow off the community like he just did. (in other words, I agree with you)
--donut3.5--

 

[Rising_Dusk]

Which retard said this? It couldn't of been dusk, it's so out of character.

Yeah, that was me. Love you, too.

Okay, since everyone's so against it, I'm going to spend time I don't have to explain it to you. Awhile ago, Ralle came to me and asked what my opinion of the mini-moderator position was. I find that it's a rather silly job, and if you trust someone enough to have them give solid and valuable reviews of a resource, they may as well be a resource moderator and be able to approve stuff on their own. He agreed with me and suggested we should do something with the position. I suggested that we eliminate it altogether, promote the users who do their job to actual mod status, and be done with it.

He absolutely refused to get rid of the system he had in place for mini-moderators altogether and suggested an alternative. I can understand that he doesn't want to throw away all of that hard work he did. He suggested that we simply eliminate mini-moderators as I suggested, but expand the users' power from just comments to giving actual reviews. Really, on the whole, this changes absolutely nothing about the quality control of resources, it just gives users pretty new ways to show how they feel. If you think someone who used to be a mini-moderator gave great reviews that should be considered, please make a topic recommending them in the Admin Contact forum. I would be more than happy to make sure that they are seriously considered for the job, as they've proved their worth before.

Now, why is this a good idea?

• It doesn't waste Ralle's old work on the mini-moderator position.
• It gives me an excuse to have the people promoted that did their job before adequately and valuably.
• It condenses the site ranks further by eliminating an otherwise superfluous position.

So please, bear with us. This is not so radical a change as you're all making it out to be. As a matter of fact, it doesn't really change anything at all in the long run except removing an unnecessary cog in the machine. This streamlines the approval process and will not impact the site negatively. Just stop being so narrowminded and you'll see what I mean.

---

I'm also rather offended that people are assuming that I even have the power to do this on the site. Guess what? I don't. Ralle asked me my opinion on something and then he did something on his own that did not correspond to my opinion. The fact that I'm the only person defending Ralle's decision is the only reason I am seeing attacks as a result of his actions. The lot of you are really effective at scaring away people who try to help the site, you know that? You should all be ashamed of yourselves; take the internet serious for a minute and consider that I am trying my damnedest to help out as much as I can.

God. It's so hard to stay professional when no one gives a damned.

---

And yeah, the community is generally kept out of the loop on these sorts of things. The only problem I see with that is that apparently Ralle didn't discuss this with the Development Director prior to its implementation. Maybe he assumed that I'd talk to Rui about it (Although Rui has never once responded to any of my private messages), I don't know. Whatever the cause, I do agree that at the very least the rest of the administration should be privy to such changes in the system. Otherwise, though, I don't think there needs to be a community discussion thread for every single change the site ever sees. What that would basically surmount to is the Moderator's Lobby becoming public. That's just a no-go. I will make sure in the future that such decisions are run by every admin, but as I'm not an admin I can only guarantee so much.

As members of the community, it is our job to make the best of these sorts of things. Yelling and crying about it in a site discussion thread is not going to get anything done, and you all know it. You're just patronizing users who disagree with you because you don't give two shits about anyone except yourselves. If you want to help the site, prove it to us, don't act out of line and hope we figure it out on our own from your poor attitudes. PM the respective admin, or better yet start a thread about it in the admin contact. We're not idiots, nor are we going to ignore you. Every single thread in the admin contact forum over the past month or so has been addressed to the users' satisfaction.

Now please, be considerate. For God's sake, the more you yell, insult, flame, troll, and cry in the site discussion forum, the less I even want to read the topics. The proper channels exist for changes to be made and things to be discussed. Use them, please, for the love of all things good in the world.