Spell Mini-Mod

[baassee]

Soooo what happened to these awesome buttons? CBA to comment, never fixes anything anyway!

 

[Vengeancekael]

Yeah I've always wanted that feature to come back in the maps section as well.

 

[Ralle]

Interesting. Did you find good use of it?

 

[Vengeancekael]

It was quite useful, there are a lot of skilled users in the resource sections who know the approval/rejection criteria. :3 With such a small staff, it'd be pretty good to have again.

 

[Ralle]

Last time we had it only specific users had the power to minimod. Do you think everybody should be able to?

 

[baassee]

Yes I did. There are multiple examples of situations that it can prevent. Like when people see a really bad coded spell (as an example), people tend to just flame the crap out of the guy in the comments - which is not encouraging at all. Or when you actually post something useful to update the resource, it will rather get a NO because "mod didn't say so, thus me so op me haz mod on my side fakk juu". And of course the lst goes on...

 

[Ralle]

It gives a quick overview of who thinks the resource should be approved. But people being able to post their opinion as normal is sufficient if you ask me, but of course Vengeancekael has been moderating more stuff than I have.

 

[Vengeancekael]

That may be, but it'd still be an additional speed-up. I guess it'd be best if only specific users were allowed to do so though.
As far as the spells section goes, Mag's doing a good job and keeping the pending resources at a low number, but it could be added in as a backup should he be busy suddenly, since he's the only active spell mod right now.

 

[baassee]

It gives a quick overview of who thinks the resource should be approved. But people being able to post their opinion as normal is sufficient if you ask me, but of course Vengeancekael has been moderating more stuff than I have.

Pardon the sentence I will use but there's too many shitters saying "best shit ever" or alike, might not even be a troll just random dude who doesn't know crap about the current topic

 

[Ralle]

Pardon the sentence I will use but there's too many shitters saying "best shit ever" or alike, might not even be a troll just random dude who doesn't know crap about the current topic

My guess is that it is quite easy to tell who is who.

 

[baassee]

Haha yeah true.

 

[RED BARON]

Also some restrictions could be placed upon it.. like I dunno; must have been a member for a year or whatever (In case fearing unjust judgment.)

But I wouldn't mind having it

 

[Grey Nightmare]

It's probably a little bit easier than reading through every post, and sadly not everyone who has an opinion can actually be bothered voicing it via posts.

 

[Ralle]

Alright. I will see to this.

 

[Magtheridon96]

How about making it so that the moderator can give these powers to a specific set of people as he pleases?
It saves time because then we don't have to make intricate rules for it ;o

 

[PurplePoot]

How about making it so that the moderator can give these powers to a specific set of people as he pleases?
It saves time because then we don't have to make intricate rules for it ;o

Such a system already existed back in 2009 or something, so it probably shouldn't be too hard to reinstate should Ralle wish to do this.

 

[Ralle]

I already added it to my list, so it will come back when I get the time.

 

[Jazztastic]

A good criteria for whether or not they should be allowed to vote would be if they've submitted X resources of that kind. For example if someone submits X amount of models they should be allowed to post their opinions on models but nowhere else, unless they meet that sections criteria. Just my thoughts.

 

[Ralle]

It's a good idea. But what if none of them are approved?

 

[Jazztastic]

Then they wouldn't count towards them giving their opinion. I personally wouldn't want someone with 7 "rejected" spells telling me whether or not my spells should be approved.

 

[RED BARON]

Then they wouldn't count towards them giving their opinion. I personally wouldn't want someone with 7 "rejected" spells telling me whether or not my spells should be approved.

Seconded - though you can't say anything about non approved - meaning that if that should be a count you should count only the rejected resources.. since one can have a made a bunch of e.g good spells which just haven't been approved yet as none have come around to do it, that does not make whatever comments that person would have irrelevant. But if that person have one approved and 10 rejected then I would agree with you on them not being able to serve in that position. Notice that I am making a difference between: not approved and rejected since its not the same which your post seems to indicate.

 

[Jazztastic]

A pending resource is an unknown value, it could be rejected or approved. If my suggestion were to be taken into practice, it should be only people with X approved resources. An approved resource says that they know what they're doing. I could go submit 10 models right now that are flimsy odd static shapes that aren't useful. Does that mean my opinion should be taken into account? Absolutely not.

If this practice were to be implemented, it would be a privelage (is that how you spell it that word always gets me), not a right.

 

[SA Dashie]

Of course with this happening there will obviously have to be different set values for what is required for each different type of recourse. Would be nice also if you where 1 map short of not being able to use this feature, if you had maybe a thew spells/ systems approved this could make up for it.

 

[RED BARON]

Indeed you could just add a bunch - but what I meant was that since its to help out with a lot of unapproved stuff it might be an idea to take it into consideration and let them count for something. -while rejected shouldn't count at all.

In regards to your question I would spell it: privilege

 

[Jazztastic]

Of course with this happening there will obviously have to be different set values for what is required for each different type of recourse. Would be nice also if you where 1 map short of not being able to use this feature, if you had maybe a thew spells/ systems approved this could make up for it.

That's actually a really good point. Because of how each resource differs you'd have to come up with a realistic number of resources of that type, it wouldn't be a blanket number of 10 resources of that type or whatever. Different resources require different time requirements to create.

For maps I'd put it around 2-4 approved maps. Models I'd say 5-10. Same with skins. Icons would be 10-15. I'd put spells at 5-10. But those are just my opinions and the ultimate choice would be made by the administration.

 

[RED BARON]

For maps I'd put it around 2-4 approved maps. Models I'd say 5-10. Same with skins. Icons would be 10-15. I'd put spells at 5-10. But those are just my opinions and the ultimate choice would be made by the administration.

Well counting them like that is a tough one, because you can't really judge time like that. Spells can take very little time to create, and so with models and icons or they can be a huge undertaking easily taking days. Maps is slightly easier to point at, given that one can't simple make a map to be approved in an hour (which I would find myself able to do with a model/icon/spell). But still also maps vary greatly in the amount of time they take to do.

If anything I would rather have it depend on the score of the created/approved resources, with a additional number or something for unapproved ones and some negative one for rejected stuff (or maybe not - dunno).

The idea about a criss-cross it good though - but hard to judge.

 

[I3lackDeath]

I actually like MEG's input on this: that moderators choose who should be a minimod.

Imagine the amount of work Ralle had to deal with, should there be problems with several people who have been granted the possibility to minimod.
The respective mods know their sections and active users there rather well, so this would be the preferable way to go, in my opinion.
Meeting a rather simple criteria such as "X approved and a max. of Y rejected resources" doesn't seem effective to me.