What is the criteria necessary to become a moderator here on JRef? [Archive]

changedonrequest

Jul 3, 2006, 15:15

In the past few days I have found myself wondering more and more what the criteria is for a member to become a moderator here?

Outside of the "owners" I would appreciate someone with the correct information sharing with everyone here how the current group of moderators got their positions and what requirements were necessary, if any?

Are the moderators here just members that volunteered for their positions or was there a vote among the current members to create and give these positions to these people?

Are members that donated funds to the operation of the board given the position of moderator?

Is it possible for members here to recommend another member here for the position of moderator? (If it is allowed there is a member that I would like to nominate. No it isn't me either for you smart alecks out there.:bow:

Thanks

Carlson

Jul 3, 2006, 16:55

*shhh dont say anything they are catching on to us*
lol
Well i can speak of how i arrived and how they let me become a MOD.
Ive noticed the growing ammount of spam and trolls growing in JREF and In the mist of PMing Thomas the idea of me becoming a MOD came up. Some time past and nothing until a string of Trolls came up and he PMed me back asking if I wanted to. I was voted in and welcomed by the rest of the group as well given a 30 day grace period where i got to see what happend but not have any of the power. In all I think the Admins must have some degree of trust in someone who wishes to join. As far as being qualified? I think someone with common sense and the who will be a fair as possible to all. Ive run a forum before nothing to the size of JREF mabye 75-100 active members. Id just wish my forum now would take off. but as always in due time

As far as Donators automaticaly beings MODS. I doubt that has anything to do with it. I was a mod before i donated but i do know of some donaters who became mods. check the members list i think. As far as you trying to Nominate someone it never hurts to ask as long as its done right.

Anything else?

changedonrequest

Jul 3, 2006, 17:16

Carlson thank you for your prompt reply. I will send my recommendation to a few of the moderators here and sound them out about this. I will also send it along to Thomas as well.

Carlson

Jul 3, 2006, 17:18

lol no problem and by all means send it to me...

changedonrequest

Jul 3, 2006, 18:58

lol no problem and by all means send it to me...

I will include you, firstly I need to let the person know what I am thinking, after I get a reply I will PM the necessary parties including you as well. Thank you for your information.

kirei_na_me

Jul 3, 2006, 20:27

I never requested to become a moderator. I was asked to be an advisor by Thomas. I think he and Maciamo might have talked it over before asking me. I don't know if they ran it by the other team members(we had very few at that time) or not.

By the way, the difference between advisors and moderators. Advisors have a tad more responsibility than moderators. On top of all the moderator duties, advisors have a certain section that they are in charge of.

Also, donators. Donators are given certain "perks" after giving money. They get larger avatars, they can see who's online, stuff like that. They can do a few things that other members can't, but they can't do what moderators/advisors do. Donating doesn't automatically give you power to manage the forum.

RockLee

Jul 3, 2006, 20:32

Well, they asked me and some other members because they were in need of some new blood :) And we were members for quite some time now. Everybody has his own jurisdiction if you want, Dutch and me are entertainment mods, Carlson is anti-spam-man, but we all delete spam if there is any. We're also free to moderate about anything. I doubt there is need for more moderators, but you can always try. Us mods were asked by either Thomas or Maciamo :)

Dutch Baka

Jul 4, 2006, 08:13

I asked to be a mod/adv a couple of months ago, but they said that they would think about it. and with all that stuff about the Jpop section, ( I was complaining so much about that) I asked again, to help changing the Jpop section ( 4 days work) and they said that they were happy to have me.

so yeah, being a member in here for a while, make good/fair posts would do a lot. being a regullar

nurizeko

Jul 4, 2006, 19:19

changedonrequest

Jul 4, 2006, 19:48

Becoming a mod is like that scene from Toy Story what with the squeaky aliens and the grasper game, its pure luck ultimately who gets chosen.

but its best to fit into the forum to stand a better chance.

Interesting, I always figured a moderator of a forum would be someone that doesnt get too involved in "heavy" discussions and sits back, watches the conversation, and acts in a timely matter to stop inappropriate posts. I also would tend to assume that moderators that post on threads that are "explosive" should at least let people know that they are either posting as a mod or as a regular member, as NOT to force the discussion into one direction or the other.

To not do so puts "different" weight behind the posts that they make.

Moderators are people too, yet I have seen moderators here get involved in discussions and then when things don't go the direction that they like end up deleting posts or warning people that their posts are against the "rules" of the forum.

It makes me want to sit back and say duh! "Practice what you preach!"....just because you are a moderator here doesnt give you the right to delete peoples posts on threads that you have participated on purely because the heat is getting too hot for you to handle.

They are abusing their priviledges that the admin have given to them. I would like to see moderators at least be honest enough to, when participating in a thread as purely a member, to put down their moderating hat and let another mod or admin take responsiblity for the thread. They should also let members KNOW that as well.

Everyone has opinions and thoughts that many times dont mesh with what others are posting, participating is fine, abusing their postitions isnt.

kirei_na_me

Jul 4, 2006, 19:56

I am definitely against management abusing their positions to do whatever they want and say whatever they want.

I believe in staying as neutral as possible when you're in a position like mine. I believe I've stated that more than once, and I believe I stick to it. I don't want anyone feeling like I show that much favoritism toward one or another, and I don't want anyone feeling like I'm not approachable.

d3jake

Jul 5, 2006, 15:56

Exactly the thing that is needed, bipartisanism... (if that's a word...)

nurizeko

Jul 5, 2006, 18:59

It is entirely possible to be able to gte involved in discussion will maintain an impartial fair and competent mod side to your forum personality.

But I reckon getting drawn into shouting matches and general poor forum etiquette isnt considored helpful to becomming a mod.

changedonrequest

Jul 5, 2006, 19:18

But I reckon getting drawn into shouting matches and general poor forum etiquette isnt considored helpful to becomming a mod

I agree, yet I have seen mods here do just that.

Mars Man

Jul 5, 2006, 23:38

I am definitely against management abusing their positions to do whatever they want and say whatever they want.

This is indeed a very noble thing !! Of course we have seen it happen too often really. . . that most recent flash was because of just a thing. I have been here coming up on a year now, and there have been at least three counts of such an offence--an abuse of power, if you will. But what can one expect from the attitude that comes up with a 'you-have-to-obey-my-rules-but-I-don't-have-to-because-I'm-the-one-who-makes-them' admendment to the rules? (the latest addition, since this past Friday in Europe)

I'm all with you kirei_na_me !! I not only agree with the notion but ask for an appeal to proper consideration of the matter, for once and for all !!

In my opinion, Hachiro, you are going in the right direction. It seems to me to be most natural that it is fair to say that there is no official without a civilian element as well. And so every official may stand up against every notion or movement that appears to challenge the system because they are in the system, but the civilian element would cause them to fairly ask if that notion or movement would not improve the system !

To better what we have as an on-line community ( a much better and more realistic view than that of visitors on someone's private property) is again, a most noble thing. It does or can have its costs and friction though--but the end product is a better thing !!

Elizabeth

Jul 6, 2006, 01:25

To better what we have as an on-line community ( a much better and more realistic view than that of visitors on someone's private property) is again, a most noble thing. It does or can have its costs and friction though--but the end product is a better thing !!
It's more analogous to petitioning absentee landlords for day to day fixes on a problem property -- what is the point of incentive or vulnerability unless traffic decreases significantly and that in turn, if it does....affect ad revenues ? I'm a total novice on the economics of running a site.

Meanwhile, realistically and very unfortunately, I think everyone would pretty much be stunned to see any major overhauls in governance for the immediate term. :( Hopefully lessons will be learned from the mangling of Eupedia, though....

Elizabeth

Jul 6, 2006, 01:50

Is it possible for members here to recommend another member here for the position of moderator? (If it is allowed there is a member that I would like to nominate. No it isn't me either for you smart alecks out there.:bow:

Best wishes to the nominee ! :-) A couple of departures recently may create a very opportune moment....

Mike Cash

Jul 6, 2006, 02:56

It's more analogous to petitioning absentee landlords for day to day fixes on a problem property -- what is the point of incentive or vulnerability unless traffic decreases significantly and that in turn, if it does....affect ad revenues ?

Not very likely to happen.

Take a look at the number of people logged onto JREF at any given time.

For example, when I came it it was:

Currently Active Users: 366 (15 members and 351 guests) - Total users last 1hrs : 576 (25 members and 551 guests)

As you can see, those of us who actually open our mouths on any given topic and actively participate are a distinct minority. And those who raise questions about the integrity of site administration are a minority within that already very small minority.

People don't have to post here to affect ad revenue; they just have to show up (and maybe click on something). Any changes are going to have to come about as an appeal to reason and an appeal to character. Appeals to economic self-preservation aren't going to carry any weight whatsoever.

nurizeko

Jul 6, 2006, 03:09

Well, its only a matter of time before I am a moderator I'm just soooooooooo liked by everyone here and I'm so awsome.
:bluush:
I think you run a forum for the express purpouse of encouraging discussion and contribution, if you impede this or downright sabotage it in anyway, your not really efficiently running a forum are you?.
Revenue aside, if you want to run a forum its always in the best interest to do what needs to be done to ensure that the largest amount of people possible are signing up and comming back and contribution material.
If they arent, and the forum population is in decline, its basically a matter of time until the forum can officially be regarded as dead.
J-Ref has had its pumps and trip ups along the way that sometimes threatened to upset the appeal of J-Ref, and I'm not entirely sure its fully recovered yet, but, its all in all an acceptably polite and comfortable forum to join in, so, it shouldnt have any worries.

Edit: I think we should try for a drive to get more of the Lurkers to sign up and contribute, maybe just a extra banner on the site like, "[i]Have a question? or feel you have infomation about japan to contribute? sign up to the forums today and discuss and learn about japan with fellow minded people today!" or it can have a banner over the forum saying something similar.

Mycernius

Jul 6, 2006, 03:22

My brother lurks. Occassionaly surfaces to put in a little comment or post the submerges again. I think most lurkers just like to read what is being said and maybe slip in the odd comment to dissappear again.

changedonrequest

Jul 6, 2006, 06:51

I think everyone would pretty much be stunned to see any major overhauls in governance for the immediate term

In my opinion they would be stunned with joy to see changes made that would make this site more stable. To sit back and let the status quo go on in this form will see many people come and go and only a handfull of regulars and moderators to chat between themselves.

Best wishes to the nominee ! :-) A couple of departures recently may create a very opportune moment....

I hope so too, I sent the pm this morning with my request to Thomas and a few selected moderators for their consideration. Just have to wait and see what comes up.

nurizeko

Jul 6, 2006, 19:53

I never felt actually asking to be a mod was a good idea, afterall, those who seek to be our political leaders arent always considored 100% honest joes.

changedonrequest

Jul 6, 2006, 21:01

I never felt actually asking to be a mod was a good idea, afterall, those who seek to be our political leaders arent always considored 100% honest joes.

Mmmm who is asking to be a moderator here?

nurizeko

Jul 8, 2006, 04:19

I hope so too, I sent the pm this morning with my request to Thomas and a few selected moderators for their consideration. Just have to wait and see what comes up.

I probably read that wrong but it said to me "I have asked to be a Mod".

kirei_na_me

Jul 8, 2006, 04:56

No, no one has asked to be mod. Someone has been nominated for mod by someone else, but no one has asked to be mod themselves.

Uncle Frank

Jul 8, 2006, 05:23

leave me off the list, I'm TOOOOOOO crazy,daisy,hazy,krazy,lazy,racey.

Uncle Frank

:blush:

Maciamo

Jul 8, 2006, 05:34

Not very likely to happen.
Take a look at the number of people logged onto JREF at any given time.
For example, when I came it it was:
Currently Active Users: 366 (15 members and 351 guests) - Total users last 1hrs : 576 (25 members and 551 guests)
As you can see, those of us who actually open our mouths on any given topic and actively participate are a distinct minority.

If I may, "Currently Active Users: 366" means people browsing the forum right now, including non-registered users. "Users last 1hrs" means all the registered users who have visited in the last hour. There is a 3rd stat at the bottom of the main index : "Active Members: 1,281" which refers to people who have posted recently.

Maciamo

Jul 8, 2006, 05:43

Let me shed some light on the way moderators are chosen. First of all, members do not normally ask to become moderators (only 1 or 2 of the team members ever did ask, and were not considered until months later). They are normally asked by Thomas or myself, and in any case after having consulted each others, and often also the team of moderators.

To be eligible, members need to have been registered for several months, have posted a considerable number of post, showed a good knowledge of Japan or the subforum they will be asked to moderate, and have a personality deemed adequate enough for the position.

In some cases existing moderators can propose someone to the admins to become moderator, but admins are the one who make the final decision.

Moderators are chosen also in function of the current needs in various categories of the forum. Some categories require more moderation or more specific knowledge or skills than others.

Please keep in mind that no one will be selected as moderator if at least an admin (or a moderator if their opinion is requested) has a serious objection.

nurizeko

Jul 8, 2006, 20:39

Thanks for shedding some light on the process, Maciamo. :cool:

DoctorP

Jul 8, 2006, 23:02

Please keep in mind that no one will be selected as moderator if at least an admin (or a moderator if their opinion is requested) has a serious objection.

Basically no matter how qualified the individual may be, if they are not 100% a "yes man" to Maciamo there is no chance of them being selected. God forbid there was a well rounded staff, or someone who disagreed with management, but thought of the greater good of the forum.:blush:

RockLee

Jul 9, 2006, 00:10

or someone who disagreed with managementI disagree all the time.

DoctorP

Jul 9, 2006, 00:14

but you are part of the management now...:p

I do appreciate your honesty though!

Maciamo

Jul 9, 2006, 03:11

Elizabeth

Jul 9, 2006, 05:04

Basically no matter how qualified the individual may be, if they are not 100% a "yes man" to Maciamo there is no chance of them being selected. God forbid there was a well rounded staff, or someone who disagreed with management, but thought of the greater good of the forum.:blush:
Well, if anyone does come on they are going to be naturally suspect as part of the Establishment....not that anyone in their right mind would particularly want the job now. :p

DoctorP

Jul 9, 2006, 14:43

CC1, we have almost 19,000 members on this board. I am sure that hundreds if not thousands could qualify to become moderators, but we only need a dozen of them. So it is only fair to select them according to the Team's own preferences.

I notice Eupedia also has that many members! That is one successful website you made there for the forum to be that popular in that short of an amount of time!

nurizeko

Jul 9, 2006, 19:09

CC1, we have almost 19,000 members on this board. I am sure that hundreds if not thousands could qualify to become moderators, but we only need a dozen of them. So it is only fair to select them according to the Team's own preferences.

Um, I hate to ruin your sense of success in the feild of forum-running but some odd wierd niggling little part deep down in me says that the vast vast vast vast majority of those members are non-posters or whatever and havnt been back since, with a small little topping of old members who no longer visit either forum.

Just a crazy hunch.

Maciamo, how did you manage to convince yourself that the 19,000 number was actually legit?....I mean, if we had 19,000 real members I just have this odd feeling it would be somewhat more noticable round here.
Since the active-member count will be lucky to break 100, as sad as that is, the number of potential moderators, coupled with perhaps managements strict criteria, means that very few potential mods exist on this forum under current considorations.

I think thats why its important to make sure the forum maintains an enviroment that makes the current mods happy to stick around and do their job while enjoying the forum, and help towards moulding potential replacement mods out of the active members that currently exist.
How is Eupedia's actual active member + active mod/management number?.
Generally I am finding both forums have just a less then avarage input, then usual, but this is acceptable due to our specialist audiences, Jref for Japan related discussion and Eupedia as the new official forum for the European Union official website (actually thats an idea, you should see if they have a forum yet).

Aside from that Jref is healthy as it can be considoring all things, as I said, I think a slight re-organization of forums and sub-forums to clean it up a bit, and more forum based articles for folk to read would improve traffic a bit but Jref seems comfortable and in no sudden danger so, all in all the forum is acceptable.

I've read some things here and there about Eupedia suffering a member shortage, but I'm sure Maciamo is ontop of that, the EU is a big place, with the right actions taken I'm sure it shouldnt be hard to get members in.
Perhaps getting it advertised in a European related magazine or website may improve the hits on the forum?.

Edit: Just an idea that popped into my head, though its probably a bit unpopular so not too serious, what about requiring people to sign up to the forum to view it? many websites and forums do this but as I said, this isnt entirely a popular thing, and will probably contradict the general policy around here of allowing freedom of infomation and articles, forum or website based for viewing.

Dutch Baka

Jul 9, 2006, 20:05

changedonrequest

Jul 9, 2006, 20:14

Because Eupedia used to be a part of Jref, the members were the same.

then there was the split. Do you take all the users with you, or do you let everybody make a new members acount? So I think there should be no problem with this, and I don`t understand why you guys want to make Eupedia look bad, in this way... Searching for everything that is wrong with it.. come one. (if I am wrong sorry about it, but I don`t get the feeling that I am wrong with this.)

Just do your thing here, have fun posting, and stop searching for bad all the time.

Dutch for me at least it would be more enjoyable if people from over there quit having authority over here. The two have not split when you have people from here automatically entered into the membership base over there. I dont remember ever being given a choice in the matter.

Don't you find it the least bit strange that people that are banned on one site are allowed to post on the other? That tells me that at least to a certain extent the two sites are separate. It would make things easier here for some people imo if the cord was 100% cut and the admin and staff no longer have controls over each others sites.

The problems over there were brought over here and not vice versa if I am reading things correctly.

Mike Cash

Jul 9, 2006, 20:58

Because Eupedia used to be a part of Jref, the members were the same.
.

So someone who joined JREF years ago, posted a couple of times, and has never come back is counted as a "member" of Eupedia? A place they not only didn't sign up for but probably don't even know exists?

It reminds me of the Mormon church posthumously making people members of their church.

thomas

Jul 9, 2006, 23:09

We have informed our members at the Japan Forum several times that they may request to be removed from the Eupedia database:

We will need to import all current users into the new Eupedia database, however, we will comply with any requests to be removed from the new forum. Current members will be able to post at both fora.

=> http://www.jref.com/forum/showthread.php?t=22675

Mike Cash

Jul 10, 2006, 19:39

We have informed our members at the Japan Forum several times that they may request to be removed from the Eupedia database:
=> http://www.jref.com/forum/showthread.php?t=22675

That's very nice and thanks for pointing that out to us.

I would like to be removed, if I'm on the Eupedia database.

And while the option to request removal is gracious and appreciated, shouldn't this have been an "opt-in" rather than an "opt-out" deal?

changedonrequest

Jul 10, 2006, 20:23

That's very nice and thanks for pointing that out to us.

I would like to be removed, if I'm on the Eupedia database.

And while the option to request removal is gracious and appreciated, shouldn't this have been an "opt-in" rather than an "opt-out" deal?

What about people that "joined" the board after the split or the thread regarding the "opt-out"?

I don't see any disclaimer that informs people when they are signing up here that they are "automatically" joining a board that they may have had no interest in anyway.

Thomas your thread date was 17-03-06, do you honestly expect people that joined after that date to be aware of this?
http://www.jref.com/forum/showthread.php?t=22675

I also would appreciate it if my name was removed from the Europedia database as well. I joined this forum because it was about Japan and not Europe.

Personally I have no interest in "that" forum.

thomas

Jul 10, 2006, 20:24

That's very nice and thanks for pointing that out to us.
I would like to be removed, if I'm on the Eupedia database.
And while the option to request removal is gracious and appreciated, shouldn't this have been an "opt-in" rather than an "opt-out" deal?

Mike, I have removed you from Eupedia.

An "opt-in" would have been possible in case we had started the Eupedia forum from scratch which we didn't. I clearly understand your point of view as a JREF member not interested in European affairs. However, our approach as maintainers of JREF and Eupedia was different - for technical and "entrepreneurial" reasons. Sorry for any inconvenience.

What about people that "joined" the board after the split or the thread regarding the "opt-out"?

Well, members who joined any of our fora after the split are either JREF or Eupedia members. There is no automatic membership at both fora.

I have removed you too, Mr. Hachiro.

changedonrequest

Jul 10, 2006, 20:50

Well, members who joined any of our fora after the split are either JREF or Eupedia members. There is no automatic membership at both fora.

I have removed you too, Mr. Hachiro.

Thank you, I only brought that up because I don't know if you noticed this or not I joined this board in May of this year, May 2nd to be exact, and your thread was dated March 17, 2006.

I was automatically included in the Europedia database. I never signed up for it but the three or four times I read posts there I had used my log-in name from here and it worked.

So it appeared to me at least that I was an "automatic" member there, as well as here.

Either way thank you for taking the time out to remove me from "it's" database.