Title: Inactive Leaders
Lightweight - September 27, 2006 05:36 PM (GMT)
We have 7 administrators and 2 global moderators. However, only Administrators Denden666piek and The Evil Reaper (sometimes FutureFish) and moderator Ralexand appear on a regular basis. What I'm trying to suggest is to implant a new rule in which moderators and administrators that remain inactive for a prolonged period of time should be contacted and be told that should they remain inactive, they will be demoted to either moderator or member status, depending on their current rank.
Again, this is just a suggestion. Discuss at will...
... now.
The_Evil_Reaper - September 27, 2006 05:43 PM (GMT)
What are admins... and what are mods :huh: :unsure:
Ziolek - September 28, 2006 12:38 PM (GMT)
| QUOTE (The_Evil_Reaper @ Sep 27 2006, 05:43 PM) |
| What are admins... and what are mods :huh: :unsure: |
I've chosed the same option.
Hmmm maybe it's something to eat.
Jagori - September 28, 2006 01:22 PM (GMT)
I say that unless they've got a good reason for being away and they give some sort of notice, they should get demoted if they're inactive. Part of the reason someone should be a moderator is that they're around a lot so they can do their job.
If they just get cut off for whatever reason and don't get a chance to give any warning, they can say that when they get back and get reinstated or something.
Lightweight - September 28, 2006 04:48 PM (GMT)
I just had to add the "what are mods and admins" choice as a joke...
BG&E Voyager - September 28, 2006 08:56 PM (GMT)
I have to agree with Jagori.
The_Evil_Reaper - September 29, 2006 11:31 AM (GMT)
Ok, seriously, the makers of the site can never be degraded, that would include Pey'j and Secundo, so that would only leave sheep and homsar (Phil is active at times, I don't want derank him). But I don't really see the use of this. I mean we can make new admins and mods without deranking the old ones right? And it's not like you can force people to stay active...
Ralexand - September 29, 2006 04:49 PM (GMT)
| QUOTE (The_Evil_Reaper @ Sep 29 2006, 12:31 PM) |
| Ok, seriously, the makers of the site can never be degraded, that would include Pey'j and Secundo, so that would only leave sheep and homsar (Phil is active at times, I don't want derank him). But I don't really see the use of this. I mean we can make new admins and mods without deranking the old ones right? And it's not like you can force people to stay active... |
He is right! :o
BG&E Voyager - September 30, 2006 02:56 PM (GMT)
Obviously you can't degrade the founders, that would be unethical, but if you choose to be moderator or an admin, you have to realize the responsibility of activeness. So, like mentioned, if you are going to become unactive for a certain reason, you should say something.
sjaak - October 1, 2006 12:11 PM (GMT)
why bother to deactivate them. It does not hurt anybody to let them stay admin.
The_Evil_Reaper - October 1, 2006 03:13 PM (GMT)
Yeah, we don't delete members who never posted right? So why derank admins and mods? There's no real point in that...
Denden666Piek - October 2, 2006 08:47 AM (GMT)
I agree that we should not remove the admin/mod status of those who are no longer active. Every time I think about it myself for a particular admin or mod, they come back and stay active(for a while).
Having said that, I'm not sure about SheepPL. Last activity was on Jan 19 2006, and no posting. During the entire period after the Resurrection, I haven't seen Sheep PL active for even a few seconds.
Zay-el - October 2, 2006 05:22 PM (GMT)
I don't think we should degrade anyone because of inactivitity,only if its been really long since he/she looked upon the forum. ;)
FutureFish - November 2, 2006 06:00 PM (GMT)
I want Sheep and Homsar to go. They appeared out of nowhere, didnt show any particular enthusiasm or talent, and got made gods for seemingly no apparent reason. Homsar disappeared after a week never too return, and Sheep left aswell, (but not after being a major dick with his authority.)
As for the "founders" they have bothed moved onto better things apparently
sjaak - November 2, 2006 06:05 PM (GMT)
maybe futurefish is right. Most of us never met Homsar or Sheep. We still can let them stay member but of what I hear now they do not desirve to be an admin on this forum.
FutureFish - November 2, 2006 06:17 PM (GMT)
This topic I guess is aimed primarily at them. Myself, I had barely met them before they got made admins. Secundo's judgement is very flawed on a lot of issues, I have gathered from AIM conversations with him.
Denden666Piek - November 3, 2006 12:17 AM (GMT)
I also vote for Homsar and Sheep being degraded to regular members, nothing against them but they won't do us any good just being inactive in a fairly long list of admins.
hotspot - November 3, 2006 02:47 AM (GMT)
| QUOTE (Denden666Piek @ Nov 2 2006, 07:17 PM) |
| I also vote for Homsar and Sheep being degraded to regular members, nothing against them but they won't do us any good just being inactive in a fairly long list of admins. |
i agree with denden. and voted yes on the poll.
BG&E Voyager - November 3, 2006 04:50 AM (GMT)
I think the list of Admins and Mods is an honourable thing to have, it say's your in charge of the greatest community in the galaxy :arr: I don't think it should be taken lightly(call me crazy if you wish :P )
sjaak - November 3, 2006 07:33 AM (GMT)
we do not take this lightly we only want to have admins on this forum who are worthy of being an admin of this forum and homsar and sheep have not proven that they are worhty
BG&E Voyager - November 3, 2006 09:38 PM (GMT)
Sorry I don't think I was clear in my last post: I agree with you in that they should be degraded :)
The_Evil_Reaper - November 4, 2006 09:42 AM (GMT)
Basicly I don't really care, I mean when they're not here, what do they care? What do we gain? Do we look more proffesional to newcomers or something? I don't really get the whole point. I personally think the only reason to derank is abuse of powers, and I've seen no one who did this, well not in a serious way at least...
But if you think it's so terribly important to derank them, I'll go ahead to the admin space and derank them. Making them unactive members instead of unactive admins...
FutureFish - November 5, 2006 11:00 PM (GMT)
Members should not be deranked, however inactive. It sends out a bad PR message. However, who holds the authority is an internal matter, and should not be taken lightly.
homsar - November 19, 2006 08:19 PM (GMT)
Hey, just because I dont appear active doesnt mean Im not active. I still lurk around here now and then. Im sorry that Im not as active as I should be. Im still a big supporter and try to tell people about the game when ever I can. I just support so many projects and belong to so many groups its hard to stay at one place for a long time. So ya, I still check in, and I do dream of making a fan game or music sometime.
Well, anyway, Ill leave you to decide my fate. I mean, its best that the more active people are the ones who make key desisions.
Denden666Piek - November 19, 2006 08:36 PM (GMT)
I'm very happy to see that you still "lurk around", to put it like that. If you're okay with it, I'm going to put a poll up for this matter and have people decide what should happen with your rank and that of SheepPl's. I want this matter to be settled. I do this because according to the poll results, there are people who think that some inactive members should be removed from the admin list. I will make a poll for Homsar and SheepPL.