Rainy

[Staff] Moderators - Explanations and Applications

654 posts in this topic

Im not sure how it is currently, but is there anything which distinguishes between a normal player and a moderator? aka a tag which says mod or maybe a different colour of text?

There is in chat form, if you donate for example you will get the 20% cooler tag next to your name

 

[20% Cooler]Sky Dragon: Hi.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its a good thing that they blend in, but when telling another player to abide by the rules or to warn them, having the ability to say have your text colour differently or have a tag appear which identifies them as a mod would be beneficial.

 

Assuming it isn't something hard to do, have a command which enables a tag or colour change in text for the message you want to emphasise that is requiring moderator attention. That way it is more obvious to someone that they are being warned by a member of the moderation and are more likely to abide by their requests.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well for the most part, it isn't necessarily to emphasize monitors for that reason currently being what they are. I like the idea of having a secret police acting like normal players, giving warning like normal players, but having an option to ban because people are just going to do whatever they want once a monitor or admin is off. The idea is to keep a sense of security within those servers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well for the most part, it isn't necessarily to emphasize monitors for that reason currently being what they are. I like the idea of having a secret police acting like normal players, giving warning like normal players, but having an option to ban because people are just going to do whatever they want once a monitor or admin is off. The idea is to keep a sense of security within those servers.

Will these "secret police" wear the Killing Gloves of Boxing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All the puns aside, I'm really not that comfortable on having a "secret police" to observe the behaviors of other players and give out bans when a moderator or even an admin is presently online and can be contacted.  Besides, there is still the sourcebans and the bans sub-thread that you can use to report anyone who is not following the rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just want to clarify that the reason we have Moderators is so that there are players within the community who have the authority to call community votes without abuse.

 

|steamID: Aquarian Poet™
|steamID32: STEAM_0:1:45110685
 
Suggesting this person for moderatorshipnessthingymabobber.

 

Added.

 

As for the complaints about Moderators having too limited of powers:

 

The purpose of Moderators is to have members within the community who have the authority to initiate votes for the community.

 

Because Moderators rely on the server's popular vote, there is little room for abuse when calling for a gag/mute or Ban. This allows us to give Moderator status out more freely than we would the actual position of Admin. It also protects the Moderator from most accusations of Abuse, as their decision was backed by the popular vote.

 

We will never give Moderators the ability to instantly Gag, Mute, Kick, or Ban players because there is already a Group which has those powers. That group is called Admins. I understand that some situations will be frustrating to Moderators since they cannot always handle every situation that comes their way without help. But at that point, it is really the Moderator's duty to look to an Admin for help.

 

I have considered the complaints regarding the number of votes needed for a successful vote. Jug and I have decided on reducing the number of votes needed from a 75% majority to a 60% majority. I will work on implementing this within the next few days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At night time the mods behaviors are quite different and a bit abusive. In my opinion.

 

I'm going to be blunt with this:

 

I use votekick:

- To remove AFK players who have been idle for 2 or more rounds when the server is full or near-full.

- To remove friendlies and players who refuse to play the game as it was intended.

 

I use votegag / mute to silence chat / mic spammers (respectively).

 

I use voteban to deal with hackers and griefers (It is a half-hour ban. Hackers get reported to admins appropriately, and griefers would hopefully learn their lesson after 30 minutes.).

 

Sound spammers are the only abusers who I am unsure of how to handle, since we cannot call a vote for sound spam, but gags do not block their ability to use sounds.

 

I don't see how having only voting powers can be abusive, especially when it requires a majority vote.

I'm going to even take a step forward here and say I've done the most voting since being given the vote commands, but 9/10 times, the votes are easily met with 80% or more agreeing with my vote.

 

 

To everyone else who recognizes the constant problem of sound spam: The recommendation is take take a snapshot of your console, high-lighting the offender's name and steam ID, a snapshot of the spam as it is shown in the console / chat-feed, and forward it to an admin.

Edited by Videogames380
4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the owner of this server only wanted admins to do work then he/she only would have admins then, they gave the server moderators in order to keep the little tid-bit things in tact, like the little annoying sound spammers at the end of the round or the griefers, or just in general the people who are trying to ruin the people of the servers good times. I think the moderators (from what I've seen of them at least) have been doing a fair and respectable job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the owner of this server only wanted admins to do work then he/she only would have admins then, they gave the server moderators in order to keep the little tid-bit things in tact, like the little annoying sound spammers at the end of the round or the griefers, or just in general the people who are trying to ruin the people of the servers good times. I think the moderators (from what I've seen of them at least) have been doing a fair and respectable job.

They did all that they could, but we all know it's never enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding the Sound Spam, it appears that the plugin was recently updated on AlliedModders and limits the amount of sounds that can be played to one sound at a time. I will work on implementing that when I get the chance.

 

As for Moderators not being able to target Donors, I fixed that issue last night. Please let me know if Moderators still have this issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't been visiting the servers as of late to see how the Mods are working out, but perhaps enabling the sm_csay command to allow them to put text right in front of everyone's faces would perhaps help to draw their attention?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't been visiting the servers as of late to see how the Mods are working out, but perhaps enabling the sm_csay command to allow them to put text right in front of everyone's faces would perhaps help to draw their attention?

Donators had that ability due to a glitch and it resulted in nothing but spam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Donators had that ability due to a glitch and it resulted in nothing but spam.

 

Never heard anything about it. Wow.

Well hey, if a moderator were to spam it, ("abusing powers" in a sense) a report could be made and cut them from the moderator group, I would think. Could even be based on a system of warnings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Donators had that ability due to a glitch and it resulted in nothing but spam.

 

Never heard anything about it. Wow.

Well hey, if a moderator were to spam it, ("abusing powers" in a sense) a report could be made and cut them from the moderator group, I would think. Could even be based on a system of warnings.

So because of this glitch, there is no way that the moderators would be able to use the sm_csay console command?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it's due to the glitch, Raini just hasn't enabled it for the Moderators to use.

Perhaps only a select few who can use it then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just suggest giving it to the entire Mod. team as a test. If they get all obnoxious with it, simply yank the cord.

I agree with this, however, if they use it for different reasons. Just don't give it to them.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just suggest giving it to the entire Mod. team as a test. If they get all obnoxious with it, simply yank the cord.

I agree with this, however, if they use it for different reasons. Just don't give it to them.

Exactly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I agree moderators need a more official way of warning/talking to players with their ranks at the ready, I'm against giving moderators the ability to use csay as there stands 3 problems.

 

1. (As previously mentioned) Easily abusable. Its just a quick little message that appears above everyones screen, I can smell this abuse a mile away.

2. Its not recorded. Players are only given a split second to read what appears on csay and sometimes isn't always seen and/or isn't completely read.

3. It disappears on certain occasions. To go with the previous one, the message doesn't appear permanently and can be easily overwritten to cut its lifespan even shorter. Players typing /ponyhp (or /halehp) and the game reaching the Last Man Standing phase all result in the csay message spot to be overtaken with the Boss's Current HP, also during the LMS phase the boss's HP is up there until it ends, making any message sent during this period only visible for a split second. Also any csays inputted while a current csay message is up, it'll overwrite it.

 

The better way of giving them some sort of way to do what was mentioned above would be to allow them to use the admin all talk (@ yadda yadda) (with perhaps a modification to it so it reads (MODERATOR) rather then (ADMIN)), this way the message can be sent once for all to read and if necessary a message telling any players who missed the first message to just scroll up in order to catch it. It has barely any flaws and stands as a clearly visible important message for all to read without getting too spammy/annoying or having moderators have to fight for screentime/mic usage. This also maintains their anonymity I mentioned earlier is a good thing for moderators to have since this will replace their name with (MODERATOR/ADMIN). Simple no?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're not set up for every single scenario. We aren't supposed to be though.

 

Even so, we don't have anything special other than the ability to call votes. Without proper support from the players, we have no "power".

 

The csay used to be bugged and every player was able to use it, it became a spamfest. If that could be corrected, then perhaps, but as Jug mentioned, there are exceptions when it does not work correctly.

 

Using the admin chat with "@" is better since players won't have the excuse "I didn't read it." Nearly all warnings are put into the chat anyway. Making them more noticeable couldn't hurt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now