Yes, pretty much. I'll gladly admit we have too few active mods. Pointing that out is redundant, solving it is rather hard.
Why is it then that we cannot
do something about this? Most of our veteran users know the drill: a moderator must be this, must be this, and we look for users that are this, yadda yadda. They have done the "expectations" of a mod for so long now, that it is like a psychological or moral
requirement , eg. they do it all the time, wherever, whenever, and maybe sneak a few hyucks in when the thread calls for it.
We have so many people right now that can take up the reins and be a respectable, hard-working, and helpful mod, even if it was just for a few weeks or months. High School juniors and seniors who have almost all their core requirements done and have little work to really do. College or University students with off days that can be used moderating the sites. If you look around, there are people that can do this. Hell, look at this THREAD! What's wrong with what is being shown here? This thread is basically a calling of candidates; Klaushouse has graciously assessed many "
roblems" with the site and those that use/police/administrate it, and look! All these people who have had enough care in their hearts to discuss it, provide solutions, overall being THE answer to some if not the majority of the problems.
Some of you have pointed out a specific person whom we all recognize around here and what she does. Carlie, who is a community manager, oversees this site and reports anything necessary to the actual staff of Armorgames and has the power to perma-ban any user that needs it. What is not as common is that she also looks around for any potential user to see whether or not he or she can be able to moderate. I'm pretty sure the mods help Carlie with any suggestions on that detail. All these powers, and yet she is only one person.
Do we need more community managers? I know that's asking for a lot, but it definitely could help in the days ahead. I also realize that Community Managers require an EXTREME amount of trust from the staff, much more so than mods. If anymore could be just for the sake of awarding well-deserved merits, carrying out the official bans of users, and looking for potential mods, then it is well worth the trouble of getting more. If it is for simply a better future, then it is worth it.
Some of you also mentioned merits and the merit system. Merits are awards given to those who have either won a contest or have posted a very strongly-written review about a game, in a nutshell. The first way is easy; all you have to do is win a contest, and you can basically say "HAY I WUN A MERIT GIME GIME GIME" to any mod, and they will have to give one to you. The last one is hard; you must first type out a review. Things such as length, grammar, vocabulary, and coherency are basic expectations of a merit. If you have already submitted a merit, then you must wait; no shoving merits into mods' faces. Things such as quick comments and spam, however, hide the merit-worthy review into older pages. If a mod actually sees the review, he or she must then "like" it. If not worthy enough, the mod ignores it for another mod to see the same one and decide again.
@ above paragraph. There is seriously something wrong with this. Don't lie to yourself; the true reason why people go out of their way to type reviews is to receive merits for their troubles. Yet their reviews are hidden by spam and quick comments and whatnot. Your opinion of it is fine, it's just this that irks me. Why can't reviews be separate from the rest of the comments, out of the way of spam, and be reviewed by mods right there where they can see it in plain daylight? I'm with the "no shovin' in faces" deal; that's silly. However, with this, all a mod has to do is decide to check out some games, maybe delete a few spams, and see if there were new reviews written. A mod can check it, decide if they like it, and if they do, write it up for a merit and maybe congratulate the user on a job well done. What's wrong with this? I know mods hate lookin' for reviews under piles of trash; they don't need to lie.
"If you would like to become a moderator, you first need to show that you are responsible on the site; show a good posting record and maturity and you may be granted these exclusive rights! We will usually hand pick moderators, but if you feel you have what it take, contact us on the Contact page... we are really, really picky though!"And what is wrong with this quote, from the personal "Moderators and Merits" sticky, that basically allows us to contact the admins and say I'm mod worthy? Because it's contradictory to what you've been teaching us all this time about not requesting to be a mod? I personally like this idea. Submitting a form for a request to be a mod is fine; you still aren't going to be a mod lickity-split. If a user decides that they are worthy of being a mod, that is fine. If they can show it for a long period of time, then maybe it is their privilege to do something greater. Have the mods and the community manager(s) watch them and look them over. If they personally feel that they can hold the reins of a moderator, then by all means let them. Even if it is for a few weeks or a few months, that is great. They just have to tell somebody that they are going to be inactive or retire. Users are notified that potential mods need to be supremely-active for a long period of time, yet when they are modified, they leave for a year and go missing without a trace? I say users can be mods for as long as they want, so long as they tell us when they are going to be inactive (again), even if it is just a few weeks or a few months.
Dang.