As some of you may have heard, armor games is firing a moderator. Since you're not allowed to have any discussion on the forum i guess post any opinions on the matter here.
The firing thread https://armorgames.com/community/thread/7293378/announcement-firing-a-mod
Devoidless hasn't done anything. How can you vote him off for being inactive and then claiming it is because he is a ******.
No one called him a "******", most people voting for him don't even know who he is.
In these past months, have you had problem with the mods?
I'm not sure if that question was directed towards me because you quoted me, but like i just said I have never had a problem. I trust armor games ability to only employ competent moderators.
I really don't see how any of them are ******bags. Voting for someone inactive won't due away with the tension that Gantic said in his post. All it will do is reduce the Moderator team one by one.
I really don't see how any of them are ******bags. Voting for someone inactive won't due away with the tension that Gantic said in his post. All it will do is reduce the Moderator team one by one.
Exactly.
Where I come from, there was this mod, Scornic, who banned for the slightest thing, but everyone hated him.
All the mods and admins, however, praised him for doing his job. He later resigned because of the community, but he did his job right and that's all that matters.
I keep going back to the thread and i keep seeing people with less than 10 posts commenting and it's kind of annoying me because they just want the popular decision. If the votes were hidden until the results were released, most of them wouldn't vote due to the fact that they don't know any moderators.
A couple other possibilities have been suggested. So we have.
1. bad joke (it is out of character and similar jokes have been pulled in the past) 2. it's for real (the mods seemed to be genuinely peeved about it) 3. it's an uncommon way of testing for a new mod (maybe using a joke as a test) 4. a ploy to get the inactive mods in gear (we did see more mod activity shortly after)
1. bad joke (it is out of character and similar jokes have been pulled in the past) 2. it's for real (the mods seemed to be genuinely peeved about it) 3. it's an uncommon way of testing for a new mod (maybe using a joke as a test) 4. a ploy to get the inactive mods in gear (we did see more mod activity shortly after)
I really don't see how this could test for a new Moderator. Can you explain, Mage?
I voted Gantic as my final decision because honestly, he started this whole waste of time.
cormyn told Gantic to do it. He was simply following orders.
Cormyn should really hire at least 8 more mods for AG3. That would solve a lot.
It really would. Having more Moderators on the site would just obliterate all the rule breaking that goes on.
I must say that if this Mod firing is real it would be the worst decision that I have seen the Admins make. To me, the Mods do a great job considering all of the things they have to take care off (Spammy game comments, advertising, duplicate threads, threads created in the wrong section, handing out merits, mediating in user fights, dealing with questions that have been answered hundreds of times,etc) and their also real people with real lives, personal relationships, jobs and bills to pay. Firing one of them will probably lead to some of his colleagues and a bunch of other users (including me) quitting the site. Now, if this is a joke, I find it to be a really sick one. If the Mods know about it, well, first of all they are really good actors and second of all my respect to them will take a big hit. If they don't know, then the game being played by the Admins is truly disturbing. For all of this reasons I have not voted and I don't intend to so.
cormyn told Gantic to do it. He was simply following orders.
I don't see why Cormyn can't do it.
It really would. Having more Moderators on the site would just obliterate all the rule breaking that goes on.
There should be a hierarchy, too. Having assistant moderators who can only lock threads but not ban people would be fine if you don't want to grant someone full modship too early.
cormyn has a newborn child and can't get on the site much. Well, that's the only reason that I can come up with.
Having assistant moderators who can only lock threads but not ban people would be fine if you don't want to grant someone full modship too early.
If you can trust them with some powers then why not trust them with full Moderator powers? ^That's what you'll get asked by the Admins, mods and some users around the site.
If you can trust them with some powers then why not trust them with full Moderator powers? ^That's what you'll get asked by the Admins, mods and some users around the site.
I'm pretty sure the mods can come up with a better one than that. That's like saying, well, "since he can manage a branch of this company, maybe he should manage the entire company."
No. Let the admins see if he is ready to become a mod.
