• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.

This site needs to improve, yall have too many mods

Status
Not open for further replies.

PrettyVixenGirl

She/Her
689
302
This site has too many mods. I get it, you want to reward people whom are active, respectful, and have good judgement, but unfortunately, that is quite simply all it takes to become a mod. It might take a couple months, a year, but if you do this, you will likely get at the very least a discussion moderator. And then work your way up to an admin. There are so many mods, that it doesn't even seem like it would feel like anything special if one were to get a position. Well I'm not saying people won't feel accomplished for getting one, but its becoming less and less. No other site, would have this many administrators, this many discussion mods, and its gunna become a point where discussion mods are the regular members, admins are the discussion mods, and bureaucrats become the administrators.

What I mean by this, is population normalcy. If bureaucrat is the most important one, eventually there will be enough to where it feels like admin group, and admin group feels like discussion mods, and discussion mods feel like regular users. I am aware bureaucrat is not easy to get. Not to sound like an ass, but it feels like every time i come back to this site, i be like damn, another admin?

There should be less people with these positions, the more you get, the more situations involving mod drama you get. There's gunna be a lot of drama with staff members, because staff members are so high they feel like normal users. And it is not hard to get a position.

Look at how much Sera was able to do, and yet, i don't think Sera is smart at all. Sad truth is, people are gullible, and too trusting in staff if they believe anything that ever came out of her mouth or let it slide. That person is a manipulator yes, but not a very good one.

This is gunna hurt to hear, Sera is a predator. Not in any way we know, but they saw a situation where they found suitable prey. That being this site. They must of got an ultimate high off of fooling an entire community. There are several users here, getting their high right now. I would say it is not unlikely, that some banned users are mods rn. They may never get found out, or time will tell.

This site is full of too much gullible people, not to be rude, it may sting, but its better to take it and learn right? and y'all pour way too much trust in staff. And because this site is massive, ppl like Sera is getting a high off of mass illusion. The way your system is designed, it is easy for half assed manipulators like Sera to get away with mass illusion. I literally just said how to become a mod. Active, good behavior, continuous good judgment, and time. Theoretically, even an alt can achieve this if that is there sole purpose

Have more faith in your regular users. What does this mean? That if 20 regular users agree on something, and 7 staff disagree, that 7 staff shouldn't win. Oh? Regular members feel like their opinion isn't valued? Bet, get a mod position. And that really is not hard. I think i said something awhile back about how alot of ppl sided with imade about something, but because they were in a staff only thread, none of that counted. This site is already external. Meaning that in general, anyone who has ever went here, was probably already a member before. Don't make positions feel like something anybody can get, even if that's true. I doubt all of them people with positions right now are active. But i know it would hurt to remove a position just based on that in case they return, but i not only feel like there should be less, but it should be something sort of a second job. Respect to ppl whom are actually busy and feel they don't deserve their position, and retire. Which is why i say second job, or maybe you can say third. Did you know, the number of admins is almost equal to thread mods? Surely admin is way more important right? Why are they so close the ratio is like 18-20 right? I feel like, now idk if you already do this, but when someone retires, then someone should probably step up and get promoted eventually. There doesn't seem to be a limit so theoretically you can have 50 admins one day. At least that way you would have consistent admins. But when the number of thread mods are even with admins, i gotta ask the people whom recently got that position if they feel it would hit the same as the first 20 people whom had ever got it. Admins and thread mods being even is criminal imo. I could be talking about stuff yall already worked on, cause im not very active but yea
 
I think you fundamentally misunderstand the purpose of staff. I've been here for a long time, and I have at times struggled with the notion of staff drives. However, the final purpose of it is simply because we need to cycle through staff due to some becoming inactive or leaving. If anything, we desperately need more staff attention on the wiki, due to all the drama and issues drummed up by regular users. As the wiki grows, more staff are needed to maintain it- and not all of us are in a position to operate like Ant, bless the poor man.

It doesn't matter if the staff feel properly rewarded or what have you. I haven't felt truly rewarded since I joined the staff in 2018. I do this because the community needs help and I am able to give at least some of it.

As for difficulty in getting a position: I agree, I feel many users are relatively underqualified when they receive a promotion to staff. I generally try to be discerning in staff positions, and yet many I'd consider somewhat poor choices do tend to get through. However, this does not change my first point- we need users for staff. It is simply how the site can function.

Sera was able to do what she did, and did so regardless of being staff. They were a liar before they were staff. I'll leave it at that.

It means nothing, what you're saying, except to attack people with stinging wounds, so I'll ask that you knock it off.

Regular users literally cannot do the things staff do. It also doesn't help that you're telling us we are far too gullible and trusting, and that your solution is that we must be more trusting. The staff are needed to outweigh biased votes. Per your suggestion, 20 people that are a fan of, say, Team Fortress, Kirby, Final Fantasy, Dies Irae, etc etc, if all of those users vote in favor of a clearly wrong thread, and 7 high-ranking staff members chime in to say "all of this is wrong, here is why", the 20 fans would win. So, no offense, your suggestion simply doesn't work.

A lot of your points feel like non-points or unrelated to the issue you seem to be discussing.
 
I think we've reached a fine number of mods. I remember a few years back constantly feeling like there weren't enough staff, shit would go down and there wouldn't be anyone to deal with it for hours, calc group would be chronically overworked, that sorta thing. This number of mods may seem big, but with how many members there are and tasks there are to do, it isn't actually that crazy of a number. Getting shit done matters more than "non-mod drama" turning into "mod drama"

I think it's good that being (somewhat) active, being respectful, and having good judgement should be all you need to be a mod. I can't think of any other criteria that people who promote staff would reasonably be able to evaluate. It's pretty hard to prove that someone's not a chronic liar/manipulator until that's exposed.

Have more faith in your regular users. What does this mean? That if 20 regular users agree on something, and 7 staff disagree, that 7 staff shouldn't win.

Ehh I dunno about this. Having the 7 staff "win" is only bad if the staff are dogmatic and unable to be convinced by reason. If that's the case, the fix isn't to give regular users to more power, it's to demote those staff members, or run to another site.

Or in other words, there's three possible situations:

  1. Staff and regular users agree because they're all reasonable.
  2. Staff and regular users disagree because staff are unreasonable. Staff should be demoted, or the regular users should run to another site without shitty staff.
  3. Staff and regular users disagree because regular users are unreasonable. We can't really "demote" regular users, and banning would be a bit harsh, so it's probably better to just have staff overrule them.

And it's not like there haven't been cases where 50 regular users have jumped on to FRA threads with arguments that, imo, are pretty shit and don't hold up to our standards of scrutiny.

It says joke battles? huh lol. Well if someone can move it to vsb. Gee this site still confuses me

This forum's for vsbw and 2 sister sites, joke battles wiki and fc/oc battles wiki. There's different subforums for each of them, looks like you went under joke battles' general discussions board.
 
Last edited:
I think you fundamentally misunderstand the purpose of staff. I've been here for a long time, and I have at times struggled with the notion of staff drives. However, the final purpose of it is simply because we need to cycle through staff due to some becoming inactive or leaving. If anything, we desperately need more staff attention on the wiki, due to all the drama and issues drummed up by regular users. As the wiki grows, more staff are needed to maintain it- and not all of us are in a position to operate like Ant, bless the poor man.

It doesn't matter if the staff feel properly rewarded or what have you. I haven't felt truly rewarded since I joined the staff in 2018. I do this because the community needs help and I am able to give at least some of it.

As for difficulty in getting a position: I agree, I feel many users are relatively underqualified when they receive a promotion to staff. I generally try to be discerning in staff positions, and yet many I'd consider somewhat poor choices do tend to get through. However, this does not change my first point- we need users for staff. It is simply how the site can function.

Sera was able to do what she did, and did so regardless of being staff. They were a liar before they were staff. I'll leave it at that.

It means nothing, what you're saying, except to attack people with stinging wounds, so I'll ask that you knock it off.

Regular users literally cannot do the things staff do. It also doesn't help that you're telling us we are far too gullible and trusting, and that your solution is that we must be more trusting. The staff are needed to outweigh biased votes. Per your suggestion, 20 people that are a fan of, say, Team Fortress, Kirby, Final Fantasy, Dies Irae, etc etc, if all of those users vote in favor of a clearly wrong thread, and 7 high-ranking staff members chime in to say "all of this is wrong, here is why", the 20 fans would win. So, no offense, your suggestion simply doesn't work.

A lot of your points feel like non-points or unrelated to the issue you seem to be disc
I don't wanna quote back and forth but it makes me automatically reply to your entire response and I have no idea now to actually get rid of it at least on the phone.

Well about the vote thing I wasn't saying more ppl wins technicaly either side could fra but a single fra from a staff means more than ppl whom are familiar with a series saying fra. Regardless either side is dangerous. You either have the fans have 20 and be right or they could be wrong and the 7 could be right. I talked about this before but staff only thread for a revision is problematic when it comes to accuracy or at least an attempt at it

And I wouldn't say unrelated its talking about site as a whole even if staff position was the main topic
 
One example is fra. By saying fra it's so you don't clutter a thread with similar views. But when used for votes especially important ones it can be extremely problematic. Like you said 50 ppl can say fra. It is very easy to say fra. Why? Because if you have no idea what is is you are arguing you cannot be exposed for it vs if you actually typed a response that makes a vote valid. Fra hides ignorance very very well, typing a legit response? No. Just because there are examples of regular users swaying the direction of votes doesn't mean its not true that staff opinions votes hold more sway.
You may say it's a good thing for bias, etc but there are just as many situations where that is as bad as those 50 users. I personally think fra is problematic. It makes versus debates fundamentally boring, it makes them lazy, one guy types a legit response and its fra till grace.
 
Last edited:
I don't wanna quote back and forth but it makes me automatically reply to your entire response and I have no idea now to actually get rid of it at least on the phone.
Select the text you want to quote and you should see a reply option after selecting it.

Admins and thread mods being even is criminal imo.
This has been the case since long back, to be fair. I joined in 2017 and it was still like that, maybe even before that too. We usually always have around 17-20 admins. And as many thread mods. It's not something that has been the case recently. And the site has only grown larger so it's not criminal that the numbers of staff grow too.
 
Last edited:
Oh, I'm so, so sorry about being active and supporting VSBW, more so than most other people on this platform at this current time, as well as possibly being Sera 2.0. I will immediately go to Antvasima right away and request my immediate demotion as a sysop.

Is that what you want me to say? Because that is what you are proposing. As both Bambu and Agnaa has stated, when a community grows large enough, you need a larger pool of staff to help contribute to maintaining it. And each of us has our own purpose on the wiki, with our own specialties that help keep things in order, not just between content mods and thread mods for instance, but with individual members.

While it may seem narcissistic, I will use myself as an example. The only reason I was initially brought into staff was because I was helping to tend to versus threads that was being largely ignored by the staff at large, and so I was given the Content Mod role with the specific instruction to maintain this aspect of the community, and I still do this even now as a Sysop. Other people get promoted due to being knowledgeable over certain subjects, attention to detail, or even just plain good behavior, as you bluntly put it.

I feel like using Sera is a bit of an outlier, even if it has proven possible. Not everyone is just gonna pull a full Lulubuu and plant multiple profiles and identities for the lols.

Finally, I just don't think you realize that for the vast majority of people here, staff or otherwise, this is a recreational hobby. Something that we are doing for fun as a distraction. Like collecting stamps or speedrunning games. This isn't a full-on job for us, and most of us sure as heck aren't treating it as one except for the chad of a man that is Antvasima. And like with most hobbies, people get bored and can grow out of them. Heck, just look at the page of retired staff. There are a ton of people that used to be active here and contributed immensely, but now have moved on to other endeavors elsewhere.

I feel like you are trying to make this point about a bloated staff because it seems like our voices are the only ones that can be heard, but that is not at all true. There are plenty of blue names that get called in because they are far more knowledgeable on certain topics than anyone on staff, hence why we have our Knowledgeable Member Lists. It's like as Agnaa said, we are trying to go for accuracy above all else. If the staff are wrong, they either need to own up to their mistakes or face the consequences. If the blue names are wrong, then we tell them they are wrong, and we move on since being frankly wrong about a subject cannot really be punished. And this motion you are proposing is far from doing anything to make this community better.
 
Huh well I guess it's better to highlight all of my issues

1. Should be staff limit, even if you think 18 admins is fine then it should be left at 20. I didn't say 18 cause thats a weird number to end on.

2. Inactive staff get a warning dm and then replaced if still Inactive.

3. Fra should be abolished for the sake of enjoyable debates. I would like it if someone else shared their actual insight. As I said fra can hide ignorance, an actual response? No. I'm sure you're all brilliant minds. Imade case is the most frustrating because it seems like people rather fra him than bring their own mind to the table. Why? Because he knows more? So everyone should just serve as a vote battery? Even if you think this character wins as well why not tell it from your perspective... you might not envision the fight the same, and it shows you aren't ignorant. There are lazy fra, there are ignorant fra, and there are fra centered around vote differential. Not a single one of those are positive if you think about it.

Its an excuse to not exercise the mind in a vs site. Like come on now thats the point folks

That's only 3 things I can think of atm but like its a thread so more stuff can come to mind but those 3 things are big things
 
1. Why.

2. We do get rid of inactive staff, though the process is informal.

3. This has been discussed, I believe, and rejected.
 
Oh, I'm so, so sorry about being active and supporting VSBW, more so than most other people on this platform at this current time, as well as possibly being Sera 2.0. I will immediately go to Antvasima right away and request my immediate demotion as a sysop.

Is that what you want me to say? Because that is what you are proposing. As both Bambu and Agnaa has stated, when a community grows large enough, you need a larger pool of staff to help contribute to maintaining it. And each of us has our own purpose on the wiki, with our own specialties that help keep things in order, not just between content mods and thread mods for instance, but with individual members.

While it may seem narcissistic, I will use myself as an example. The only reason I was initially brought into staff was because I was helping to tend to versus threads that was being largely ignored by the staff at large, and so I was given the Content Mod role with the specific instruction to maintain this aspect of the community, and I still do this even now as a Sysop. Other people get promoted due to being knowledgeable over certain subjects, attention to detail, or even just plain good behavior, as you bluntly put it.

I feel like using Sera is a bit of an outlier, even if it has proven possible. Not everyone is just gonna pull a full Lulubuu and plant multiple profiles and identities for the lols.

Finally, I just don't think you realize that for the vast majority of people here, staff or otherwise, this is a recreational hobby. Something that we are doing for fun as a distraction. Like collecting stamps or speedrunning games. This isn't a full-on job for us, and most of us sure as heck aren't treating it as one except for the chad of a man that is Antvasima. And like with most hobbies, people get bored and can grow out of them. Heck, just look at the page of retired staff. There are a ton of people that used to be active here and contributed immensely, but now have moved on to other endeavors elsewhere.

I feel like you are trying to make this point about a bloated staff because it seems like our voices are the only ones that can be heard, but that is not at all true. There are plenty of blue names that get called in because they are far more knowledgeable on certain topics than anyone on staff, hence why we have our Knowledgeable Member Lists. It's like as Agnaa said, we are trying to go for accuracy above all else. If the staff are wrong, they either need to own up to their mistakes or face the consequences. If the blue names are wrong, then we tell them they are wrong, and we move on since being frankly wrong about a subject cannot really be punished. And this motion you are proposing is far from doing anything to make this community better.
The problem is it doesn't take that many staff when you think about it. If anything I say content mod is the only thing lacking. Because of how many pages this site has. There are alot of situations i read and think only one admin would of been enough. It could be a very simple ban, that literally only requires one admin to do the job. Never do i see a situation where I go more admins are definitely needed here. The only thing I can think of is a vote. And that's only because of the existence of staff only votes or threads in the first place.

As for discussing rules? Someone need to get banned? It really doesn't take 18 admins for any of that. It only seems like a lack of admins when you do admin only votes and they conveniently are doing something else at the time.

I mean what evaluations? Those seem to get ignored in general
 
1. Why.

2. We do get rid of inactive staff, though the process is informal.

3. This has been discussed, I believe, and rejected.
1. Because that many isn't needed. Especially if the mods in question are active. If you have like 20 inactive mods? Then yea it probably doesn't feel like you will ever have enough

2. Hmm alright

3. Really why? So does that mean it's forever a no? I don't really understand why thats important honestly

Anyway its 5 am sleepy Goodnight
 
Last edited:
1. Because that many isn't needed. Especially if the mods in question are active. If you have like 20 inactive mods? Then yea it probably doesn't feel like you will ever have enough

2. Hmm alright

3. Really why? So does that mean it's forever a no? I don't really understand why thats important honestly

Anyway its 5 am sleepy Goodnight
1. How can you possibly know how many are needed. The amount we need is unrelated to the amount of inactive mods. As I said- as the site grows, we need more staff to cover it. Admins can cover most issues, restricting the number of admins achieves literally nothing.

3. Probably. It is desperately important that decisions are at least somewhat lasting, to avoid creating even more workload (and, ironically, requiring more staff to cover said workload).
 
What Bambu, Agnaa, and Starter said is correct. The workload here for what needs to get done is immense, and most of our staff help out as a hobby, and some of them regularly retire, so we need to continuously fill up with more of them. We are being as discerning when recruiting them as is realistic under the circumstances.

We should close this thread.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top