Quite frankly, I've noticed a couple of GAG mods who are consistently unstable, stir up drama, and generally do not seem mentally equipped to responsibly handle GAG mod duties. This is what sparked this question. What do you think? Why or why not?
Yes, I think GAG members should do a review on the mods.
56% (9)67% (12)62% (21)Vote
No, I do not think GAG members should do a review on the mods.
Fuck yes! Because it is also written in the manual that :- "Now that you have been selected as a Moderator, we ask that you behave in a manner that best represents GirlsAskGuys. While lively debate and honest opinions are encouraged, we ask that you refrain from sarcastic or rude comments that may cause distrust amongst the community. Please do not respond publicly to rude/offensive behavior with retaliation; rather, report and/or hide their posts. Comments such as, “I am a mod and will remove your comments if I disapprove,” are discouraged. Similar activity that creates distrust or implies abuse of your Moderator powers can result in dissolving your Moderator status. We encourage our Moderation team to advise others of the site rules when necessary/applicable, but please do not engage in arguments regarding site moderation. Please feel free to direct them to “Contact”."
But still there are a lot of sarcastic dicks controlling mod power. I think admins are helpless. They don't have quality users who'd take enough time in reporting so, they just choose them based on their regularity and report success ratio ONLY!
Even tho I'm mod, I vote A ___________________________________________________
PS: Not just mods, but they should check the decision making abilities of admins too. I noticed that admins reinstated my reports again and they're not even replying me. I'm heavily pissed off by such noobs. So, this time I'm gonna reveal it :- #1. "You are a horrible person" (Isn't it antagonistic?) #2. "All women are perverts" (Isn't it offensive?) ___________________________________________________ The guidelines of this site SUX BIG!
There are two types of mod reviews. - The system reviews the report/hide success ratio of all the mods and prepares daily reports. If a mod's success ratio falls below a certaing % that mod is taken into review by admins. This also applies to inactive mods. Mod inactivity will result in mod status removal. The system also calculates the removal rates of the mod's posts too. If mod has bunch of his/her posts removed, then his/her profile comes to mod review queue. - Another assesment is done manually by admins. Mods who may ve giving false information about the site, the rules, antagonizing other users, abuse mod power are either being warned or their mod status is revoked immediately. So, quantitative and qualitative mod assesment is being conducted, not by users but by admins and the system.
I believe the primary indicator of a moderator's success is their report success ratio. Second is the quantity of said successful reports on a regular basis. Then comes showing example by not being generally antagonizing and thus showing a proper example to the people on the website, while also being helpful to the community. And of course, preferably don't abuse your power; just because you disagree with someone's views, that doesn't mean it actually violates the guidelines.
The difference between drama and a debate is the amount of maturity used to handle the argument, preferably by stating your viewpoint without antagonizing the opposing side. We are just people with differing opinions, after all. No point in calling each other names; that won't change anyone's mind.
I was under impression admin would constantly review mods as Menguc confirms and user feedback probably forms part of that so if you have an issue with a mod report them to admin. http://www.girlsaskguys.com/contact
I can only speak for myself here, but I was invited to join the Mod team; I did not ask for, nor did I apply for it. I was promoted to SuperMod after about 10 months and was just recently promoted to UberMod. Both times, it was offered to me without a prior request.
The point here is that yes, you could have reviews of the Mod Team, but the admins are watching who does what. That's just my two cents :-)
The admins should. It'd be nice if they could critique us say at the end of the month about the accuracy of our hides and reports. I just started, so maybe they already do this and I just don't know about it.
I don't think that it would be fair to leave a mod's abilities to retain their mod position in the power of other users. The fact that some mod's are 'consistently unstable, stir up drama, and generally do not seem mentally equipped to responsibly handle GAG mod duties' is a subjective statement. Just because you might not like someone's antics in no way means other's dislike it as well, or that their mod-status should be revoked.
If their activities are actually antagonistic or offensive in any way, admins will take care of that. Users are also not able to see or 'review' a mod's actions as an actual mod, so their handling of mod duties is independent from how they interact with the GaG community.
What makes regular users more stable than mods, though? Like, what makes them stable enough to decide whether a mod is stable? Admins, if anything, should be the only ones doing reviews. Which they probably DO.