Now that a second vote has confirmed the consensus in favor of setting up a Request for Moderator to select moderators, albeit by a fairly small margin, we have to decide what the requirements will be for someone to run for moderator.
Since there are a lot of options, I say we just bounce a few ideas around before actually having a vote. Some requirements we'll want to discuss are how long they've been active, their ban/block history, their activity level, number of edits, etc.
We need to vote, but I haz to write paper not forum. D:
Obi the LEGO Fan wrote: We need to vote, but I haz to write paper not forum. D:
Doesn't really need a vote. People have listed their ideas/suggestions and can continue to do so; we can just take all the supplied ideas and make a list of requirements that best combines those ideas and that people agree with. Vote not needed. :)
Bourgeoisie wrote:
Obi the LEGO Fan wrote: We need to vote, but I haz to write paper not forum. D:
Doesn't really need a vote. People have listed their ideas/suggestions and can continue to do so; we can just take all the supplied ideas and make a list of requirements that best combines those ideas and that people agree with. Vote not needed. :)
NO NO NO there wouldn't be enough community input we could never do that how could you even suggest such a thing we need as much input from everyone as possible the people would never trust a small group of users such as ourselves to make a decision like that without the whole thing ending in utter chaos what are we some kind of leaders with extra authority this is blasphemy
Is this really a vote forum? Not sure, haven't seen any votes yet... I second Meiko's suggestion near the top.
Because I know Alemas dreads linking to external wikis in regard to guidelines, processes, and ideas, here's one that's nice to take to mind (doesn't just apply to wikis, but really anything online): metawikimedia:Don't vote on everything
Voting for specific options will detract from people giving their own opinions and ideas and instead they'll just be voting yes or no. I'd prefer to see as many ideas as possible, and then find the best way to combine them to get the best parts out of each idea.
Voting for specific options will detract from people giving their own opinions and ideas and instead they'll just be voting yes or no. I'd prefer to see as many ideas as possible, and then find the best way to combine them to get the best parts out of each idea.
I feel bad now, because I should have read the opening post, instead of skimming through - I thought this was a vote :P Maybe instead of warnings like Meiko suggested, there could be a solid three months of good behavior - no kicks/bans. I haven't really seen warnings given before, although candidates for the moderator position shouldn't have received any warnings, recently, anyways.
Bourgeoisie wrote:
Those are just some basic ideas I have.
I am going to agree with Bourgeiosie on this one. A user that is familiar with policies and how to enforce them, is an active editor, and has not gotten any warnings recently are what I believe would make a good forum moderator. In my opinion, Wikia was better off without implementing this right, but I think that someone that could potentially become a rollback would be fit for this right - I couldn't see anyone that is solely focused on chat with this right.
Loney, I think the idea is to have a discussion and reach a consensus, as opposed to having an actual vote with "yeses" and "noes."
Based on consensus in this thread and in a chat discussion, I have set up LMBW:RFR/FM.
