5,988
pages
ALL POSTSAllow active CMs to decide bans in chat
<p>So recently there have been issues with users and ban lengths and administrators who haven't taken action. The moderators in chat on these occasions came to a different decision from the admin but were unable to put it into effect as a single admin basically overruled us.
What this vote would allow is all active CMs on chat to come to a unanimous decision on the banning of users. This would <i>not</i> overrule admin votes, but it would take multiple administrators to overturn a CM decision. For this to be put into effect it requires at least three active CMs in chat and all active CMs to reach the same decision.
</p><p>Should we allow CMs to come to a unanimous decision on ban time in chat?
</p><p>A) Yes: 24 Votes
</p><p>B) No:
</p><p>C) Neutral: 1 Vote
</p>
<h2><span class="mw-headline" id="Concensus">Concensus</span></h2>
<p>Yes, allow Chat Moderators to come to an agreement on chat bans.
</p>
(Edited by Veralann)
A.
(Edited by Sir Guurahk)
0
A
(Edited by Ked830)
<div style="font-family:courier new;">
<p>A. This is what mods are for. And requiring unanimity was a good way to go with this.
</p>
</div>
(Edited by LordWeirdo)
A. It's their job.
(Edited by T-007Bond)
A
(Edited by JMW wolfpack)
0
A.
(Edited by Peudguin)
0
<p>Can you clarify by what you mean by "<span style="font-weight:normal;line-height:22px;">This would </span><i>not</i><span style="font-weight:normal;line-height:22px;"> overrule admin votes," because if it's 1 admin vs 3 CM's: wouldn't the CM decision overrule the admin vote?</span>
</p><p><span style="font-weight:normal;line-height:22px;">(not that I would be opposed to this, I just want clarification by what you mean)</span>
</p><p>My only other note would be how to define an "active CM." My best guess would be a CM who is marked as active in the sidebar and who was involved/witnessed the situation..? What if a CM goes inactive for a minute? How much time is alotted for the CM's to "vote"? etc.
</p><p>I'll most likely be voting A, I just want to clear these things up first. So for now, C.
</p>
(Edited by Harold89)
0
<div class="quote">
<p>Harold89 wrote:
Can you clarify by what you mean by "<span style="font-weight:normal;line-height:22px;">This would </span><i>not</i><span style="font-weight:normal;line-height:22px;"> overrule admin votes," because if it's 1 admin vs 3 CM's: wouldn't the CM decision overrule the admin vote?</span>
</p><p><span style="font-weight:normal;line-height:22px;">(not that I would be opposed to this, I just want clarification by what you mean)</span>
</p><p>My only other note would be how to define an "active CM." My best guess would be a CM who is marked as active in the sidebar and who was involved/witnessed the situation..? What if a CM goes inactive for a minute? How much time is alotted for the CM's to "vote"? etc.
</p><p>I'll most likely be voting A, I just want to clear these things up first. So for now, C.
</p>
</div>
<p>Right, if it's a single administrator vs 3 or more CMs, there wouldn't really be an admin "vote" because it's one admin. If, say, there were two or more administrators in chat and they came to their own decision together, they could override a decision made by the CMs.
</p><p>Active CMs would mean CMs engaged in the situation at the time, actively modding and observing the entire thing. If a CM goes inactive for a minute or two that wouldn't really make much of a difference as long as they were still involved in the situation. And as for the vote, every CM defined as "active" would have to come to an agreement before anything could be done.
</p><p>I hope this helps 
</p><noscript>
</noscript>
</p><noscript></noscript>
(Edited by Veralann)
1
<div class="quote">HyperFlash Studios wrote:
<div class="quote"> <p>Harold89 wrote: Can you clarify by what you mean by "<span style="font-weight:normal;line-height:22px;">This would </span><i>not</i><span style="font-weight:normal;line-height:22px;"> overrule admin votes," because if it's 1 admin vs 3 CM's: wouldn't the CM decision overrule the admin vote?</span> </p><p><span style="font-weight:normal;line-height:22px;">(not that I would be opposed to this, I just want clarification by what you mean)</span> </p><p>My only other note would be how to define an "active CM." My best guess would be a CM who is marked as active in the sidebar and who was involved/witnessed the situation..? What if a CM goes inactive for a minute? How much time is alotted for the CM's to "vote"? etc. </p><p>I'll most likely be voting A, I just want to clear these things up first. So for now, C. </p> </div>Right, if it's a single administrator vs 3 or more CMs, there wouldn't really be an admin "vote" because it's one admin. If, say, there were two or more administrators in chat and they came to their own decision together, they could override a decision made by the CMs. <p>Active CMs would mean CMs engaged in the situation at the time, actively modding and observing the entire thing. If a CM goes inactive for a minute or two that wouldn't really make much of a difference as long as they were still involved in the situation. And as for the vote, every CM defined as "active" would have to come to an agreement before anything could be done. </p><p>I hope this helps</p><noscript></noscript>
</div>
<p>@the first thing: Ah yeah alrighty, thanks for clarifying. I assumed that.
</p><p>@the second: I should have clarified: I meant if an "active" CM goes inactive for a minute <i>during a CM "vote."</i> But then you cleared it up by saying <i>every </i>CM who was active in the chat situation would need to vote. I only ask because I would not be surprised in the future if a CM complains about how a decision was made without him/her because he/she were in the bathroom or something. :P But if they were "active" during the chat-situation, the other CMs are just going to have wait for him/her to get out of the bathroom so that he/she may vote. Am I right in this? I think so. Am I reading way too far into this? Also yes.
</p><p>A. :P
</p>
<div class="quote"> <p>Harold89 wrote: Can you clarify by what you mean by "<span style="font-weight:normal;line-height:22px;">This would </span><i>not</i><span style="font-weight:normal;line-height:22px;"> overrule admin votes," because if it's 1 admin vs 3 CM's: wouldn't the CM decision overrule the admin vote?</span> </p><p><span style="font-weight:normal;line-height:22px;">(not that I would be opposed to this, I just want clarification by what you mean)</span> </p><p>My only other note would be how to define an "active CM." My best guess would be a CM who is marked as active in the sidebar and who was involved/witnessed the situation..? What if a CM goes inactive for a minute? How much time is alotted for the CM's to "vote"? etc. </p><p>I'll most likely be voting A, I just want to clear these things up first. So for now, C. </p> </div>Right, if it's a single administrator vs 3 or more CMs, there wouldn't really be an admin "vote" because it's one admin. If, say, there were two or more administrators in chat and they came to their own decision together, they could override a decision made by the CMs. <p>Active CMs would mean CMs engaged in the situation at the time, actively modding and observing the entire thing. If a CM goes inactive for a minute or two that wouldn't really make much of a difference as long as they were still involved in the situation. And as for the vote, every CM defined as "active" would have to come to an agreement before anything could be done. </p><p>I hope this helps
</p><noscript></noscript>
</div>
<p>@the first thing: Ah yeah alrighty, thanks for clarifying. I assumed that.
</p><p>@the second: I should have clarified: I meant if an "active" CM goes inactive for a minute <i>during a CM "vote."</i> But then you cleared it up by saying <i>every </i>CM who was active in the chat situation would need to vote. I only ask because I would not be surprised in the future if a CM complains about how a decision was made without him/her because he/she were in the bathroom or something. :P But if they were "active" during the chat-situation, the other CMs are just going to have wait for him/her to get out of the bathroom so that he/she may vote. Am I right in this? I think so. Am I reading way too far into this? Also yes.
</p><p>A. :P
</p>
(Edited by Harold89)
1
<div class="quote">
<p>Harold89 wrote:
</p>
<div class="quote">HyperFlash Studios wrote:
<div class="quote"> <p>Harold89 wrote: Can you clarify by what you mean by "<span style="font-weight:normal;line-height:22px;">This would </span><i>not</i><span style="font-weight:normal;line-height:22px;"> overrule admin votes," because if it's 1 admin vs 3 CM's: wouldn't the CM decision overrule the admin vote?</span> </p><p><span style="font-weight:normal;line-height:22px;">(not that I would be opposed to this, I just want clarification by what you mean)</span> </p><p>My only other note would be how to define an "active CM." My best guess would be a CM who is marked as active in the sidebar and who was involved/witnessed the situation..? What if a CM goes inactive for a minute? How much time is alotted for the CM's to "vote"? etc. </p><p>I'll most likely be voting A, I just want to clear these things up first. So for now, C. </p> </div>Right, if it's a single administrator vs 3 or more CMs, there wouldn't really be an admin "vote" because it's one admin. If, say, there were two or more administrators in chat and they came to their own decision together, they could override a decision made by the CMs. <p>Active CMs would mean CMs engaged in the situation at the time, actively modding and observing the entire thing. If a CM goes inactive for a minute or two that wouldn't really make much of a difference as long as they were still involved in the situation. And as for the vote, every CM defined as "active" would have to come to an agreement before anything could be done. </p><p>I hope this helps</p><noscript></noscript>
</div>
<p>@the first thing: Ah yeah alrighty, thanks for clarifying. I assumed that.
</p><p>@the second: I should have clarified: I meant if an "active" CM goes inactive for a minute <i>during a CM "vote."</i> But then you cleared it up by saying <i>every </i>CM who was active in the chat situation would need to vote. I only ask because I would not be surprised in the future if a CM complains about how a decision was made without him/her because he/she were in the bathroom or something. :P But if they were "active" during the chat-situation, the other CMs are just going to have wait for him/her to get out of the bathroom so that he/she may vote. Am I right in this? I think so. Am I reading way too far into this? Also yes.
</p><p>A. :P
</p>
</div>
<p>@First thing: Ah, ok, glad I could clear that up :P
</p><p>@Second thing: Yes, you'd be correct in saying that. And maybe you are reading a little too far into it, idk :P
</p>
<div class="quote"> <p>Harold89 wrote: Can you clarify by what you mean by "<span style="font-weight:normal;line-height:22px;">This would </span><i>not</i><span style="font-weight:normal;line-height:22px;"> overrule admin votes," because if it's 1 admin vs 3 CM's: wouldn't the CM decision overrule the admin vote?</span> </p><p><span style="font-weight:normal;line-height:22px;">(not that I would be opposed to this, I just want clarification by what you mean)</span> </p><p>My only other note would be how to define an "active CM." My best guess would be a CM who is marked as active in the sidebar and who was involved/witnessed the situation..? What if a CM goes inactive for a minute? How much time is alotted for the CM's to "vote"? etc. </p><p>I'll most likely be voting A, I just want to clear these things up first. So for now, C. </p> </div>Right, if it's a single administrator vs 3 or more CMs, there wouldn't really be an admin "vote" because it's one admin. If, say, there were two or more administrators in chat and they came to their own decision together, they could override a decision made by the CMs. <p>Active CMs would mean CMs engaged in the situation at the time, actively modding and observing the entire thing. If a CM goes inactive for a minute or two that wouldn't really make much of a difference as long as they were still involved in the situation. And as for the vote, every CM defined as "active" would have to come to an agreement before anything could be done. </p><p>I hope this helps
</p><noscript></noscript>
</div>
<p>@the first thing: Ah yeah alrighty, thanks for clarifying. I assumed that.
</p><p>@the second: I should have clarified: I meant if an "active" CM goes inactive for a minute <i>during a CM "vote."</i> But then you cleared it up by saying <i>every </i>CM who was active in the chat situation would need to vote. I only ask because I would not be surprised in the future if a CM complains about how a decision was made without him/her because he/she were in the bathroom or something. :P But if they were "active" during the chat-situation, the other CMs are just going to have wait for him/her to get out of the bathroom so that he/she may vote. Am I right in this? I think so. Am I reading way too far into this? Also yes.
</p><p>A. :P
</p>
</div>
<p>@First thing: Ah, ok, glad I could clear that up :P
</p><p>@Second thing: Yes, you'd be correct in saying that. And maybe you are reading a little too far into it, idk :P
</p>
(Edited by Veralann)