Pending New 'Trusted' Rank

SquidgyBoat

SquidgyBoat

Member
VIP
Squidgy's Super Suggestion Saturdays - Trusted Rank

Hello all. I have a suggestion that I don't think most people will agree with initially, but let me explain.

On a rather large and successful server I played on many moons ago with a couple of you like Wink, they had a rank between Member and Mod called 'Trusted'.
It served mainly the same purpose as Trial Mod does here (to test potential mods), but with only mute/gag/kick powers.

The second purpose it served is why I'd like it here; regular players that can't or won't be a mod can still participate in making the server a better place.

Either they don't play enough or just don't want to deal with reports or bans, or they aren't ready to be a mod quite yet (failed Tmod but still want to help out).
Silly as it sounds, I honestly think giving some of our regulars that don't want to moderate more responsibility would make the community stronger.



Arguments for:

Helps reduce work load for mods. A lot of the time staff are dealing with reports, bans, and deathscenes. Trusted can handle smaller voice or chat things.
A lot of issues do not need a full report or ban. A quick mute or kick can stop something before it turns into a bigger situation.

Giving regular players a bit of responsibility helps them feel more invested in the server. People who feel trusted usually care more about keeping things in line.
It also means no training required. They'd basically be a trusted regular given some chat mod powers.

Gives more time to see how someone acts with powers, without the risk that comes with ban access.
Since the powers are limited, the risk is low. If someone makes a mistake or misuses the role, it is much easier to deal with than with a full staff position.



Arguments against:
"Jesus Christ Squidgy, just apply already."
No.

"It's open to abuse."
Hence the term 'Trusted.' If they break that trust be abusing the little power they have, demote and use it against future mod apps.

"We have enough mods, we don't really have an issue with low staffing."
Fair enough, but I have noticed some late nights or early mornings that I am on without staff.
Especially with EU server coming next week or so, this would help with any gaps in the times.

"The role is already filled by Advisor and Tmod."
Correct, but I don't think it would hurt adding another that catches those that aren't a former admin or planning to moderate.



Please ask me any clarifying questions or give me any arguments against I haven't thought of.
 
Upvote -3 Downvote
i do find that sometimes staff end up missing who said what in a full server, so i definitely see some use in a rank that can mute/gag. idk if kicking is necessary for that purpose though. +1
 
Now I'm not saying that there isn't merit to this, but I want to point out that we do not enforce any activity requirement for mods for the most part, as long as they're present to some degree within the community. In my eyes, there's very little practical difference between what you're describing and someone who applies for mod knowing that they'll only be able to help out here and there. But I do understand that my perspective is very biased.

Still though, my main critique of this is that this is significantly more difficult to monitor than any other staff position. By nature of not being trained, not being privy to staff announcements, and not being explicitly part of the staff hierarchy, trusted members would likely have very different applications of the rules from trusted member to trusted member. They would also primarily be using their powers when staff members are not online, so the people who would need to call out misuse of powers are people who are also not trained or privy to staff announcements. I am not concerned about trusted members abusing powers, because that's easy to spot and correct. I am concerned about trusted members missing the nuance we attempt to achieve while staffing. It's essentially a role that would (whether intentionally or not) utilize more discretion than mods while having less training and less oversight (albeit less scope and fewer powers). I'm not saying it couldn't work, but that sounds like a big headache for me.
 
This can work under one condition (and I feel like this addresses some of pigeon's issues):
It cannot be an automatically given rank, it has to be done under the review of at least an Admin or above to someone who is considered incredibly well-known and has had no bans of any kind (or if they had any that aren't considered bad enough, at least a year since their last ban)

Also as Elvis said, votekick only and anyone who has it must strictly adhere to the existing protocol for punishments and never attempt to go beyond it.
 
pigeon said:
I am concerned about trusted members missing the nuance we attempt to achieve while staffing. It's essentially a role that would (whether intentionally or not) utilize more discretion than mods while having less training and less oversight (albeit less scope and fewer powers). I'm not saying it couldn't work, but that sounds like a big headache for me.
Click to expand...
I see your points, especially about redundancy, only things I'll counter is the staffing nuance and the limited scope. I get wanting to have everyone on the same page, but the scope and powers granted are so limited that I don't see that being an issue. Spam and slurs are both pretty simple concepts, only thing we'd need to really train imo is if they are also capable of kicking mass RDMers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top