PkHonor

There shouldn't be a big activity requirement but if you're hardly logging in then the rank should be removed completely...

I don't understand why you are waking up the dog from the dog house.

The helper team worked fantastically. They were all generally respected, nice, and helpful. They helped a lot and whenever anyone had a question it was pretty much answered. I've never heard anyone complain that our server isn't helpful enough towards new players. We don't need an Army of helpers and the dynamic of how people are promoted and their "duties" don't need changing. It worked great, no one really ever complained about it.

Focus on things players are actually complaining about. Not things that people aren't even thinking about because they are happy with it.

Kavlar wrote: I don't really understand either of your statements. So, you're basically saying, "Eh, let the current staff team do what they're doing, at least they're on for 30minutes a day". I don't really get what is getting lost in translation. It's common sense, demote those that are inactive promote those that are active. I don't get why this has to be some sort of popularity game where those that are the most popular get tenure and have the benefit of the doubt then those that are unknown are cast aside.

I'll be honest, the only Moderator I know In-Game is Toeh. You both are making it seem like it has to be more of a job and less of a game. 2-3 hours a day for a staff member that cycles between other members in specific timezones is ubiquitous. You currently have 1-2 on average staff members for 24 hour cycle for 230+ concurrent members. That's 115 people per person. Not to mention a plethora of Helpers; when it comes down to it, Helpers might as well be Staff Members since those are the only authoritative figures members can look towards if they need assistance.

Uh no, I'm saying that just because someone can spend more time in game, doesn't necessarily make them a better moderator than someone who can play less. And again, just because a person is active in-game, doesn't mean they want to be apart of the staff team or show the capabilities of being a potential staff member...

Kevlar wrote: I don't care if you have college and you're trying to better yourself. Mike is running a business and if you can't give him time to assist in that, why did you apply. No offence to anyone who's a staff member and has duties outside of this realm, but you giving the excuse "Sorry I can't be on all the time, college". Basically is a cop out when you knew your time was completely limited.

This basically implies you think only people with a full time/certain amount of free time should be given the chance of being moderator. Then they should be demoted if say they go on LOA for a week or more because of unforeseen circumstances. Just because you don't care, doesn't mean that others don't as well.

Azu rite wrote:There shouldn't be a big activity requirement but if you're hardly logging in then the rank should be removed completely...

^

I also get that you may wish to give people a "reward" for their ability and wanting to help out the players/server, but if they are truly wanting to help the server/players, wouldn't they just get enough satisfaction out of knowing they helped the players too? But then it also comes down to how can you get them noticed for their abilities to help people, to help relieve the workload for moderators. This is why I thought it was best to be kept as a trial status "job", and I think why people somewhat feel as if it goes hand in hand with becoming a trial member. Moderators help out too, as do helpers. There's no clear distinction apart from staff members having more responsibilities and abilities.

Loxy wrote: Uh no, I'm saying that just because someone can spend more time in game, doesn't necessarily make them a better moderator than someone who can play less. And again, just because a person is active in-game, doesn't mean they want to be apart of the staff team or show the capabilities of being a potential staff member...

This basically implies you think only people with a full time/certain amount of free time should be given the chance of being moderator. Then they should be demoted if say they go on LOA for a week or more because of unforeseen circumstances. Just because you don't care, doesn't mean that others don't as well.

Azu rite wrote:There shouldn't be a big activity requirement but if you're hardly logging in then the rank should be removed completely...

^ This is completely acceptable by your standards. As long as staff members login and help someone they're good for the rest of the day.
I would be embarrassed at the moment if I saw that a situation like this wasn't being attended to, who know how long this guy has been spamming for, 30minutes? 40minutes?
Eh as long as the staff shows they want to help people they're off the hook for their base responsibilities.

Please, do not give any suggestions for helping the staff team, because you clearly have no idea how a staff team should revolve, honestly.

You do realise that this about helpers and not moderators right?

I never said that the server wouldn't benefit from a few more staff members, only implied that there'd be a lack of potential staff members/applicants at best. And I never said that the activity wasn't an issue, only that high activity levels shouldn't be forced.

Kavlar wrote:

Loxy wrote: Uh no, I'm saying that just because someone can spend more time in game, doesn't necessarily make them a better moderator than someone who can play less. And again, just because a person is active in-game, doesn't mean they want to be apart of the staff team or show the capabilities of being a potential staff member...

This basically implies you think only people with a full time/certain amount of free time should be given the chance of being moderator. Then they should be demoted if say they go on LOA for a week or more because of unforeseen circumstances. Just because you don't care, doesn't mean that others don't as well.

Azu rite wrote:There shouldn't be a big activity requirement but if you're hardly logging in then the rank should be removed completely...

^ This is completely acceptable by your standards. As long as staff members login and help someone they're good for the rest of the day.
I would be embarrassed at the moment if I saw that a situation like this wasn't being attended to, who know how long this guy has been spamming for, 30minutes? 40minutes?
Eh as long as the staff shows they want to help people they're off the hook for their base responsibilities.

Please, do not give any suggestions for helping the staff team, because you clearly have no idea how a staff team should revolve, honestly.

I have yet to see you give a solution or suggestion to help with the current issue? All I've read is you rambling on about how helpers are supposed to be considered as a "trial" in a sense. Helpers are given the spot because they want to give back to the server and it littlerly requires nothing extra that they don't already do? If a helper wants to be a mod, apply for mod then and deny the helper rank. It's pretty simple. As for your last post, there can't be a 100% staff coverage Because stuff comes up(emergencies,meetings,phone calls,whatever) or real life obligations take priority. We currently only have 4 mods and 2 admins(plus Billy) for 24h worth of coverage and they work their ass off for what in return? Nothing but self satisfaction and/or to do degraded/dragged down by some members of the community that have nothing better to do then complain about something stupid. Most are the same time zone as well And it's not like we can magicly have all times covered.

So Please, do not give any suggestions for helping the staff team, because you clearly have no idea how a staff team should revolve, honestly.

Maybe it's just because I have a higher standard in terms of what constitutes Moderator material, but I've never viewed the Helper rank as being a step towards the Moderator rank. Quite frankly, I don't understand that perspective.

They fulfil completely different functions, though a good Moderator will encompass all that is the Helper rank as well. More importantly, they require completely different qualities. A Moderator is - or should be - so much more.

Amount wrote:Maybe it's just because I have a higher standard in terms of what constitutes Moderator material, but I've never viewed the Helper rank as being a step towards the Moderator rank. Quite frankly, I don't understand that perspective.

They fulfil completely different functions, though a good Moderator will encompass all that is the Helper rank as well. More importantly, they require completely different qualities. A Moderator is - or should be - so much more.

History of people applying for mod and getting helper instead, of being helper for 2-3 months and being promoted to mod. Was much more common under Maurits, though.

stupid. helpers help. activity should be required simply because they have a rank. if you play once a week, and are helpful, you don't need a rank. just do what you want to do..

if we were promoting every average joe we would have 100+ helpers online and 50 players. that's fucking retarded.

"hey welcome to pkh! just pm one of our helpers if you have any questions!" "ok, holy shit here 100 people with helper rank"

"rank" means nothing if anyone can have it. yeah it's not staff, but it takes time and effort to achieve. the guy that started last month that's active on yell doesn't necessarily deserve it more than a 2 year vet, who's helped more than enough for the rank in his time played.