Inactive staff team
#81
Admins get about 80 @ calls every 10 Minutes, Imagine if there were one Admin/Mod on at that time? And they were on for even just an hour? Think about how many @ calls they get. They are doing this voluntarily, Everyone started off as a normal player, normal players are allowed to RP without disturbance, why are Admins any different, they are players aswell. They come on to play, not sit on a roof for 4 hours.

Fair enough if there is a prop pusher or mass spammer, which is stopping everyone to RP, but they should not have to answer every call because it is impossible. Do you expect them to answer to;
  "@ i was stuk and this 0 hour minge tazed and killed me'?
People should be informative as it says,
'@ Player <name> just started spamming huge props at <location>'
The following 1 user Likes Create's post:
  • Agorith
#82
(08-24-2016, 02:18 PM)Divey Wrote:
(08-24-2016, 02:00 PM)Random Wrote:
(08-24-2016, 01:55 PM)Agorith Wrote:
(08-24-2016, 01:12 PM)Eclipze Wrote: Alot of people are bringing up that admins should be allowed to RP and ignore @ calls but couldnt they just stop for the moment and actually answer that call but sadly stopping the RP for a few minutes, thats atleast what Lesanka did and apparently it worked fine.

Apparently it did NOT work fine as she resigned with the sole purpose of being able to RP without having to pause it CONSTANTLY.
If you think @ calls come trough only every 5 minutes you're horribly wrong, it'd be one thing if it were like that.

Yea. Admins shouldn't have to stop an RP to respond to an @ call, I can tell that'd be annoying..

Admins should do more admin "business" over RPing though. They should know what they say yes to, when they accept a spot in the staff team.
I don't start any roleplays if I am the only staff member on at that time. If I'm roleplaying and there is a clog of @ calls then I will usually deal with ones that are needed to be seeing to immediately, as I'm not going to do something small like changing someones car colour if I'm in a middle of a roleplay. Every staff member is different, but I think this is the general attitude most staff members have.

And that's great.. But sadly there are admins who would much rather RP all the time, but ones something happens regarding them, they will respond to it asap, not going to mention any names.

I personally feel like you, Divey are a great mod. Going to be honest with ya though, I didn't think you would do too well before you got promoted as I had rarely seen you in game. But I was wrong.

Now I wait for the asslick comments.

Edit: I wouldn't expect you to stop RPing to change the color of my car, theres mechanics for that.. Unless its a BMW of course.
[Image: CYCeH3i.png]
#83
(08-24-2016, 02:00 PM)Random Wrote:
(08-24-2016, 01:55 PM)Agorith Wrote:
(08-24-2016, 01:12 PM)Eclipze Wrote: Alot of people are bringing up that admins should be allowed to RP and ignore @ calls but couldnt they just stop for the moment and actually answer that call but sadly stopping the RP for a few minutes, thats atleast what Lesanka did and apparently it worked fine.

Apparently it did NOT work fine as she resigned with the sole purpose of being able to RP without having to pause it CONSTANTLY.
If you think @ calls come trough only every 5 minutes you're horribly wrong, it'd be one thing if it were like that.

Yea. Admins shouldn't have to stop an RP to respond to an @ call, I can tell that'd be annoying..

Admins should do more admin "business" over RPing though. They should know what they say yes to, when they accept a spot in the staff team.

I agree on that last part though.
Upon accepting the staff promotion offered to you, you're accepting to quite a few terms.

@ calls take priority over RP situations.
Minor @ calls such as requesting to get their car modified and all that get ignored by me personally whenever I'm RP'ing though as like mentioned it doesn't really require an administrator.
The following 1 user Likes Agorith's post:
  • Random
#84
(08-24-2016, 02:44 PM)Agorith Wrote:
(08-24-2016, 02:00 PM)Random Wrote:
(08-24-2016, 01:55 PM)Agorith Wrote:
(08-24-2016, 01:12 PM)Eclipze Wrote: -snipj

@ calls take priority over RP situations.
Minor @ calls such as requesting to get their car modified and all that get ignored by me personally whenever I'm RP'ing though as like mentioned it doesn't really require an administrator.
Yea. I mentioned that in ny last comment.
[Image: CYCeH3i.png]
#85
(08-24-2016, 03:20 PM)Immo Wrote: I love that previouse admins come along with their side of the story, pointing out some good stuff.
Its clear that there is some kind of problem, and we can discuss this for ages, admin defending themselves, players argueing for ages. This problem has been there for ages, as long as I remember.  Its time to find a solution.

So what do you propose?

It's clearly not an easy issue to fix as otherwise it would already have been taken care of.
#86
Demote inactive staff members, recruit some new ones, it's that simple
The following 2 users Like Greed^'s post:
  • Nadrickk, Arkten
#87
There's no real way to fix this to be honest.

Staff will be inactive for a month then what if the next month they play 150 hours then don't play again the month after?

It's easy enough saying things have to change but it's a hell of a lot more complicated than that. The only way it can change is if the inactive staff stand up and admit "You know what, I'm inactive and holding up this spot for no reason.. I should resign".

With the above it's not like they can never come back, if they are too inactive or lost interest, resign. If they then return in 3 months time with interest again, they can pursue interest in the position again, work their ass off to prove they are committed again and they can come back and do an even better job.

I mean look at Pear, he realised he had shit going on before and couldn't be hugely active so he resigned, but he came back and apart from his holiday he's been an active staff member.
The following 2 users Like Falc's post:
  • Arkten, Agorith
#88
Y'all only think about the actual demotion itself, not anything past that..

So they demote everyone inactive*?What then? There may not be anyone qualified to take the spot as a mod (or higher) at this moment of time..

Give this a moment, it will probably all play out OK.

Edit: Edited a bit where the * is.
[Image: CYCeH3i.png]
#89
(08-24-2016, 03:38 PM)Random Wrote: Y'all only think about the actual demotion itself, not anything past that..

So they demote everyone inactive*?What then? There may not be anyone qualified to take the spot as a mod (or higher) at this moment of time..

Give this a moment, it will probably all play out OK.

Edit: Edited a bit where the * is.

I can point out loads of people who "qualify", and even though they don't fit into what the staff team considers the perfect candidate, I am sure there's loads of people who would do a better job as a moderator than a lot of the current team does
The following 1 user Likes Greed^'s post:
  • Nadrickk
#90
(08-24-2016, 03:38 PM)Random Wrote: Y'all only think about the actual demotion itself, not anything past that..

So they demote everyone inactive*?What then? There may not be anyone qualified to take the spot as a mod (or higher) at this moment of time..

Give this a moment, it will probably all play out OK.

Edit: Edited a bit where the * is.

False. The demotion itself is irrelevant, its the fact that inactive staffmembers slow down Communications, UBR's & potential votes. There is literally no reason to keep a long term inactive staffmember in a community that wants to go forward.

I dont see how this will play out okay, since this has been a problem since i joined.


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)