Atelier 801
Transformice 
 EN/E2 Staff Feedback |
 Inkzooka  « Censeur » 1578077340000
| 0 | ||
Barberserk a dit : This thread is only for giving criticism about official EN/E2 staff (mods, sentinels, mapcrew). Other players with special permissions such as Funcorp or the Module Team are not official Atelier801 staff. |
Inkzooka
Profil
Derniers messages
Tribu| 2 | ||
| Agreed with what everyone said about inactive mods. They should be let-go for being inactive for a certain period of time. Having over 30 mods and rarely ever see more than 2 mods online is just a little pathetic. |
Mousey  « Citoyen » 1578083460000
| 16 | ||
| I'm sure I'm considered an inactive mod. There is definitely some truth to that statement when regarding the public's eye. However, I am one of the more active mods with almost daily log-ins (I did take a two week break to play Stardew Valley, but then the Christmas event started, so I'm back), so I would like to share my point of view as to why I keep a public alt account. A public account allows me to speak with the voice of "authority" when replying to comments on the forum. So I'm not just a mouse, I'm a yellow-named mouse. It allows players to come to me via the forum to ask questions. I, like many other inactive mods, check the forums very frequently. It allows players to appeal directly to me. There is no need for a middle man. That can be a nuisance at times, having to contact a private mod and wait for their reply, then reply back to the original player, etc. With a public account, players have direct contact with me which speeds up the process. Also sometimes I am helpful on Discord with giving roles, answering questions, sending users to the proper mod to appeal. My views/reasons do not apply to all the inactive mods, but I know several keep public accounts to better communicate when necessary. I do think the majority of the team will definitely agree with the need to clean up the moderation team and we'll be discussing that. The other takeaway I want to stress is that all staff positions are VOLUNTEER POSITIONS. We volunteer however much or little time we see fit. No one is being paid, therefore no one should have to be completely available for every whim of the community. We are players first, staff second. Sometimes that means disabling whispers. |
Mousey| 3 | ||
Mousey a dit : it's like you're all accepting people that can fit in 2 hours every year lol sorry but , the 20+ inactive mods shouldn't be in the team. but no, 90% of you are biased and wont do anything to help that problem.it's getting fucking stupid when alot of the mods are often on discord (not everyone has discord) but never in game. Dernière modification le 1578086880000 |
| Inkzooka « Censeur » 1578092040000
| 9 | ||
Camila_cabello a dit : Discord is an entity completely separate from Transformice. A lot of staff use Discord for other reasons other than being in the official Transformice server and being a moderator. You can be online using Discord on your phone and not be available to log into Transformice. Mods can also be online on Discord on their computers and choosing to play other games instead or even just wanting to chat with other players for fun. Mousey covered this above pretty well: Mousey a dit : |
Sikeque  « Citoyen » 1578096120000
| 12 | ||
| Although they may just be volunteer positions, it’s something that should be taken seriously not just to have the “authority” among other players. There are plenty of people who are legible for the positions and are willing to contribute twice the amount of effort some of the current mods are putting right now on assisting the community in game and everywhere else (not just lurking through forum/discord), but they aren’t given a chance because there can only be so many mods in the staff team. Eliminating inactive mods or the ones who just simply don’t do much is a start. No bummer, there shouldn’t be any hard feelings because everyone who signed for it should know what they got themselves into. Dernière modification le 1578096300000 |
Delirium  « Censeur » 1578099660000
| 5 | ||
| In response to some other people’s posts, I personally haven’t seen any current EN/EN2 moderators who are in it just because they want the power and yellow color to their name! That being said, I’ve seen multiple posts now emphasizing that the moderator position is 100% a volunteer position, and it’s understandable that life gets in the way, sometimes out of random or sometimes with reason (sickness, jobs, vacations, etc.) Dealing with our community is probably a little hectic sometimes as well so breaks are also understandable. Respectively speaking, I think it’s important to make sure that when someone is stepping up to volunteer that they need to be (somewhat) dedicated and willing to put some full hours into the job (which I’m fairly certain the majority of you have at some points in time), and when they’re incapable they should be willing to step away for someone who can. Most mods are welcome back once they take a break, perhaps when a mod is inactive (maybe settle on a certain time period that will determine when a mod is labeled away/inactive) someone can step up to take their missing position. I don’t see a problem with having too many yellows, we could always use them! |
Charlen  « Censeur » 1578102240000
| 9 | ||
| If you know anyone who might be a good fit for any staff position, I urge you to encourage them to apply whenever apps are open (which is roughly once every six months for the in-game moderation team). Finding new suitable candidates is actually a lot harder than one would imagine; yes, we have a lot of active players, however most have shown qualities that make us sure that they wouldnt be a good fit for any staff position. Hiring someone who is extremely active, but don’t know the rules well would cause a lot more damage than hiring someone who may be less active, but more suitable for the position. There is no limit to how many mods we can have in our staff team, so that wouldnt decrease nor increase ones chances when applying whatsoever. With that being said, as Tachi already mentioned - we’ve seen your feedback regarding the amount if seemingly inactive mods in our team, and we’re looking into changing this soon. Theres no reason to keep bringing the inactivity issue up again unless anyone has additional suggestions or ideas related to it. We know where you guys stand. :) |
Froggy  « Censeur » 1578112200000
| 1 | ||
| In my opinion, a room should be fully moderated without a moderator when there is no moderators in EN/E2 online or any moderators on whatsoever. There are many dramas around Transformice especially where I used to play in vanilla1 E2 and none of the moderators aren't handling the situation for this type of chat. For example if one has to say a racism word or insult another member, they get carried away easily and we have to report for this type of reason. Otherwise the room would just be more toxiciting. There are plenty of people who hacks around Transformice, they also get carried away when nothing is going on. On the night of January 3rd, I saw 3 people hacking. THREE!!!!!! The moderation system can definitely be improved with this type of situation because if something is wrong, something is wrong. |
Lullabye  « Citoyen » 1578119640000
| 19 | ||
| I just have a small suggestion for those who are Moderators and Sentinels. You know how when you have to ban or mute someone, you have to put some sort of reason, right? Well, how about you put, in parenthesis, what your username is. For example, if Mousey were to ban someone in-game for hacking, they'd put "Hack. If you have any concerns, contact Mousey#0010". Or, to make it simpler, they could put "Hack. (Moderator: Mousey#0010)" Some communities, such as the Brazilian community, actually do this. I think it'd be a lot easier and much less of a hassle. The subforums won't be as flooded with "I was banned!" or "I got muted!" and asking who banned them and whatnot, same goes with Staff FAQ. It's also much less of a hassle for those who are trying to find who put a sanction on their account, and spend hours doing so. It could also give the Moderators an easier time when it comes to not only trying to contact the Moderator who placed a sanction on the person's account, but also redirecting the person to said Moderator. Sometimes, by the time someone is able to contact the Moderator that banned them, or even find out who it was, the ban may be about done, even with 360 hour bans. Sometimes, the ban that occurred could've also been a simple misunderstanding that could've been dealt and done with, but instead it was prolonged due to the lack of knowing. That's all I have to say, I think everyone else covered everything else that needed to be said. |
Bobbyxsoxer  « Consul » 1578135060000
| 8 | ||
| My suggestion perhaps is when going through applications I noticed no one lets an applicant know they didnt move on in the process applicants just have to get the hint after 3 months of no replies, but I figure y'all have various stages when going through applications yes? I think itd be beneficial for applicants who make it past certain "stages", but who did not make the ultimate cut to receive a personalized reply with feedback as to why they didnt make the final cut. It could encourage them to re-apply in the future and adjust accordingly! I know applicants can ask a mod/senti why they were rejected, but usually there isnt a clear explanation like "You just werent a good fit". Idk if yall do stages or if theres just too many cuts at the end to send feedback, but I think it would be nice! Also, it would be nice when y'all are updating when a new mod joins if yall could put what the application period they are joining from because i see a few new mods who join but arent from the most recent application cycle. It would also give players a general timeline from when that person originally applied and how long it averaged for them to actually be a full-fledged member! Thanks for listening to our feedback Reply from Charlen Charlen a dit : Thank you for the reply! Dernière modification le 1578362220000 |
| Dawn 1578138780000
| | ||
| [Modéré par Inkzooka, raison : Please follow the rules of the thread. Keep your feedback constructive, "mods are biased" is not constructive.] |
Retrouvaille  « Citoyen » 1578219000000
| 11 | ||
| I would like to add my two cents, both as a really old player that from time to time logs in, and as somedoby that was involved to some extent into "staff stuff" if you don't mind. As far as I can tell most of the staff is extremely pleasant to deal with, I've befriended many of them in the past and I can totally relate to many of their "small issues" about having to silence whispers because it is really overwhelming and such, when i tried to contact them about a report most of the time I received a reply, I think mostly because there's ways to ask for support, and many players use the rude way and do not get a reply Somebody stated that "if you're friend with a mod or soulmate or tribemate it is easier to get into staff". I'll tell you that is not true, otherwise I would've been a mod since long time, and I tried applying more than once failing miserably. Here come my "rant" if I'm telling too much, feel free to delete or edit this part, but I'd kindly ask the staff to leave the rest of my post.In case any mods would like to discuss this into dept without having both me or them to publicly share information about the training process, and to share feedbacks on the matter please do contact me in private. My only real "bias" has always been the way arbs have been handled by A801. I can understand that arbs are trainee and have limited powers, that is totally reasonable. Having arbs to stay secret for long time is not the best IMHO, because as long as time passes they gain no sense of responsability for their reports, expecially when it comes to important bans, this because they report something and when it comes to chat related bans the mods that actually perform the ban have to "trust" the report from the arb without having the actual opportunity to really double check. I've received "important" bans from arbs (this was confirmed by the mods I appealed to, I still have the PM's in my inbox) based absolutely on nothing, and when I followed the appeal procedure the mods that banned me simply replied "We received a report from an arb, eat your ban" without even bothering tring to understand what was going onnor investigating on a killing sprre of ban in a specific server, that was involving most of the said server playerbase. I wont say this led to an abuse of this mechanic from a few staff members but it actually did, my ban history kinds speak for itself. Without really taking the long road, I simply ask you to reconsider having arbs as public after a short nesting time, because part of having "power" is obviously being able to take responsabilities for your actions.This is something that I do every single day, I'm responsible of 30 workers and I always have to be held responsible for everything, since the day I completed my training, and this is the way it should work. Hiding behind a public staff member will never allow arbs to do that, simply because if they ever make a mistake this will be handled as "your word against mine". Leading to having them not really taking any responsability. CIAO Dernière modification le 1578219120000 |
| Error_404 1578263400000
| | ||
| [Modéré par Charlen, raison : Please make your feedback constructive. Thank you for the kind words, though! <3] |
| 0 | ||
| mods ARE biased, and should stop being biased by an actual admin look at the mods they've chosen to hire for 2 minutes and see if 5/7 of them are connected to the mods . there, that's contructive |
| 8 | ||
Camila_cabello a dit : You are not wrong but over the past years admins who portrayed the role of EN Community Manager looked the other way and now there is no EN CMM to even look the other way. Which brings me back to my suggestion, hide usernames on posted applications. Most of you don't exclude yourself from voting when it comes to your friend applying, as I said before, most of the **good** applicants get rejected for stupid or petty reasons while your friends get looked the other way. Reasons I have heard my friends getting rejected before "Youre not active enough" ......... 90% of EN moderators are in-active and you judge players activity? "Youre immature" Dude this is a game about mice, chill lmao. I think these two are good enough examples. Good luck w future candidates |
| 17 | ||
| All staff that gets hired become official representatives for A801 and we need to be convinced they can act the part, of course joking around is fine, we all do it, but we need to know potential candidates won’t take it too far. And this also makes hiding the applicants’ usernames impossible, if we don’t know who they are, how can we check on their ingame behaviour and sanctions? “Mods only hire friends” no we don’t, we judge all applicants by the same criteria. I’m not gonna lie and say knowing staff members can’t have benefits, if we know the person well we can make a final decision fairly quickly, be it good or bad (just because someone’s friends with a mod doesn’t mean their behaviour would fit a staff position, we reject friends too). But at the end of the day, and the end of the application process, everyone will have been looked at the same way and judgement is based on what we see during this time or know from before. |
| Bobbyxsoxer « Consul » 1578360060000
| 1 | ||
Jealy a dit : Quick question - You judge based on present and past actions, but how long do you hold an applicants past against them? Do y'all take into account if theyve had any recent sanctions since then? Or do you say well it's only been 1 year I doubt they have changed or whats your thought process on that? Do you give the benefit of the doubt or just base it on previous sanctions and the time between then and now? Applications arent always the best way to tell if someone is fit to be on a team because theres only so much you can say on paper and if you say too much or too little its seen negatively. So perhaps this maybe isnt feedback, but it does tie back into my original suggestion ! Add on - being friends with an applicant as a staff member isnt anyones fault, but maybe to attempt to prevent bias the staff member could just exempt themself from voting? Difficult to say because it could be the applicant is friends with a lot of staff so I'm not sure how its possible to prevent bias without also harming an applicants chances just bc theyre friends with staff. But you cant say theyre all looked at the same way as with other non friend applicants you said it yourself the application gets stream lined because you know that applicant. It may not be intentional, but its not looked at the same entirely. Dernière modification le 1578360600000 |
| Charlen « Censeur » 1578360660000
| 25 | ||
Lullabye a dit : While your suggestion is quite good, it is near impossible to follow through on. A big portion of the EN team are private moderators, and majority of private staff has no public account that we can refer players to. Giving players the names of private mods would defeat the purpose of having private staff. Some of the ban reasons are also automatic messages which we can't personalize. That being said, it is something the Sentinel team could consider. While I personally don't see the big purpose of it (most are sanctioned by the sentinel that locked their topic/moderated their comment), we'll definitely take it into consideration if its something the community wants. Bobbyxsoxer a dit : We've actually thought about doing this in the past; unfortunately sending personalized replies to all applicants would be extremely time consuming, since theres so many players applying. This is why we ask players to message us instead. With that being said, we'll look into the possibilities of being more specific (reason-wise/"stage"-wise) when talking to rejected applicants. Bobbyxsoxer a dit : In all honesty, I very rarely remember what application period x mod was hired from when they've made it to public mod. As Lostchicken already mentioned earlier, training could vary everywhere from 3 months to 18 months. Camila_cabello a dit : King a dit : All accepted applicants have to be approved by the admins themselves. I can recall cases where a successful applicant ended up not being hired cause an admin did not approve of them. Meli has the final say in all hires. Theres no secret that we look at an applicants in-game behaviour and past ban/mute history, so trying to hide their name would be near impossible. I've had about fifteen friends applying to join the Staff team while I've been part of it, and I can only recall voting on one of them. I know for a fact that its also the case with other mods in our team. As Jealy already mentioned, being friends with staff could easily backfire as well; a mod could know you well enough to know that you're not a fit for our team. I have already replied to the feedback on seemingly inactive EN mods and I kindly ask you to not mention it again unless you have any suggestions or ideas related to that specific subject. It is pretty self explanatory that we look for active players when hiring new staff. Sure, some applicants happens to be friends with staff, however denying them simply for being friends with staff would be a sore reason to reject someone. You mention stupid or petty reasons for being rejected, but I think the one I just mentioned would be the pettiest of them all. Believe it or not, but when we tell an applicant that they're immature, it means its our apprehension of them. It is a guideline for what you should improve on if you'd like to get accepted into the staff team. Prove us wrong. If an applicant gets a reply like the ones you just mentioned, and immediately jumps to the gun by refusing to believe that they might be a tad immature, then it just further strengthens our reasoning. Mature behaviour is actually one of the listed requirements when applying for staff. If you cannot accept that as one of the requirements, then you're not who we're looking for. |
| Inkzooka « Censeur » 1578362460000
| 6 | ||
Lullabye a dit : I'm very interested in this for the Sentinel team. I'll go ahead and bring this up to the rest of the team for a discussion about potentially implementing this into how we sanction in the future. Thank you for your suggestion! |