FANDOM


  • Cokedragon
    Cokedragon closed this thread because:
    Closed.
    22:07, January 19, 2014

    Introduction

    For those unaware, recently, I (Cokedragon) suggested "Forum Admin/Op," a brand new user group consisting of members of the Ben 10 Planet community who can be trusted with overlooking these forums. For more on the base idea, see here.

    How It Will Work

    As discussed in the main thread, the forum operator is the forum's version of the default user group, the chat moderator/operator. These forum operators will be "regulars" on the forums who can be trusted to block those who spam and manage to vandalize on the forums. Alongside this, they will make sure all users of the forum are adhering to the forum policy while themselves being its adherents.

    Forum operators will be entrusted with the ability to close or remove threads when necessary as well as to edit and delete others' messages (where absolutely necessary, such as in the use of profanity or caps shouting). The ability to highlight threads will also be given for the cases in which highlighting is absolutely necessary (such as if said forum admin is moving a suggestion to its public voting stage).

    If allowed and the suggestion passed, I'd like to assist with getting the forum operators in place and doing their duties as well as aid in inviting/promoting them to their new positions. An admin as a head of the forum operator group is fitting, right? Plus, I've got a few ideas for people who might just be seeing an invitation if this suggestion goes through.

    What It's Come Down To

    With a majority vote in favor of this Topic of the Week being introduced to Ben 10 Planet, it comes down simply to you, the regular user, on deciding whether or not the Topic of the Week truly does become a a part of this wiki. All users are to vote in favor by replying below like so:
    {{Support|reason}} - For those who want Topic of the Week to happen.
    {{Neutral|reason}} - For those who are undecided or are indifferent; you are free to change your decision later (as are those supporting and opposing), but it has to be before we count votes.
    {{Oppose|reason}} - For those who are truly against Topic of the Week; you're who we're looking for to see what about Topic of the Week may not be fitting.


    The voting will close in two weeks, on August 15, 2013 at 0:00 UTC. This topic will be closed at that time. Also, no administrators or members of CotG are to vote in this stage. You are free to change your vote at any time before the topic closes, and you can also suggest additions here that are relevant to Topic of the Week that may make it even better.

    Let the voting commence!Happyface2

      Loading editor
    • Support Support — It's a great way to make users edit, and it seems fun.

        Loading editor
    • Cokedragon
      Cokedragon removed this reply because:
      Irrelevant
      19:57, August 2, 2013
      This reply has been removed
    • Cokedragon
      Cokedragon removed this reply because:
      Irrelevant
      19:57, August 2, 2013
      This reply has been removed
    • Cokedragon
      Cokedragon removed this reply because:
      Irrelevant/double-post
      19:57, August 2, 2013
      This reply has been removed
    • ....

        Loading editor
    •  Good Idea :D

        Loading editor
    • ...ok I'll admit I don't get what HALF of the stuff you guys put up their so cokedragon could you put it in a summary for me.

        Loading editor
    • Mysteryals wrote:
      ...ok I'll admit I don't get what HALF of the crap you guys put up their so cokedragon could you put it in a summary for me.

      Forum operators will be like admins for the forums only. They will (simply):

      • Make sure everyone's following the rules, warn those who are not, and block those who repeatedly offend.
      • Close threads (they'll still be visible, but no one can reply), delete threads, edit people's forum messages (only if necessary), and delete messages (such as if someone says something inappropriate), all if necessary.
      • Highlight threads (such as how this thread works where everyone is told about the thread in their notifications). Again, they'll do this only if necessary.

      They will have to follow the forum policy like everyone else.

        Loading editor
    • How do I do any of this?

        Loading editor
    • good idea

        Loading editor
    • What's a good idea?

        Loading editor
    • Cokedragon
      Cokedragon removed this reply because:
      Irrelevant (again).
      19:08, August 7, 2013
      This reply has been removed
    • List is Correct Choice My Admin Super Buddies

        Loading editor
    • Orion Invictus
      Orion Invictus removed this reply because:
      Off-topic
      20:43, August 7, 2013
      This reply has been removed
    • Oppose Oppose — Opppose, leaning towards neutral Considering that BTP has a history of creating new usergroups, it should be noted that there also has been redundancy at times. Seeing that there are a lot of admins already for this sizable wiki, there shouldn't be much need for an additional admin like group, for the forums. Also, I haven't seen much malicious activity in the forums for a new, whole group to monitor it. So, I don't think there really is a necessity for a new group where there aren't many suitable candidates for the user right.

        Loading editor
    • If any other members are truly in agreement or disagreement, please ues the respective templates from the main post ({{Support}} or {{Oppose}}) now, as this cannot end in a stalemate.

        Loading editor
    • Support, I guess.

        Loading editor
    • I think we've waited long enough. The idea has been approved. I'll contact Wikia soon.

        Loading editor
    • It's interesting that consensus is 2 supports to 1 oppose.  Sadly, you're looking at 1/3 of the voting being opposed to the idea.  So there isn't much consensus, even though support wins.

        Loading editor
    • PlasmaBot wrote:
      It's interesting that consensus is 2 supports to 1 oppose.  Sadly, you're looking at 1/3 of the voting being opposed to the idea.  So there isn't much consensus, even though support wins.

      I count 5 to 1. Not everyone came out and said "support", but some thought it was a good idea.

      Also, given that you barely edit here anymore, your vote is hardly representative of one third, or even one sixth, of the members of this wiki.

        Loading editor
    • While that's true, I'm still a member, and it's still a vote.  When you suggest a change to a wiki to staff, you really have to refer  to some public voting forum, which this is, if only a "good idea" is implied as a support, then why even have templates to show your support?  Seems like there's really only 3 official votes.

        Loading editor
    • PlasmaBot wrote:
      While that's true, I'm still a member, and it's still a vote.  When you suggest a change to a wiki to staff, you really have to refer  to some public voting forum, which this is, if only a "good idea" is implied as a support, then why even have templates to show your support?  Seems like there's really only 3 official votes.

      I count those who say it's a good idea as being "official" (as you call them) votes. As for the usage of templates, that's not necessary to show support. Just simpler.

      On the subject of votes: votes are meant to represent parts of the wiki's members; specifically those who visit most often, who are the ones that will be most influenced by these changes. While your vote is still a vote, it represents a minor fraction of the wiki; smaller than the total number of votes would indicate.

        Loading editor
    • I was just wondering, has anything happened with this?  Thanks.

        Loading editor
    • Not yet. I've been busy with real-life stuff.

        Loading editor
    • What kind of real life stuff?

        Loading editor
    • Mysteryals wrote:
      What kind of real life stuff?

      If I wanted to discuss it, I would've been less ambiguous.

        Loading editor
    • Don't worry just kidding.

        Loading editor
    • You know, there are other administrators and bureaucrats to sent out a request.  ;)

        Loading editor
    • PlasmaBot wrote:
      You know, there are other administrators and bureaucrats to sent out a request.  ;)

      They clearly do not wish to do so, or they would've done it already. That said, I would appreciate it if they did.

        Loading editor
    • Months later, and nothing's been done.

      The forum operator group will not be going into effect for the following reasons:

      • There aren't clear candidates for the position at the moment.
      • The group does not pose enough of a difference to, say, the CVU.
      • The group is not actually implementable, due to technical limitations, in a way that forum operators would be able to block users only from the forum.
        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.