Mod's Rules?

I'm not using my "unhappiness" - I have many valid points yet the staff fail to understand them.

 

Talking about this part, you made it seem like were untouchable as long as the admins dont notice.

 

sorry, I meant the admins were pleased when the rules were followed and by that tried to hint that the mods also need to follow the rules. sorry for the misunderstanding.

 

To be honest with you, what you just did was "unacceptable"...

You shouldn't call out specific users just because you aren't happy with them, what you should've have done was privately message us regarding your concerns.

 

calling out specific users is perfectly fine, I actually ask my friends to call me out when I do things that are wrong or misunderstood.
as to pm'ing I'd prefer to be told misunderstandings at public so I could fix them.

 

The moderators calling specific users out in public because they aren't happy with us could be considered public shaming... which I'm pretty sure is against the rules?

 

nothing against public shaming, we all need it from time to time.
if done repetitively it can probably be classified under forum rule #10 harassment. altho im not a mod so I wouldn't take my word for it.

 

This thread went terrible in an instant.

This is a very interesting question. And it's very obvious this is unclear because Wynncraft is ulterior about it.

Here's the definition by Google—Which google also supplies with a use of the word to fortify how we use nouns!—How kind of them:

So, there you go. That is a moderator, a mediator, who seeks for rules to not be broken.

Though, to be frank. Is that how a moderator is here in Wynncraft? I would say yes, but they're also way more than that.

To begin with, the staff team, since the beginning, since I joined, the word always was that if you wanted to join, that it was a good idea to become friends with the current staff members. I always thought that was a fallacy to conceal the fact that what they truly want is people who have similar opinions, not find people that coalesce together at work—since the staff team is divided in sections, anyway. And it's obvious to see that it is a fallacy, when supposedly mods are hired and allowed to "have their own judgement", as it says on the rules thread, but if all people have the same judgement, it's not really as free as it appears, and specially when moderators such as Snowing are demoted for their opinions, when moderators are hired for those opinions (not defending Snowing, however, just stating how it would fit according to the logic Wynn provides us with, as well as giving a small notice saying Snowing's ban was unfair, but anyway).

There is a lot which I've always doubted, specially when it comes to hearsay from truthful sources. A lot of the reasons I hear, from very reliable people, on how Grian chooses moderators, are incompetent.

But, anyway, just my thoughts, because I do think the definition of "Moderator" deludes how circumstances are in Wynncraft.

For you both:

Ganny: Nobody asked you to be prideful. If you're going to answer as a moderator, answer as one. If you're going to answer as a person, answer as one as well, but do not mix both. If who you are and what you do are not congruent, why are you here?

IntSerErr: Due to the fact Ganny was prideful, I would consider it public shaming. But is that bad? It can do wrong, but I think what's more worse is that Ganny took words out of your mouth. Which, it's obvious that that is an offense.

 

I realise Snowing got demoted recently, but I figured (like other mods recently) she just got demoted for inactivity (can't confirm ingame, but I haven't really seen her around. Then again, I haven't been the most 'around'). Did she really get demoted for her opinion?

 

It may be due to other reasons, however, the demotion was incited by a report regarding her controversial opinions.

Also, may I add. The report which demoted Snowing was mostly due to Snowing "airing laundry", yet I got a copy of the report right away lol.

 

It was not entirely due to the report. Three days ago a riot of sorts occurred, pertaining to Grian not having made a decision on demoting snowing, and it got very nasty. To avoid any further altercations of a similar nature, moderators pressed him to make his decision.

I would also like to say that the report sent was not the ideal report, however the reportee's goal was accomplished.

 

The moment people stop nagging Grian like he was some sort of dad, the moment most of these altercations wouldn't even happen. Grian may be the ultimate authority, but his children are definitely rowdy, ultimately Grian choosing what pleases both sides, not what is correct. And the moment Grian stops doing that, the moment most of these altercations wouldn't be valid as well.

I mean, if the report was trash, does the reportee's goal matter?

 

Its just a stop hackers and spambots job. Theres not much to it

________________________________

Uhhh i still dont get mod points, and they follow the same rules as normal players...and other set guidelines

 

Are the "Set Guidelines" private? Or could you give a few examples?

 

Welp, A perfectly normal question has turned into a flame war. RIP.

 

Happens.

 

1. Dont leak shit
2. Dont abuse powers

 

Figured as much, haha.

 

unless you're Snowballing in the backyard

 

1. Don't tp people into prisons instead of banning them

2. Use common sense

3. Be active

(Pretty sure rule 1 is common sense but now we have to highlight it)