Make the staff LOA thread public! by Acceqted February 13, 2017 at 7:02 PM UTC
With this feature, public players will not have to worry about who's inactive and who's on leave because there's an actual thread for it. Make it so they do not have a reason to take an LOA, therefore the privacy is containable. If seniors need to know what the LOA is for, they can just PM the certain staff member through a private platform. This will really help show the players who's on leave!Discuss
Myworld6 February 13, 2017 at 8:02 PM UTC
-1.If staff members don't know why someone isn't coming on, it could be taken advantage of.
profbananaslug February 13, 2017 at 8:02 PM UTC
-1.
If staff members don't know why someone isn't coming on, it could be taken advantage of.
Spartemex February 13, 2017 at 8:02 PM UTC
DaGoldBrick and 
Xuph please stay on topic.OP: I like this idea. It improves transparency.
Acceqted February 13, 2017 at 8:02 PM UTC
-1.
If staff members don't know why someone isn't coming on, it could be taken advantage of.
Spartemex February 13, 2017 at 8:02 PM UTC
uh what
Myworld6 February 13, 2017 at 8:02 PM UTC
profbananaslug and 
Acceqted: If a mod doesn't need to provide a reason for going on a LOA, they can't be punished if they take several of them because it could be something serious. Ergo, it would be too easy to abuse the system. Sorry about the confusing post, I'm half asleep.
BoldAndBrash February 13, 2017 at 9:02 PM UTC
When admins decided to do this last time, players would type up messages and responses on the thread, which would be pretty annoying. I'll only agree with this if it's made so only staff members can type on it.Walt February 13, 2017 at 10:02 PM UTC
-1 nope nope nopeprofbananaslug February 13, 2017 at 10:02 PM UTC
god forbid anyone comes up with a half-decent reason not to have thisMyworld6 February 13, 2017 at 11:02 PM UTC
god forbid anyone comes up with a half-decent reason not to have this
profbananaslug February 13, 2017 at 11:02 PM UTC
'If a mod doesn't need to provide a reason for going on a LOA, they can't be punished if they take several of them because it could be something serious. Ergo, it would be too easy to abuse the system. Sorry about the confusing post, I'm half asleep.'
Myworld6 February 14, 2017 at 12:02 AM UTC
'half-decent'
GrapeSmoothie February 14, 2017 at 12:02 AM UTC
god forbid anyone comes up with a half-decent reason not to have this
profbananaslug February 14, 2017 at 12:02 AM UTC
There is no reason to attempt to argue this point. We tried doing this once before and the community showed that they can't handle the privilege of it so it got taken away. Point blank period.
or perhaps someone can simply make a thread, lock it, and edit the OP with whoever is on leave when needed
profbananaslug February 14, 2017 at 12:02 AM UTC
Then explain how it's not a good enough reason.
Myworld6 February 14, 2017 at 12:02 AM UTC
oh i think i've misunderstood the situation just a bit. i was under the impression that they would make a thread and tell people who's gone, but now i realize that the staff actually have a super secret thread where they post about those leaves of absence and discuss them or whatever. i really don't care about whatever dumb staff banter is going on there, so it can stay private for all i care. what i just want is a place (possibly a thread) where they can tell us who is on """"leave""""" so i don't have to go around accusing staff members of being """"inactive""""" only to find out they're on """"leave"""""""".
GrapeSmoothie February 14, 2017 at 1:02 AM UTC
so it's impossible to make a thread that only staff can post in? is the technology simply not there yet?
or perhaps someone can simply make a thread, lock it, and edit the OP with whoever is on leave when needed
TooSweetSki February 14, 2017 at 1:02 AM UTC
I suggested this last week and nothing came of it.I'll ask the Seniors if we can make an official public LOA thread.
_DISTRACTION_ February 14, 2017 at 1:02 AM UTC
I don't see the point in this. It seems like unnecessary work for the seniors to maintain a leave-of-absence thread, since it's not exactly vital for the community to know who's on break and who isn't.dev_revs February 14, 2017 at 1:02 AM UTC
why not just lock the threads? holy hell you guys make it seem like its our fault when you can just simply make it so we cannot commentprofbananaslug February 14, 2017 at 1:02 AM UTC
I don't see the point in this. It seems like unnecessary work for the seniors to maintain a leave-of-absence thread, since it's not exactly vital for the community to know who's on break and who isn't.
in fact, if everyone on the staff team is too busy to do this, i volunteer to make and maintain the thread. just e-mail me about breaks at [email protected] and i'll go ahead and make a thread. i don't really care about the reason (although include it if you want to seem more legit) and i'll go ahead and make a thread.
ytilauxesomoh February 14, 2017 at 1:02 AM UTC
Who cares avicus's player base is so small they could have 3 mods_DISTRACTION_ February 14, 2017 at 2:02 AM UTC
what else are the seniors so busy with, gee whiz. they got like ~20 mods under them to do all the actual moderating so shouldn't they have plenty of time to take care of the little quality-of-life things like this?
in fact, if everyone on the staff team is too busy to do this, i volunteer to make and maintain the thread. just e-mail me about breaks at [email protected] and i'll go ahead and make a thread. i don't really care about the reason (although include it if you want to seem more legit) and i'll go ahead and make a thread.
profbananaslug February 14, 2017 at 2:02 AM UTC
That doesn't change the fact that the community simply doesn't need this information. What difference does it make, whether or not somebody is on leave?
_DISTRACTION_ February 14, 2017 at 2:02 AM UTC
well obviously if they are on leave then they aren't moderating lol
It still doesn't change the fact that the community doesn't really need to know who is on leave, and who isn't.
profbananaslug February 14, 2017 at 2:02 AM UTC
Yes, as you said, that is obvious.
It still doesn't change the fact that the community doesn't really need to know who is on leave, and who isn't.
_DISTRACTION_ February 14, 2017 at 2:02 AM UTC
why don't they need to know? what do you have to hide? how much of the staff is REALLY on leave?
Why would they? I have yet to see a good reason.
What do you have to hide?
I have nothing to hide. As
AtditC would be glad to tell you, I'm not the most active person on the server. Does it really matter, though? I don't think so.How much of the staff is REALLY on leave?
A very small amount of staff are on leave at the moment, if any are. Leaves are most commonly taken during periods of final exams in school, and now is not such a time.
Acceqted February 14, 2017 at 2:02 AM UTC
The reason I want this to be avaiable is because a while ago I made a report again about 5 staff members, the response I got back was "All these staff members are on leave" after checking with another mod they could confirm about 2 of those staff members weren't on leave. And just make it so community members can't post._DISTRACTION_ February 14, 2017 at 2:02 AM UTC
The reason I want this to be avaiable is because a while ago I made a report again about 5 staff members, the response I got back was "All these staff members are on leave" after checking with another mod they could confirm about 2 of those staff members weren't on leave. And just make it so community members can't post.
shadowolfyt February 14, 2017 at 2:02 AM UTC
I'm a bit undecided on this, to sum it all up I from Snows thread
Posighdun said something helpful:"As long as it just says the mods name, no reason for inactivity or things like that"
"lets make a list of mods who will be on LOA and the community will be able to see it"
profbananaslug February 14, 2017 at 3:02 AM UTC
What would even change? If you are currently able to ask a moderator whether or not somebody is on leave, that gives you the same level of information that a public leave thread would. I still don't see a good reason to have a public thread.
_DISTRACTION_ February 14, 2017 at 3:02 AM UTC
yeah but this way we won't have to take up as much of the moderator's or god forbid, the senior's valuable time
profbananaslug February 14, 2017 at 3:02 AM UTC
Why are you taking that time up in the first place? Since when have staff leaves become a pressing issue that concerns the entire community?
_DISTRACTION_ February 14, 2017 at 3:02 AM UTC
since hackers started running wild because of the lack of staff which started making people wonder why the hell people who hadn't been on for two months were still on the staff team
Crazy_ February 14, 2017 at 3:02 AM UTC
What would even change? If you are currently able to ask a moderator whether or not somebody is on leave, that gives you the same level of information that a public leave thread would. I still don't see a good reason to have a public thread.
Just not everyone has a mod friend to ask....too bad there's not a public thread with all this info that people can just ask for normally.
profbananaslug February 14, 2017 at 3:02 AM UTC
So... How would knowing whether or not they are on leave help anybody? Having inactive moderators would not prevent more moderators from being promoted.
also even if having inactive moderators doesn't prevent more mods from being promoted, why keep them around? it's like letting an employee who doesn't come in anymore keep the keys to the building, and they can come in and steal a bunch of little debbies or torch the whole place whenever they feel and that's gonna take some time to sort out
it's kind've strange how vehemently you are against this... could it be that there IS a pattern to the leaves of absence that you're trying to conceal? i mean, there doesn't seem to be any argument against publicizing leaves of absence other than "lol u dont need it", so why not? unless you have something to hide, of course...
_DISTRACTION_ February 14, 2017 at 3:02 AM UTC
I mean, you basically just said it, this is info people can get anyways.
Just not everyone has a mod friend to ask....too bad there's not a public thread with all this info that people can just ask for normally.
However, since you and the rest of the senior staff would be the ones actually affected by this, you should decide whether or not the extra time spent on a public thread would be worth it.
_DISTRACTION_ February 14, 2017 at 4:02 AM UTC
'cause then we know that their absence has been acknowledged/approved by the staff and we can see if there is a systematic pattern of absences that could be ascribed to some kind of plot
also even if having inactive moderators doesn't prevent more mods from being promoted, why keep them around? it's like letting an employee who doesn't come in anymore keep the keys to the building, and they can come in and steal a bunch of little debbies or torch the whole place whenever they feel and that's gonna take some time to sort out
it's kind've strange how vehemently you are against this... could it be that there IS a pattern to the leaves of absence that you're trying to conceal? i mean, there doesn't seem to be any argument against publicizing leaves of absence other than "lol u dont need it", so why not? unless you have something to hide, of course...
2) That's up to the senior staff team, and not to the community.
3) By the looks of it, this idea is probably going to be implemented. The community will be no better off; it will simply be a time sink for the senior staff. I think it's unnecessary, which is what I've been saying in my responses to this thread.
profbananaslug February 14, 2017 at 4:02 AM UTC
1) So? It's not as if you need to know that.
2) That's up to the senior staff team, and not to the community.
3) By the looks of it, this idea is probably going to be implemented. The community will be no better off; it will simply be a time sink for the senior staff. I think it's unnecessary, which is what I've been saying in my responses to this thread.
wonder what the senior staff could do with the 5-10 minutes they save by not making an LOA thread? bring back prestiges? make a new anticheat?
anyways i can't wait to analyze all the data
_DISTRACTION_ February 14, 2017 at 4:02 AM UTC
looks like the good guys win again.
wonder what the senior staff could do with the 5-10 minutes they save by not making an LOA thread? bring back prestiges? make a new anticheat?
anyways i can't wait to analyze all the data
What else do you have? Simply their last join date, and their pvp encounters.
What can you deduce from what you have?
- Whether staff members have taken a leave since their last join date.
- Whether or not staff members are good at pvp.
I'll remind you of what you don't have access to:
- Staff members' activity patterns.
- Staff members' average time played per week.
- Staff members' average time played per month.
- Overall patterns of when staff are online.
- Anything else that could possibly be useful.
profbananaslug February 14, 2017 at 4:02 AM UTC
The data you would gain access to have is on which days certain staff members were on leave of absence.
What else do you have? Simply their last join date, and their pvp encounters.
What can you deduce from what you have?This must be amazing, since everybody is clamoring to have access to the data.
- Whether staff members have taken a leave since their last join date.
- Whether or not staff members are good at pvp.
I'll remind you of what you don't have access to:But well, I guess you are going to come up with spectacular deductions of whether or not staff members have created a leave of absence for their brief absence. I'm looking forward to them.
- Staff members' activity patterns.
- Staff members' average time played per week.
- Staff members' average time played per month.
- Overall patterns of when staff are online.
- Anything else that could possibly be useful.
_DISTRACTION_ February 14, 2017 at 4:02 AM UTC
hey, don't be forgetting about the punishments list now. this "console" guy seems to really be picking up a lot of the slack recently
profbananaslug February 14, 2017 at 4:02 AM UTC
You cannot base activity information on punishments. It happens quite often that there are multiple staff members online, and either some of them take most of the punishments, or there are simply barely any rule-breakers during the staff member's online time.
_DISTRACTION_ February 14, 2017 at 4:02 AM UTC
wouldn't it be great to have at least one staff member on all the time instead of like 5 at the same time?
profbananaslug February 14, 2017 at 5:02 AM UTC
Yes, that would be great. It doesn't help your point, though.
TooSweetSki February 14, 2017 at 5:02 AM UTC
wouldn't it be great to have at least one staff member on all the time instead of like 5 at the same time?
#NewZealandsolomoderatingcarrying2am-4amEST
#snowcarries
woo!!
profbananaslug February 14, 2017 at 5:02 AM UTC
Hey you described me 90% of the time while I moderate.
#NewZealandsolomoderatingcarrying2am-4amEST
#snowcarries
woo!!
TooSweetSki February 14, 2017 at 5:02 AM UTC
but wait aren't you on leave? or is that over already??? wouldn't it be great to know quickly and easily???
Having a public LOA thread would be quite beneficial for everyone.
It would erase the confusion (for the community) between people who are inactive and people who are genuinely on leave.
I will personally create and maintain the thread if the seniors give it the green light.
profbananaslug February 14, 2017 at 5:02 AM UTC
I agree.
Having a public LOA thread would be quite beneficial for everyone.
It would erase the confusion (for the community) between people who are inactive and people who are genuinely on leave.
I will personally create and maintain the thread if the seniors give it the green light.
PokerFace February 14, 2017 at 9:02 AM UTC
'cause then we know that their absence has been acknowledged/approved by the staff and we can see if there is a systematic pattern of absences that could be ascribed to some kind of plot
also even if having inactive moderators doesn't prevent more mods from being promoted, why keep them around? it's like letting an employee who doesn't come in anymore keep the keys to the building, and they can come in and steal a bunch of little debbies or torch the whole place whenever they feel and that's gonna take some time to sort out
it's kind've strange how vehemently you are against this... could it be that there IS a pattern to the leaves of absence that you're trying to conceal? i mean, there doesn't seem to be any argument against publicizing leaves of absence other than "lol u dont need it", so why not? unless you have something to hide, of course...
Would it be better that I retire and punish 0
players a week, or stay in the team and take care of 5 a week? Some is better than none. That's why I hate to see fellow moderators retire due to inactivity, it they still hop on 2x a week, it won't negate the staff team, all it can do is put a small positive effect.
In fact, for any retired staff members reading this, I encourage you to talk to a senior about returning to the staff team, even if you can only come on 2x a week. Any amount of help can help.
Aphelion February 14, 2017 at 11:02 AM UTC
When admins decided to do this last time, players would type up messages and responses on the thread, which would be pretty annoying. I'll only agree with this if it's made so only staff members can type on it.
| Staff Member | Group | LOA |
|---|---|---|
| keenanjt | Admin | Yes |
| Posighdun | Admin | No |
| PieZ | Senior | Yes |
| Crazy_ | Senior | No |
| Resepignev | Moderator | Yes |
Crazy_ February 14, 2017 at 1:02 PM UTC
As I said before, there isn't a true need for the community to have this.
However, since you and the rest of the senior staff would be the ones actually affected by this, you should decide whether or not the extra time spent on a public thread would be worth it.
Iron February 14, 2017 at 1:02 PM UTC
We have tried this before, didn't work. There is no need for mods to make their whereabouts public, seeing as how immature this community is it would be exploited.kon333 February 14, 2017 at 1:02 PM UTC
We have tried this before, didn't work. There is no need for mods to make their whereabouts public, seeing as how immature this community is it would be exploited.
profbananaslug February 14, 2017 at 3:02 PM UTC
We have tried this before, didn't work. There is no need for mods to make their whereabouts public, seeing as how immature this community is it would be exploited.
_DISTRACTION_ February 14, 2017 at 3:02 PM UTC
I mean, writing a post on a forum thread doesn't take too much time. Here I am making a post on this thread.
Iron February 14, 2017 at 4:02 PM UTC
it's not like they're putting a gps on the mods and having their location publically available on the forums, it's just "oh so-and-so is on leave for the next two weeks". not sure how you'd exploit that but if you can come up with a way feel free to share it instead of just saying that people will exploot it.
As a former staff member, I can say that most people that post their LOA's wouldn't want them public. Most of them are relatively private matters. Moreover, if you wanna make them public you'd have to get every staff to agree. I certainly wouldn't have wanted people reading about things that I LOA'd for seeing as that some were pretty personal.
"but if you can come up with a way feel free to share it instead of just saying that people will exploot it." First of all spell exploit right, then I have the right to make whatever point I fucking want. I have been staff for almost 2 years, I have seen literally everything. This has happened in the past for this specific reason. You know what happened? It got abused and taken down after 2 weeks or so.
resepignev February 14, 2017 at 5:02 PM UTC
I completely agree with iron!profbananaslug February 14, 2017 at 7:02 PM UTC
I dont really see the need, people are people. They will always use things to their own benefit. IE; so and so keeps on posting in LOA's demote them! So and so's personal reasons are funny, HAHAHAHA!
As a former staff member, I can say that most people that post their LOA's wouldn't want them public. Most of them are relatively private matters. Moreover, if you wanna make them public you'd have to get every staff to agree. I certainly wouldn't have wanted people reading about things that I LOA'd for seeing as that some were pretty personal.
"but if you can come up with a way feel free to share it instead of just saying that people will exploot it." First of all spell exploit right, then I have the right to make whatever point I fucking want. I have been staff for almost 2 years, I have seen literally everything. This has happened in the past for this specific reason. You know what happened? It got abused and taken down after 2 weeks or so.
staff dude: that guy
leave duration: 2/17/17-2/17/18
i would love to see how you think this can be exploited, since you've seen """""everything"""", but yet again you dodged the question. are you at a loss? is it impossible to exploit?
also good job attacking my spelling instead of my arguments, sadly i had to turn off autocorrect because it would always make everything all caps for some reason
Iron February 14, 2017 at 7:02 PM UTC
gee whiz you seem to have totally missed the part where i never said that there had to be reasons along with the leave of absence. the ONLY information that should be provided in the public thread should be the staff member's name and the duration of the leave, which negates basically all you said. here's an example of the info that i want provided in a public LOA thread:
staff dude: that guy
leave duration: 2/17/17-2/17/18
i would love to see how you think this can be exploited, since you've seen """""everything"""", but yet again you dodged the question. are you at a loss? is it impossible to exploit?
also good job attacking my spelling instead of my arguments, sadly i had to turn off autocorrect because it would always make everything all caps for some reason
2) First off, you can fuck right off. Read my response "They will always use things to their own benefit. IE; so and so keeps on posting in LOA's demote them! So and so's personal reasons are funny, HAHAHAHA! " There you go, I answered your question. My dear friend, are you incapable of reading whats presented in front of you?
3) I attack your spelling because I can and we are on the internet. I addressed all of your arguments it just seems you are incapable of reading what I wrote.
profbananaslug February 14, 2017 at 7:02 PM UTC
1) Thats not how staff LOA's work. You list what parts of the server you cant access, the duration of your leave, and then the reason. Giving reason as to why you cant come on is the most important part of the process. By making a public LOA thread you get rid of the private one. Hence, why removing the reasoning wont work. Having two documents is counter productive and would get very cluttered very fast.
2) First off, you can fuck right off. Read my response "They will always use things to their own benefit. IE; so and so keeps on posting in LOA's demote them! So and so's personal reasons are funny, HAHAHAHA! " There you go, I answered your question. My dear friend, are you incapable of reading whats presented in front of you?
3) I attack your spelling because I can and we are on the internet. I addressed all of your arguments it just seems you are incapable of reading what I wrote.
so to summarize:
*two threads
*one has staff posting their leaves and reasons (staff only)
*one just has a list of who's on leave (maintained by one or more staff members)
as to your answer to the "exploits" question only addresses a situation with one public leave of absence thread, not the LOA thread solution i'm trying to advocate
also, would it be possible to be more condescending lol
Iron February 14, 2017 at 7:02 PM UTC
i still don't think you understand. there's a private LOA thread where the staff post about their leaves and absences and whatnot, and then there's a public thread (locked and stickied) that'll have a big 'ol table with staff names and the durations of their leaves which'll be edited as the need be by whoever maintains the thread (and that snow guy already volunteered)
so to summarize:
*two threads
*one has staff posting their leaves and reasons (staff only)
*one just has a list of who's on leave (maintained by one or more staff members)
as to your answer to the "exploits" question only addresses a situation with one public leave of absence thread, not the LOA thread solution i'm trying to advocate
also, would it be possible to be more condescending lol
I literally JUST said, managing two documents is a pain in the ass. Snow is also just sucking up, as he is trying to get senior. In the event that this did happen it would not be managed by a mod, a senior would. However, that wouldn't happen because having two documents is not productive or manageable.
You asked for exploits I gave you one, I responded to your suggestion by telling you why its wrong. Your document would not work as reasoning is very important. Not to mention (like I have done so many times) having more than one document would be stupid. Therefore, I gave you exploits for a viable solution not one that is unlikely.
And yes, I could be way more condescending.
TheTNTPotato February 14, 2017 at 8:02 PM UTC
I suggested this last week and nothing came of it.
I'll ask the Seniors if we can make an official public LOA thread.
@OP: In the past, one of the reasons as to why having the LOA thread went public then was private again is because non-staff kept posting their LOAs onto the thread. Of course, some of the LOAs were jokes, but plenty of people took it as a public LOA for all players rather than staff. This can easily be avoided by simply locking the thread then allowing staff to edit in their LOAs into the OP so that all of the information is compiled into one post rather than several posts/pages. Aphelion had the same idea, and I don't see any problems with that whatsoever. Some people do believe that the information can be used by players with malicious intent to do various things (what those things are is unknown to me), but that is something that can be sorted out behind-the-scenes. At the very least, the pros definitely outweigh the cons.
profbananaslug February 14, 2017 at 8:02 PM UTC
I don't think you understand.
I literally JUST said, managing two documents is a pain in the ass. Snow is also just sucking up, as he is trying to get senior. In the event that this did happen it would not be managed by a mod, a senior would. However, that wouldn't happen because having two documents is not productive or manageable.
You asked for exploits I gave you one, I responded to your suggestion by telling you why its wrong. Your document would not work as reasoning is very important. Not to mention (like I have done so many times) having more than one document would be stupid. Therefore, I gave you exploits for a viable solution not one that is unlikely.
And yes, I could be way more condescending.
dev_revs February 14, 2017 at 8:02 PM UTC
It isn't rocket science. Just make a post, only staff can edit and update it whenever, it can't be easier. That post where you congratulate new staff is just obnoxiously messy.
Staff Member Group LOA keenanjt Admin Yes Posighdun Admin No PieZ Senior Yes Crazy_ Senior No Resepignev Moderator Yes
Iron See? we wouldn't need to know the reason, that can stay private, just who's on leave.
TooSweetSki February 14, 2017 at 8:02 PM UTC
I don't think you understand.
I literally JUST said, managing two documents is a pain in the ass. Snow is also just sucking up, as he is trying to get senior. In the event that this did happen it would not be managed by a mod, a senior would. However, that wouldn't happen because having two documents is not productive or manageable.
You asked for exploits I gave you one, I responded to your suggestion by telling you why its wrong. Your document would not work as reasoning is very important. Not to mention (like I have done so many times) having more than one document would be stupid. Therefore, I gave you exploits for a viable solution not one that is unlikely.
And yes, I could be way more condescending.
and it's not like maintaining one thread is difficult xD
Acceqted February 14, 2017 at 9:02 PM UTC
Did you guys not read my original post, I clearly stated there needs to be no reason and seniors can privately contact the staff member fin needed.AtditC February 15, 2017 at 5:02 PM UTC
Why don't they need to know?
Why would they? I have yet to see a good reason.
What do you have to hide?
I have nothing to hide. As
How much of the staff is REALLY on leave?
A very small amount of staff are on leave at the moment, if any are. Leaves are most commonly taken during periods of final exams in school, and now is not such a time.
AtditC February 15, 2017 at 7:02 PM UTC
-1.
If staff members don't know why someone isn't coming on, it could be taken advantage of.
Myworld6 February 15, 2017 at 7:02 PM UTC
what... uh
TooSweetSki February 16, 2017 at 2:02 AM UTC
They wouldn't need to provide a reason for leave on the public LOA thread.Whereas the do need to provide a reason on the private LOA thread.
PieZ February 16, 2017 at 3:02 AM UTC
The last time the admins did something like this some random started posting onto it and it was annoying to deal with. If we are doing something, (I believe the admins are/might do something) we are not doing what happened last time and actually having a full plan on it.felipu_feliu February 16, 2017 at 3:02 AM UTC
whats LOATooSweetSki February 16, 2017 at 3:02 AM UTC
whats LOA