Boycott McM

[Cal]

There seems to be a gap in understanding between how an average user views what a suggestion is, and how staff view it.

Or, you know, make a suggestion or support request?
If there is something you think should be fixed that is something that is for the whole team, a suggestion is a right place to do it.
If it is something like you believe a staff member is abusing their power, state it in a support request.

If you want to make MCM better, go about it the right way, not making threads where the goal of it is just to spew hate.
A good example of a suggestion that was well-intentioned, in my opinion, was the suggestion thread(s) saying that reputation moderators should be added.
Examples of bad suggestions include "promote x" "demote x"

I run into this problem all the time in Student Government, a fairly applicable metaphor if you ask me. Recently, a kid came in saying "The audio in the quad sucks, you should fix it." The audio teams response broiled down to "Well if you have any specific suggestions to fix it let us know" and the problem fizzled out.

I think MCM is having a similar problem right now.
The staff team (spoken for by Kram), want specific solutions in suggestions. Things that are fully fledged out and solved.
A typical user views suggestions as a way to state problems with the site, IE: staff not being on the same page about various issues.

Suggestions often don't go anywhere because what a user thinks is a valid suggestion (a problem with the site that should be fixed), and the staff team thinks a valid suggestion is (a solution to a problem with the site) are not in agreement. So the problem isn't addressed because the interpretation of staff is that the suggestion is incomplete, and the users are unhappy because the suggestion they interpret to be valid and complete is not being addressed.

I suggest action is taken to make the purpose of the suggestions board more clear. Neither way to use the forum is necessarily wrong, as long as everyone is agreement as to how it should be used.

I also suggest staff stop putting pressure on the general user base to solve the sites problems. To be frank, the average user of this forum doesn't know what a derivative is, they simply aren't on a level where they can solve complex and layered management issues. The staff team should have the best sense of the product they are trying to deliver, and how best to do that. The general user only has a grasp on the problem, and how to solve it based on a limited understanding of how the staff team functions. They can't solve all the problems working on half the information.

oh really? ok 2018 member

honey, no.

 

[Cal]

pls tell that to the man who joined in 2018 saying lets go back to the olden days or whatever he said

boi you from 2017.

 

[Joshua C]

The fact is, the staff team needs to be fast in scam report.
OPEN THEIR EYES WHEN HANDLING WARNINGS!!@!@#!
Giving a restrict SR tag doesn't do SHIT when you're slow

 

[Hitoo]

okay, but am I the one who said let's go back to the old days? nope.

You just said it.

 

[Joshua C]

That rep dispute shit, and the rep getting 100s to 0 needs to be taken down! what else ? its simple you need to listen to the people at times.

 

[kayn]

this went from a joke to a legit debate.... wheres my popcorn

 

[Kram]

There seems to be a gap in understanding between how an average user views what a suggestion is, and how staff view it.

I run into this problem all the time in Student Government, a fairly applicable metaphor if you ask me. Recently, a kid came in saying "The audio in the quad sucks, you should fix it." The audio teams response broiled down to "Well if you have any specific suggestions to fix it let us know" and the problem fizzled out.

I think MCM is having a similar problem right now.
The staff team (spoken for by Kram), want specific solutions in suggestions. Things that are fully fledged out and solved.
A typical user views suggestions as a way to state problems with the site, IE: staff not being on the same page about various issues.

Suggestions often don't go anywhere because what a user thinks is a valid suggestion (a problem with the site that should be fixed), and the staff team thinks a valid suggestion is (a solution to a problem with the site) are not in agreement. So the problem isn't addressed because the interpretation of staff is that the suggestion is incomplete, and the users are unhappy because the suggestion they interpret to be valid and complete is not being addressed.

I suggest action is taken to make the purpose of the suggestions board more clear. Neither way to use the forum is necessarily wrong, as long as everyone is agreement as to how it should be used.

I also suggest staff stop putting pressure on the general user base to solve the sites problems. To be frank, the average user of this forum doesn't know what a derivative is, they simply aren't on a level where they can solve complex and layered management issues. The staff team should have the best sense of the product they are trying to deliver, and how best to do that. The general user only has a grasp on the problem, and how to solve it based on a limited understanding of how the staff team functions. They can't solve all the problems working on half the information.


honey, no.

I really didn’t mean to put pressure on the community. If someone just wants to use MCM for their needs and not involve themselves in suggestions or reports, I can understand that and I won’t try to convince people who just don’t want to do something like that. I also didn’t mean to speak for the staff team as a whole but rather my opinion that comes from being a staff member.

What I do want to say though is that if you care about MCM enough to want to see change and take the time to make threads in general, if a little more effort can be put in into a thread but in the suggestions section, that’d be something that brings change. General discussion threads don’t help the community nor the team generally.

 

[Mick]

Transparency is and almost always has been a large issue throughout the time that I have managed the site. It is something that I'm always thinking about and considering, but I don't actually know what it is that users would like the staff team to be more open and transparent about. I feel like I am at a stage where it has been so long since I was a regular user (over four years now) that I'm out of touch with what users expect from me with transparency.

Behind the scenes there is always work being done with bug fixes, announcement planning, custom development, discussions, debates, and so much more. For example, over this past month, I have been focused a lot on preparing documentation for custom development and organising that all a lot better with Justis. I've also been looking into expanding our developer team, and we now have Lyphiard developing for us on a case-by-case basis to get our development backlog down a little bit more and release updates more for you all. We're looking to also get another developer or two so that we can improve the site as quickly as our users would like. My question for you is do you care to hear about these behind-the-scenes changes? What sort of information would you like to receive from me, and how would you like to receive it? I want to be the best administrator I can be for you all.

In saying that, I feel like users need to be more understanding and accepting of the decisions that the staff team makes, especially in terms of rule enforcement. We are fairly strict about our enforcement of rules and I don't intend on changing that. We are a marketplace first, and if you are not able to abide by our rules then you do not have a place dealing in our market, and if there are any particular rules you feel need to be amended then all suggestions made are reviewed. Tonight I plan to go through all of our pending suggestions to deny ones we're no longer going ahead with, accept suggestions we have already implemented and give an update if there are any suggestions we are still planning to implement soon.

I don't try to manage the site poorly, and I apologise for the times that I have. If you have any feedback about anything I have said or any issues I've missed, let me know and I'll respond.

 

[iojafwiojiuawhd]

atleast buy my accounts before u start boycotting!

 

[Red]

Or at least for someone to be appointed and paid a liveable wage to manage the site.

This is the best and truest fix, IMO and also the thing most worth reading in this thread. This is also quite literally impossible.

 

[kayn]

Transparency is and almost always has been a large issue throughout the time that I have managed the site. It is something that I'm always thinking about and considering, but I don't actually know what it is that users would like the staff team to be more open and transparent about. I feel like I am at a stage where it has been so long since I was a regular user (over four years now) that I'm out of touch with what users expect from me with transparency.

Behind the scenes there is always work being done with bug fixes, announcement planning, custom development, discussions, debates, and so much more. For example, over this past month, I have been focused a lot on preparing documentation for custom development and organising that all a lot better with Justis. I've also been looking into expanding our developer team, and we now have Lyphiard developing for us on a case-by-case basis to get our development backlog down a little bit more and release updates more for you all. We're looking to also get another developer or two so that we can improve the site as quickly as our users would like. My question for you is do you care to hear about these behind-the-scenes changes? What sort of information would you like to receive from me, and how would you like to receive it? I want to be the best administrator I can be for you all.

In saying that, I feel like users need to be more understanding and accepting of the decisions that the staff team makes, especially in terms of rule enforcement. We are fairly strict about our enforcement of rules and I don't intend on changing that. We are a marketplace first, and if you are not able to abide by our rules then you do not have a place dealing in our market, and if there are any particular rules you feel need to be amended then all suggestions made are reviewed. Tonight I plan to go through all of our pending suggestions to deny ones we're no longer going ahead with, accept suggestions we have already implemented and give an update if there are any suggestions we are still planning to implement soon.

I don't try to manage the site poorly, and I apologise for the times that I have. If you have any feedback about anything I have said or any issues I've missed, let me know and I'll respond.

Heres a list in my opinion
1. dont have such up the ass staff (uptight)
1a. Hire staff who are active within the community and basically everyone likes (ex: Cal)
1b hire more staff

Some people who you hired I had never heard of before, such as Kram, but Kram is a great member.
You guys need to hire more staff and have less up the ass policies.

Also for the love of god have some warning points expire, If I ask for a VC one more time Im banned from here so...

Some staff members aren't liked at all, so if you hire people who are liked (look in past threads and all) then people will like the staff.

Props to Kram with constant scam reports but Mick hes the only one thats fuckin doing shit besides Lotus if hes even still staff. Plus you guys are firing LIKED staff members (ex: thebaum) everyone liked him and he was a great staff member.

They're just minor rules in this forum that are a straight ass.

 

[Lotus]

Props to Kram with constant scam reports but Mick hes the only one thats fuckin doing shit besides Lotus if hes even still staff. Plus you guys are firing LIKED staff members (ex: thebaum) everyone liked him and he was a great staff member.

Being liked does not mean you are appropriate or competent as a staff member. Demotions happen for competency or attitude reasons.

In my opinion, I don't believe your solution hiring less uptight staff or more "liked" members to be suitable. To be less uptight, they would need to intentionally turn a blind eye to rules being broken?

Instead, a solution would be a complete update to the warning system which should alleviate a lot of community disturbance. I had been contemplating suggesting a major change in rule enforcement when I was a staff member, but I've stepped down and kind of just forgotten about it now.

The site's base warning point policies are years old and very outdated. It's unbalanced and needs to be completely reviewed so its expiries are reasonable and makes sense. E.g. things like the shoutbox rules should be expirable. However, things like 1.6 (being disrespectful to other users) should be where the line is drawn to make the warning points not expirable.

Another suggestion to how staff actually should issue warning points in the first place is by assuming positive intent from the other party. For example, if someone accidentally breaks a rule, warning points should never be issued and instead, the user should be given a kind reminder. Leniency to the people who never held any malicious intentions in the first place. Of course, if there is intentional harm behind an action, that should be dealt with points as usual.

This policy should be formalized internally within the staff team since I believe some staff members go with this approach, but not all of them. That's where the conflict starts. MCM is a business. Treat users like customers, not pests. Although then again, some of our more toxic users are pests, so that's a difficult idea to swallow.

I believe I've expanded upon your idea of "less uptight staff" in a more reasonable manner sufficiently?

 

[Hanzkoch]

A site wide boycott Would be pretty hard to organize

 

[Chearful]

My question for you is do you care to hear about these behind-the-scenes changes? What sort of information would you like to receive from me, and how would you like to receive it? I want to be the best administrator I can be for you all.

You see - this is the first time I (and I assume most others) have even heard there's stuff going on behind the scenes in recent times.

Nobody really looks at pending suggestions nowadays as it's just a backlog really, if anything.

IMO, create a subforum under announcements and call it either 'Weekly Updates' or 'Monthly Updates'. Every week/month, quite literally just post what is coming up/what can be expected/what has been done in the past week[/month]/what is being debated in a quick bullet point format. In the case of what is being debated, then would also be a good opportunity to allow the community to weigh in on the debate where appropriate to make the community feel more valued when it comes to decisions.