Explanation of Staff Choices

[Glident]

I've noticed a lot of people complaining or questioning why certain members are chosen for staff. In order to better defend their choices, I feel that the administrative team should share a brief statement about each new recruit, what made them get chosen for staff, and why they would be a good addition to the team. I know this sounds like a reverse-application, but I think it would be a really good defense for the administrative team's choices, and it also shows the community that they put thought into choosing who they recruit.

Spoiler: Example

McCharity has been promoted to ChatMod.
We have observed McCharity's activity level and the positive interaction with members of our community. He is always very professional and fair, which are just two reasons why we think he will be a great staff member. We are looking forward to what McCharity will bring to McMarket. Please wish him a big congratulations!

 

[Dessi]

So just for the fact of debate, why must they have to give a reason for their choices? As it may seem more transparent, people will be mad regardless and there will always be out there arguing it. They chose who was the best applicant with the views of MC-Market and personal belief. I just don't think that this should be completely public.

 

[Landon]

I disagree that an explanation should be required. However, I do call into question these recent promotions (26.5 messages a year, says a lot), but I hope that these promotions were thought out and not something to appease the demand of moderation needed.

 

[Glident]

So just for the fact of debate, why must they have to give a reason for their choices? As it may seem more transparent, people will be mad regardless and there will always be out there arguing it. They chose who was the best applicant with the views of MC-Market and personal belief. I just don't think that this should be completely public.

You’re right, there will still be people who argue, but at least the administration team is providing a reason and explaining their choices. Sure not every reason they hired them is there, but a general idea of their good qualities would be nice just to show they did put thought into their decisions, and they didn’t just pick someone randomly.

 

[Dessi]

You’re right, there will still be people who argue, but at least the administration team is providing a reason and explaining their choices. Sure not every reason they hired them is there, but a general idea of their good qualities would be nice just to show they did put thought into their decisions, and they didn’t just pick someone randomly.

Good points brought up here. I don't really involve myself way too much with watching MCM's moves as they haven't had a direct effect on me yet. Again, just debating a bit as I think that this is the reason they enable comments anyway, wouldn't it be unfair to say that they are picking people randomly instead of looking at the full list of applicants? Now, of course, me debating doesn't necesarrily disagree with this concept. To be honest, I think in order to show something of the sort they should open up applications to all of MC-Market instead of doing this with an exception being at least on MC-Market a year and with x amount of messages per year. Maybe they have these rules maybe they don't. But I feel like it may prevent this paranoia in the future.

 

[Landon]

Good points brought up here. I don't really involve myself way too much with watching MCM's moves as they haven't had a direct effect on me yet. Again, just debating a bit as I think that this is the reason they enable comments anyway, wouldn't it be unfair to say that they are picking people randomly instead of looking at the full list of applicants? Now, of course, me debating doesn't necesarrily disagree with this concept. To be honest, I think in order to show something of the sort they should open up applications to all of MC-Market instead of doing this with an exception being at least on MC-Market a year and with x amount of messages per year. Maybe they have these rules maybe they don't. But I feel like it may prevent this paranoia in the future.

Applications were not enabled this time through. Everything was hand-picked by the administration.

 

[Dessi]

Applications were not enabled this time through. Everything was hand-picked by the administration.

Oh really? Well if that is the case then I hope they at least questioned them thoroughly and ensured they had a good understanding of the forums etc. Which I am sure they did but no one knows for sure. Honestly, handpicking can lead to things like favoritism etc, but what it also can lead to is higher quality candidates by sniffing out who they want on the forums to be part of staff and that align with MC-Markets views. It's a double-edged sword when it comes to handpicking staff that's for sure.

 

[Landon]

Oh really? Well if that is the case then I hope they at least questioned them thoroughly and ensured they had a good understanding of the forums etc. Which I am sure they did but no one knows for sure. Honestly, handpicking can lead to things like favoritism etc, but what it also can lead to is higher quality candidates by sniffing out who they want on the forums to be part of staff and that align with MC-Markets views. It's a double-edged sword when it comes to handpicking staff that's for sure.

Yeah, I totally agree. My only thing is that two of the staff (one a 2016 member, and the other a 2017 member) had less than 106 posts. Which is roughly 26.5 messages/year, and 34 messages/year (accordingly). That’s where I’m a bit concerned, as I feel like that level of inactivity as a community member will only roll over to inactivity as a Staff Member, but hopefully I’m wrong I’m sure they were thoroughly interviewed, and hopefully these new Staff turn out to be a good thing and not just quick resignations.

 

[Kram]

We've shared in the past about what we look for,
Here's something I've said in a recent suggestion

When we look into a member, we look at all aspects of them that we can. How active they are, where they are active, how long have they been here, but above all, their attitude and how they act is what we care about most.

These 4 chat mods (Jdsgames, Annqii, Amokinio, and MCCharity) had the attitude we look for.
We really don't care about their average posts per year.
Jdsgames is the only staff member of the 4 that got promoted because I had personal experience working with them in the past that showed their attitude and their capability. Jdsgames also has shown in the past that they want to help improve the site.
Amokinio and MCCharity both showed that they were kind, professional users that cared about the site and wanted to improve it. MCCharity also had plenty of chat messages showing that he would be active in chat.
Annqii's posts showed her attitude plenty and how she treated and responded to others was a clear indicator of the attitude we look for.
Both Annqii and Jdsgames have had accounts for a while as well.

All 4 of them were promoted for very similar reasons, the main one being is they have the attitude we look for. This time around, we looked at a lot of different users for staff, I know I personally went looking at a lot of members, but there were few that showed what I was looking for.

Honestly, handpicking can lead to things like favoritism

Most of the time, the team doesn't actually know the individual staff members. So we make decisions based on what we find on their profile.

 

[Dessi]

Most of the time, the team doesn't actually know the individual staff members. So we make decisions based on what we find on their profile.

Yeah, I wasn't trying to give you guys a bad reputation or anything. Mostly stated because it honestly can and for debate reasons, but it is good to know that you are here trying to defend MC-Market. Thanks for the clarification!

 

[Glident]

We've shared in the past about what we look for,
Here's something I've said in a recent suggestion

These 4 chat mods (Jdsgames, Annqii, Amokinio, and MCCharity) had the attitude we look for.
We really don't care about their average posts per year.
Jdsgames is the only staff member of the 4 that got promoted because I had personal experience working with them in the past that showed their attitude and their capability. Jdsgames also has shown in the past that they want to help improve the site.
Amokinio and MCCharity both showed that they were kind, professional users that cared about the site and wanted to improve it. MCCharity also had plenty of chat messages showing that he would be active in chat.
Annqii's posts showed her attitude plenty and how she treated and responded to others was a clear indicator of the attitude we look for.
Both Annqii and Jdsgames have had accounts for a while as well.

All 4 of them were promoted for very similar reasons, the main one being is they have the attitude we look for. This time around, we looked at a lot of different users for staff, I know I personally went looking at a lot of members, but there were few that showed what I was looking for.

Most of the time, the team doesn't actually know the individual staff members. So we make decisions based on what we find on their profile.

Thank you for the clarification! I feel like if we received information like this each time, people would be more accepting to the new recruits (but that’s just my opinion).

 

[Kram]

Thank you for the clarification! I feel like if we received information like this each time, people would be more accepting to the new recruits (but that’s just my opinion).

I truly feel like it would become very repetitive as we look for the same thing every time.

 

[Glident]

I truly feel like it would become very repetitive as we look for the same thing every time.

That makes sense, but for instance the personal interaction story made sense and justified the choice. Again, I totally see where you’re coming from.

 

[User]

We're already been given a short explanation on how they got staff, and if you can't find it, it's still not very hard to see the reasoning. A large, detailed explanation, however, would likely lead to users of the forum meticulously copying everything listed in the hopes of getting staff, potentially for nefarious purposes. Some of the staff choices may seem odd, specifically in terms of activity (at least, that's what I've seen pointed out the most), but they do all make some degree of sense. Of course, depending on what qualities you value in a staff member, you might make completely different choices; for example, if you picked staff based on their experience and/or activity, I doubt that 3/4 of the staff team would be here, but that's not the value system that MC-Market has, and to be honest, I do appreciate that to an extent.

 

[Niteburn]

Here we go a bunch of armchair theorists getting upset with new staff getting promoted again. Why do you guys care so much who becomes a staff member?

 

[Mick]

We don't need to be justifying our internal promotions each time that they happen, and even it just happening this one time from Kram shows how unnecessary it is. To become staff there are a few key things that we look for and vote internally as a team. It's not really the sort of thing that I'd want to do each time when in reality who are new recruits are isn't that important to the community as long as they're maintaining our quality standards.

Denied, thanks for the suggestion