@Staff | Chatbox

[Mason.]

I think a staff tag should be implemented into the chatbox.

1. This would be extremely beneficial for newer members who need some fast support and don't have connections or bonds with staff members.

2. Most of the time there are staff lurking in chatbox that you don't even know are there. That causes the issue of - "who do I tag for help?" Well, with @Staff, fret no more! You will get the active support member on duty without having to scroll through the staff list!

3. Using the @Staff tag has it's obvious benefits, like gaining a moderator's attention. However, there are other benefits as well. When using @Staff, normal members and staff members alike will understand you are asking for a staff member's guidance, not a normal user on the site. This will avert confusion and keep the chat clear from untrue (maybe not intentional, but still false) member guidance.

Those are some basic benefits of the @Staff tag, there are many more that I haven't even thought of yet. Unlimited potential.

 

[Ally]

Unlimited potential = unlimited abuse.

 

[Sparko]

there isn’t a ton of ppl in sb to need this, people can simply look at who has a red prefix-tag thing or whatever you call it

 

[Mason.]

Unlimited potential = unlimited abuse.

This is something to look into but I doubt it would be much of a problem. I'd assume abuse of this would be matched with a severe punishment.[DOUBLEPOST=1587703246][/DOUBLEPOST]

there isn’t a ton of ppl in sb to need this, people can simply look at who has a red prefix-tag thing or whatever you call it

Yeah, but when there isn't a red prefix-tag thing or whatever you call it, who do you look to then?[DOUBLEPOST=1587703303][/DOUBLEPOST]

there isn’t a ton of ppl in sb to need this, people can simply look at who has a red prefix-tag thing or whatever you call it

 

[Misclaim]

This could be very helpful and useful to new people I completely agree! Consider this!!

 

[Sparko]

This is something to look into but I doubt it would be much of a problem. I'd assume abuse of this would be matched with a severe punishment.[DOUBLEPOST=1587703246][/DOUBLEPOST]
Yeah, but when there isn't a red prefix-tag thing or whatever you call it, who do you look to then?[DOUBLEPOST=1587703303][/DOUBLEPOST]
View attachment 337693

uhh, that’s because there’s no staff in sb, and i also mean the reddish name color as the indicator, since a staff member’s name color would be easily identifiable[DOUBLEPOST=1587705528][/DOUBLEPOST]also, no point in tagging all staff and potentially having two or more answer the same question

 

[Mason.]

uhh, that’s because there’s no staff in sb, and i also mean the reddish name color as the indicator, since a staff member’s name color would be easily identifiable[DOUBLEPOST=1587705528][/DOUBLEPOST]also, no point in tagging all staff and potentially having two or more answer the same question

That’s not hard to avoid.

 

[Yoda]

Lmao I made this as a joke today along with Everyone please don't add this feature xD

 

[Jdsgames]

I do not see a point in having an @staff tag in chat,
You generally wouldn't get the ping unless you were on that screen or have to chat above all your pages anyway.

However, I would be down to see the Members drop down to include the option to go directly to the staff directory. This way, a user would be able to private message a staff member if needed. However, from what I have witnessed, we primarily function through support tickets and reports, I do not see the benefit of it as far as getting support any faster.

Kind Regards,
Jdsgames - Personal Opinion

 

[Snowcone]

I mean, I don't think it's a bad idea. I think that it would be better if chatbox was open to everyone, but since its only for donors then I think that it wouldn't be as effective.

 

[Yoda]

Instead, I'd suggest having what Jdsgames suggest and also add a reputation thing for staff. Would make it so no one can see it except admins but would allow people to leave good or bad feedback for how they believe there issue was handled

 

[Red]

… and also add a reputation thing for staff. Would make it so no one can see it except admins but would allow people to leave good or bad feedback for how they believe there issue was handled

I agree with feedback for staff's

Ohhhh boy, that's a terrible idea. I'm pretty sure there are members that hate my guts because they got a whopping 3 warning points in chat. It would be sooooo easy to abuse.

 

[Yoda]

Ohhhh boy, that's a terrible idea. I'm pretty sure there are members that hate my guts because they got a whooping 3 warning points in chat. It would be sooooo easy to abuse.

Agreed, but that is why it wouldn't show to anyone else but admins. This would also be watched over and if abused permission can be taken away.

 

[Jdsgames]

also add a reputation thing for staff. Would make it so no one can see it except admins but would allow people to leave good or bad feedback for how they believe there issue was handled

I agree with feedback for staff's

I do believe that this would be unnecessary and provide skewed information.
I would prefer to see more features or upgrades to the site come first.

For example, during a feedback dispute, you choose to remove the reputation or reject it for following the guidelines. One user will get what they want, and the other won't. So, the staff in question is likely to get a +1 reputation and -1 reputation in this system.

If we are basing off of just general support tickets, how would you effectively measure the usefulness of a particular staff member?

For example, a chat moderator cannot handle something regarding user feedback, so they redirect you. Are they poor staff for not having the permission or authority to handle your issue directly?

Another example, appeal rejects for warnings, other punishments, or actions, as you did not get the support you wanted, is it reasonable to negatively rep the staff member in question?

I see it mainly providing the information of what the user wanted out of the support, not the quality or validity of the support given.

Not to mention, just like feedback between users, disputes on whether or not what the user claimed is accurate.
So, you would likely see support slowing down to handle the falsified claims here as well.

Kind Regards,
Jdsgames - Personal Opinion

 

[BOOP]

If this was added, MCM would literally be going against itself:
3.2 Do not attempt to contact staff members for non-shoutbox related staff things via the shoutbox. Use support tickets/reports.

I could almost guarantee that if this was added it would be most used by people trying to get help with non-shoutbox things lol

 

[Mason.]

If this was added, MCM would literally be going against itself:
3.2 Do not attempt to contact staff members for non-shoutbox related staff things via the shoutbox. Use support tickets/reports.

I could almost guarantee that if this was added it would be most used by people trying to get help with non-shoutbox things lol

MCM staff already go against this rule all the time, it should be removed in my opinion. Not everything should be handled through a support ticket.

I do believe that this would be unnecessary and provide skewed information.
I would prefer to see more features or upgrades to the site come first.

For example, during a feedback dispute, you choose to remove the reputation or reject it for following the guidelines. One user will get what they want, and the other won't. So, the staff in question is likely to get a +1 reputation and -1 reputation in this system.

If we are basing off of just general support tickets, how would you effectively measure the usefulness of a particular staff member?

For example, a chat moderator cannot handle something regarding user feedback, so they redirect you. Are they poor staff for not having the permission or authority to handle your issue directly?

Another example, appeal rejects for warnings, other punishments, or actions, as you did not get the support you wanted, is it reasonable to negatively rep the staff member in question?

I see it mainly providing the information of what the user wanted out of the support, not the quality or validity of the support given.

Not to mention, just like feedback between users, disputes on whether or not what the user claimed is accurate.
So, you would likely see support slowing down to handle the falsified claims here as well.

Kind Regards,
Jdsgames - Personal Opinion

You have some really good ideas here, you should totally make a separate suggestion so they’re better noticed.

 

[Mick]

We try to discourage users from pinging staff in chat for quick support and instead use tickets for support since we're really fast at answering simple questions in those.

Denied, thanks for the suggestion