notification/update

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Bread.

Gold Member
[suggestion]
Would it be too much trouble to ask for ADMINS/MODS to acknowledge response to their PMS?
Not asking for updates on what course of action the admin/mods decide to take. Just acknowledgement that they have taken action to your issues.

Often times no response is given and users can not now whether their message has been read and issues already looked into or whether the message has not been read at all. So the user does not now if they should re-address the issue with them or not.

It doesnt cost anything to be transparent. thank you
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Bampot said:
Forgive me but if there’s no ********, there’s no Chat.
Click to expand...

Most staff members, such as myself, are also paying customers of the site. Being a staff member is just an extra layer of responsibility we have volunteered for, but that doesn't take away that I am also a chatter who got VIP, just as any other VIP user of the website.
 
Bread. said:
Maybe you guys can look into @LostCause. method of how to interact with users. She has never once failed to respond back to a pm even after 3 days of being inactive or reapeated "waaahs" from me. She has disagreed with some of my complaints as well as agreed with them. Yet the thing that remained consistent is she always responded. She has always remained professional. Ive had zero complaints on wahh threads against her even when we outright disagreed. So this is not an issue of creating wahh threads because "things dont go my way" its an issue of not being left in the dark and remaining transparent and professional.
Click to expand...
Thank you for your kind words.

I understand your frustrations with this – I too can get frustrated when I reach out to someone above me about an issue and it's seemingly disregard when my words go unacknowledged. That being said, it's important to remember that the staff here are volunteers. I understand the argument that if someone is volunteering for a position, they're volunteering to do that position well. However, there is a limit to the number of responsibilities you can reasonably ask volunteers to do. I try to address every issue that is presented to me to the best of my ability, and I would hope that the rest of the staff does the same – but following up is a task, just like following through is. And if I had to pick between the two, I would rather a member of the staff follow through with addressing my complaint than follow up with me about it. I appreciate where your suggestion is coming from, although I don't envision it being reasonably implemented.
 
The problem lies that one does not know whether its being followed through. As a moderator it is expected or assumed complaints will be followed through. But i of all people know moderators will not follow through with complaints, even if they are supplemented with blatant documentation. Providing a confirmation that your compliant is acknowledged also provides evidence that the moderator is in fact attempting to resolve the issue. They can not claim they didnt see the complaint or that the complaint is still waiting to be addressed (effectively putting complaints in limbo).
 
Time Capsule said:
Unfortunately, Sometimes DM cant be answered at once as we are busy in side rooms or dealing with reports. There is a lot going on behind the scenes.
Click to expand...
It's annoying like, you're helping for free. You're not customer support on salary. Why do people think mods/admins have to dedicate a large portion of the day to addressing issues? People work, have families, this is just a good gesture and volunteer job, nothing else.
 
Bread. said:
The problem lies that one does not know whether its being followed through. As a moderator it is expected or assumed complaints will be followed through. But i of all people know moderators will not follow through with complaints, even if they are supplemented with blatant documentation. Providing a confirmation that your compliant is acknowledged also provides evidence that the moderator is in fact attempting to resolve the issue. They can not claim they didnt see the complaint or that the complaint is still waiting to be addressed (effectively putting complaints in limbo).
Click to expand...

All complaints are followed through with and every issue is adressed, no complaint is ever left "in limbo". However, you do not need to be kept involved in the proceedings, the resolution and the way it's handled isn't up to you, and you won't necessarily get the outcome you wish to see, as you are well familiar with.

If you have further concerns, you are welcome to inquire to the room admin. Mods handle every single complaint we get, but we have no obligation to keep you involved in the proceedings and resolution of said complaints, and just because you don't get the outcome you were hoping to achieve doesn't mean your complaint was ignored.
 
Dice. said:
All complaints are followed through with and every issue is adressed, no complaint is ever left "in limbo". However, you do not need to be kept involved in the proceedings, the resolution and the way it's handled isn't up to you, and you won't necessarily get the outcome you wish to see, as you are well familiar with.

If you have further concerns, you are welcome to inquire to the room admin. Mods handle every single complaint we get, but we have no obligation to keep you involved in the proceedings and resolution of said complaints, and just because you don't get the outcome you were hoping to achieve doesn't mean your complaint was ignored.
Click to expand...
dice why you ******

@Johnny - his killin’ me! 😉
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dice. said:
All complaints are followed through with and every issue is adressed, no complaint is ever left "in limbo". However, you do not need to be kept involved in the proceedings, the resolution and the way it's handled isn't up to you, and you won't necessarily get the outcome you wish to see, as you are well familiar with.

If you have further concerns, you are welcome to inquire to the room admin. Mods handle every single complaint we get, but we have no obligation to keep you involved in the proceedings and resolution of said complaints, and just because you don't get the outcome you were hoping to achieve doesn't mean your complaint was ignored.
Click to expand...
Very well said. 👌🏻
 
I wouldn't say choosing who to respond to shows bias. if this suggestion was put into place, the ironic thing is that its people like bread who would abuse it. they'd send 100 pm's about different topics to multiple admins and mods, just waiting to not get a reply so that it can be used against them. it would create a situation that could sometimes be impossible to uphold. if every admin/mod was required to pm someone back for every complaint, it would be ridiculous. what if every user in adult chat, or general, somewhere with a lot of active users all the time, all pm'd the same mod at the same time? this suggestion is born out of the fact that bread mostly uses VGC, which has a fair amount of users and this suggestion would be possible there, it would still be stupid but it would be possible. but if this was a site wide rule for staff to have to follow, as soon as you look at user counts in rooms with 100+ users at any given time you can see how ridiculous it would be. a mod or admin could theoretically get as many as 100 or more complaints in pm's all at once and they would have to respond to every single one of them? ridiculous. and bread would for sure use that as an excuse to pm 20 different complaints to every mod and every admin and make forums complaints when every single one of them isn't addressed individually.

in summary, this suggestion sounds good on paper but would be ridiculous to try and actually implement. and it would also be a rule that extremely easy for people like bread to abuse.
 
Frombo said:
I wouldn't say choosing who to respond to shows bias. if this suggestion was put into place, the ironic thing is that its people like bread who would abuse it. they'd send 100 pm's about different topics to multiple admins and mods, just waiting to not get a reply so that it can be used against them. it would create a situation that could sometimes be impossible to uphold. if every admin/mod was required to pm someone back for every complaint, it would be ridiculous. what if every user in adult chat, or general, somewhere with a lot of active users all the time, all pm'd the same mod at the same time? this suggestion is born out of the fact that bread mostly uses VGC, which has a fair amount of users and this suggestion would be possible there, it would still be stupid but it would be possible. but if this was a site wide rule for staff to have to follow, as soon as you look at user counts in rooms with 100+ users at any given time you can see how ridiculous it would be. a mod or admin could theoretically get as many as 100 or more complaints in pm's all at once and they would have to respond to every single one of them? ridiculous. and bread would for sure use that as an excuse to pm 20 different complaints to every mod and every admin and make forums complaints when every single one of them isn't addressed individually.

in summary, this suggestion sounds good on paper but would be ridiculous to try and actually implement. and it would also be a rule that extremely easy for people like bread to abuse.
Click to expand...
What is ridiculous about "pm to every complaint" when they already claim to "respond or react to every complaint"?

The mods just dont want any accountability. Its the equivalent of "oh were spending your tax money wisely but we cant show you were or how its spent"

Dice. said:
All complaints are followed through with and every issue is adressed, no complaint is ever left "in limbo".
Click to expand...

You should see Johnnys inbox, or yours.
 
Bread. said:
What is ridiculous about "pm to every complaint" when they already claim to "respond or react to every complaint"?

The mods just dont want any accountability. Its the equivalent of "oh were spending your tax money wisely but we cant show you were or how its spent"



You should see Johnnys inbox, or yours.
Click to expand...
The best place for a complaint on here, not in dm to a mod. If you dm and dont get a response, then the mod is busy. Thats the time to come to the forums
 
Only its not because it takes anywhere from 2-12 hours for anyone to even log in here. In chat the mods are already logged in and can address offenses in real time or somewhere closer to it. Do you think the mods keep a back log of who is supposed to be kicked the next time they log in? They just say oh i agree he should be kicked but theyre not here right now so i cant do anything about it.

Again this goes back to the conversation topic
How is someone to supposed to know whether a mod is busy when they dont respond?

1. They say not responding doesnt mean theyve not acknowledged the complaint
2. You say not responding means theyre busy.
 
Bread. said:
What is ridiculous about "pm to every complaint" when they already claim to "respond or react to every complaint"?
Click to expand...

its almost like you didn't read any of what I said. it would create a situation where these volunteer mods and admins could possibly have to take time and respond to 100+ complaints one by one. and if a mod or admin is busy responding to every single complaint one by one, that would take time away from them actually being able to watch the room, would let rules be broken without being seen, which would cause more complaints, which cause more time the mod has to take not looking at chat and responding, which would let more rules be broken, which would cause more complaints....and the cycle continues.
 
Frombo said:
its almost like you didn't read any of what I said. it would create a situation where these volunteer mods and admins could possibly have to take time and respond to 100+ complaints one by one. and if a mod or admin is busy responding to every single complaint one by one, that would take time away from them actually being able to watch the room, would let rules be broken without being seen, which would cause more complaints, which cause more time the mod has to take not looking at chat and responding, which would let more rules be broken, which would cause more complaints....and the cycle continues.
Click to expand...
Have you ever heard of a queue? You know, like wait your turn? Nobody is asking for moderators to immediately respond to your complaints and have your 110% undivided attention.

Im just using this as an example to answer to this troll and this is by no means a mod complaint. If @Apollo or any of the UMs deem it as such then it can be removed from this conversation.
We have a moderator who has by all accounts not been seen in a month. If you think moderators being "distracted" by responding to PMs takes away from the room being moderated when we have people like this as part of our moderation then you need to reprioritize your judgement.
85kfoNV.jpg
 
I love how you chose that one example lol. Zero should be removed as a mod, but on that same note, **** that he is the heart of VGC. like I said this hypothetical new rule for staff would only make sense in rooms like vgc, mobile, and music. and even then it would still be ridiculous. rooms with 100+ users would make absolutely zero sense, because literally hundreds of complaints probably get racked up. and even if someone is waiting for their turn, it could take a very long time for someone whos volunteering to able to go through every single complaint in a room with over 100 people. so it would still take away from these volunteers time watching the room they are supposed to be modding to go through and reply to every single complaint they get. especially when theres people like you who would purposely use this as a way to get mods in trouble. there is a 100% chance you would sometimes send compliant after complaint, just waiting for the one time they don't respond so you can run to these forums and make a thread about it. even in rooms like VGC, the fact that Lost responds to you is awesome, but she shouldn't be forced to do that.

this reminds me of the recent Darrel Brooks trial. Mr Brooks was acting like a petulant child asking the judge for her grounds every time she sustained an objection that was against him. and sometimes she told him the grounds for her making that ruling, and sometimes she didnt. this is basically what she told him:

"You ask me for grounds and sometimes I tell you the grounds and other times I don't. Theres nothing in law that says I have to tell you the grounds, I just sometimes do. But its not a requirement."

This is a similar situation. Is it super nice of Lost to care that much and always respond? yes. Should she always be forced to do that? No. If anything all that it means is that this site is lucky to have a volunteer that goes above and beyond. And that they should start paying her. lol. because thats basically what you're asking for. for these volunteers to make this a full time life commitment. because thats what this new rule would be asking of people. more so the rooms with over 100 users at any given time. they'd be responding to hundreds of complaints a day.
 
Frombo said:
I love how you chose that one example lol. Zero should be removed as a mod, but on that same note, **** that he is the heart of VGC. like I said this hypothetical new rule for staff would only make sense in rooms like vgc, mobile, and music. and even then it would still be ridiculous. rooms with 100+ users would make absolutely zero sense, because literally hundreds of complaints probably get racked up. and even if someone is waiting for their turn, it could take a very long time for someone whos volunteering to able to go through every single complaint in a room with over 100 people. so it would still take away from these volunteers time watching the room they are supposed to be modding to go through and reply to every single complaint they get. especially when theres people like you who would purposely use this as a way to get mods in trouble. there is a 100% chance you would sometimes send compliant after complaint, just waiting for the one time they don't respond so you can run to these forums and make a thread about it. even in rooms like VGC, the fact that Lost responds to you is awesome, but she shouldn't be forced to do that.

this reminds me of the recent Darrel Brooks trial. Mr Brooks was acting like a petulant child asking the judge for her grounds every time she sustained an objection that was against him. and sometimes she told him the grounds for her making that ruling, and sometimes she didnt. this is basically what she told him:

"You ask me for grounds and sometimes I tell you the grounds and other times I don't. Theres nothing in law that says I have to tell you the grounds, I just sometimes do. But its not a requirement."

This is a similar situation. Is it super nice of Lost to care that much and always respond? yes. Should she always be forced to do that? No. If anything all that it means is that this site is lucky to have a volunteer that goes above and beyond. And that they should start paying her. lol. because thats basically what you're asking for. for these volunteers to make this a full time life commitment. because thats what this new rule would be asking of people. more so the rooms with over 100 users at any given time. they'd be responding to hundreds of complaints a day.
Click to expand...
I love how you are using some astronomical number of 100 users as an example for your bogus trolling. On average VGC has a total of about 20 users and at the most has ever hever had a maximum of 30-35 users in the past 3 years ive been there. VGC has 7 mods which is a total plausible number for 7 mods to address complaints for 20-30 users.

As of right now:
VGC chat has 7 online users with 1 active mod
Gen chat has 174 online users with 0 active mods
Gay chat has 701 online users with 0 active mods
In your hypothetical, yes youre right this would not function in large rooms. But thats because the problem in these large rooms is that theyre already lacking moderation to begin with. Which is probably the reason these large rooms are rampant with crime.

As of right now:
Gay chat, the room with 700 online users, also has the same amount of moderators as a room with 20 people.

In your hypothetical:
The issue is not, "notifying users will cause a lack of moderation". The issue is the large rooms already have a lack of moderation and CM is not addressing this by implenting a "7 mod rule"
 
You're talking about a volunteer position. I clearly stated every time that this could theoretically work in rooms in VGC. this is what makes me think you aren't reading what anyone is saying. Until being a chat ave mod pays money, you can't expect the level of work you're describing to be delivered. chat ave would basically have to create a completely different position just for responding to user complaints, if what you're asking for was implemented. like i said, if every one of those users made a complaint, it would take a very long time to go through and respond to every one. and if the answer is "make 40 people a mod" then that takes away from the already limited power that this sites mods have. include the rest of the rooms in your list. how many users are in lesbian, and adult chat? you purposely stopped the list at those three. if you included the numbers from all of the big rooms you'd realize how foolish this suggestion is. if your solution is "more mods would solve this responding thing" then you're talking about literally hundreds of mods you'd need to respond to everything. you thought you had something profound to say that turned out to be stupid if you really think about it, its okay.
 
Refer to this quote:
Dice. said:
All complaints are followed through with and every issue is adressed, no complaint is ever left "in limbo".
Click to expand...
Your argument is that we dont have enough moderators to respond to the population. Yet we have mods in here already claiming that ALL complaints are addressed. If they have the time to address all complaints they surely have to time to respond to them. Chat ave doesnt have to pay anyone money for moderators to remain transparent and accountable. The mod already testified that this is already being achieved.

Yes i purposely stopped at those 3 because 700 users with 7 mods is already more than enough to prove your point of about having 100 users in a room. I purposely stopped at 3 because im not about to log into every room and because there is no master list of how many mods are in each room. Some of the room rules list mods, others dont. Im not about to spend the next 12 hours inquiring who is mod in each room. What is spending my time doing that for a troll going to achieve.

I already stated that issue is lack of moderation per capita and you have yet to respond to that but you keep pushing your own argument about 100 users and complaining im not reading your troll comments.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top