# New Staff Structure and Admins



## Dragoneer (Aug 16, 2011)

We're working to improve our admin staff structure, and as such over the new month or two you'll begin seeing new admins and staff joining the main site. We're compartmentalizing much of the staff to focus on specific areas (photography, art, music, etc) to ensure more consistent rulings and better end results for our users. 

Many of the Furocity admins have joined the site, and we''ll be posting more updates and working towards a bit more transparency in the near future.

The staff structure can be seen here:
http://www.furaffinity.net/staff/


----------



## Ben (Aug 16, 2011)

I saw the announcement on the front page last night, and it's honestly pretty impressive (well, by this site's standards). It's good to see so many admins (and some structure to them) actually working on the site.


----------



## maddogairpirate (Aug 16, 2011)

Interesting restructuring. Co-admins for head of site. The breakdown looks simple enough. How does it work, though, when, say, there's an artwork that violates ToS? Do the ToS admins handle it or the artwork admins?


----------



## Dragoneer (Aug 16, 2011)

maddogairpirate said:


> Interesting restructuring. Co-admins for head of site. The breakdown looks simple enough. How does it work, though, when, say, there's an artwork that violates ToS? Do the ToS admins handle it or the artwork admins?


Any admin can handle any issue, but those focused on a specific area are there to focus on that and that alone. The other admins can assist in a variety of issues if need be unless those admins choose to focus on a particular group/field.


----------



## Ben (Aug 16, 2011)

Dragoneer said:


> Any admin can handle any issue, but those focused on a specific area are there to focus on that and that alone. The other admins can assist in a variety of issues if need be unless those admins choose to focus on a particular group/field.



I would also presume that under this structure, if one of the regular admins is having trouble with a TT, they can take it to one of the department heads that run that category for a second opinion. At least, that would make sense, I think.


----------



## Captain Howdy (Aug 16, 2011)

Well as long as I can be my weird, assholish self, then yay.


----------



## Lobar (Aug 16, 2011)

So is the new strategy for making up FA's shortcomings just to cannibalize Furocity and its resources or what?


----------



## Dragoneer (Aug 16, 2011)

Lobar said:


> So is the new strategy for making up FA's shortcomings just to cannibalize Furocity and its resources or what?


Furocity staffers are joining FA if they want to. That's part of us joining together (one mere part) by bringing over some experienced staffers to help with issues and improve the site.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Aug 16, 2011)

Dragoneer,

I don't mean to hijack the thread, but can you please give these details to our current staff so we understand what is going on?


----------



## maddogairpirate (Aug 16, 2011)

'Any admin can handle any issue, but those focused on a specific area are there to focus on that and that alone. The other admins can assist in a variety of issues if need be unless those admins choose to focus on a particular group/field. '

I'm still rusty on quoting stuff here, but you get the gist.

The clarification is good as long as it doesn't lead to any sore toes. If it's first-claim handles it then long as everyone knows and that works.

I like the smaller staff simply because it's easier to get a sense of who's responsible. The older staff had a lot of people that never seemed to handle much, leaving it rather unfairly in a double sense to those that did. Unfairly because they shouldn't have to do all the work, and because oftentimes there was no one keeping their biases in check. We've all got 'em, and my #1 concern right now in the restructuring is just making sure there's a solid sense of accountability. So if A handles the issue and metes out punishment, there's a framework to be pointed to that's fair. Verbal harassment first offense is, say, a warning, second offense a ban, unless threats are involved in said harassment. That kind of thing, so when Mr. Banned whines it's so unfair, there's something to point to right away. I think that will cut down on a lot of the complaints that staff is heavily biased or punishes people they just don't like more severely.

So: small staff good, active staff good. Accountability is next in terms of quantifiable actions against offenses. I'm looking to see that somehow.


----------



## Andy Nonimose (Aug 16, 2011)

Arshes Nei said:


> Dragoneer,
> 
> I don't mean to hijack the thread, but can you please give these details to our current staff so we understand what is going on?



It's sad that this even needs to be asked. 

Hooray for failed use of hierarchical news flow. :V


----------



## Devious Bane (Aug 16, 2011)

Arshes Nei said:


> can you please give these details to our current staff so we understand what is going on?


My faith, assuming I had any, just pissed out the window.
_Smooth._


----------



## maddogairpirate (Aug 16, 2011)

Devious, essentially you're just complaining to hear yourself complain then?

I can't say I fully get the 'me-first' hangup on this. It's a site admin restructure list. It would definitely be a concern if there was no consideration for giving it to the staff, or if there was some kind of bomb in there that severely shook things up. If you find out about it this afternoon or this evening, if the announcement is on the BB first, there is not a worldshattering consequence I can think of. Staff has asked that they were briefed upon it first. Okay. Now go and discuss it. Ain't the end of the world as we know it. And I feel fine.


----------



## Accountability (Aug 16, 2011)

Arshes Nei said:


> Dragoneer,
> 
> I don't mean to hijack the thread, but can you please give these details to our current staff so we understand what is going on?



Welp.

Is there any reason why the new staff was brought in above the old staff? Seems like a slap in the face for some of them, who have been here for years, to be given some crappy "TOS Enforcement" title while new people are brought in and made "department heads". Would make more sense to me to promote the older people who have been active and know the rules to these positions before bringing in the new people who haven't even been on the site for a month.

Also, why do most of the new staff seem to be giant assholes? At least one of them has a very unfriendly profile. Not sure if these are the kind of people that should be representing the site.



maddogairpirate said:


> Devious, essentially you're just complaining to hear yourself complain then?
> 
> I can't say I fully get the 'me-first' hangup on this. It's a site admin  restructure list. It would definitely be a concern if there was no  consideration for giving it to the staff, or if there was some kind of  bomb in there that severely shook things up. If you find out about it  this afternoon or this evening, if the announcement is on the BB first,  there is not a worldshattering consequence I can think of. Staff has  asked that they were briefed upon it first. Okay. Now go and discuss it.  Ain't the end of the world as we know it. And I feel fine.


The fact the _existing site staff_ was not informed of at least some of the details is cause for concern.


----------



## maddogairpirate (Aug 16, 2011)

It's not the way it should be done, Accountability, I can agree with that. But bad form aside, I don't see how the different timeline really changes anything. A respect issue, perhaps.


----------



## Tiger In A Tie (Aug 16, 2011)

Accountability said:


> Welp.
> 
> Is there any reason why the new staff was brought in above the old staff? Seems like a slap in the face for some of them, who have been here for years, to be given some crappy "TOS Enforcement" title while new people are brought in and made "department heads". Would make more sense to me to promote the older people who have been active and know the rules to these positions before bringing in the new people who haven't even been on the site for a month.



Maybe it's a matter of qualifications? Some of the new admins might just be more qualified for those positions than existing ones. But I don't have room to say much as I'm still fairly new to fA and the forums. I do feel it's a bit unfair as well, though. I guess we'll just have to see how the new admins perform?


----------



## Shireton (Aug 16, 2011)

I feel like some of these new accounts are in very poor taste.


----------



## Xenke (Aug 16, 2011)

Shireton said:


> I feel like some of these new accounts are in very poor taste.



What do you mean?


----------



## LizardKing (Aug 16, 2011)

Accountability said:


> Is there any reason why the new staff was brought in above the old staff? Seems like a slap in the face for some of them, who have been here for years, to be given some crappy "TOS Enforcement" title while new people are brought in and made "department heads". Would make more sense to me to promote the older people who have been active and know the rules to these positions before bringing in the new people who haven't even been on the site for a month.



That does seem a strange way of doing things; all 6 of the new staff have gone straight into department head/admin positions. I'm sure they've had plenty of experience on Furocity, and a few have been here for a little while, but surely they should get some experience here first instead of leapfrogging people who have been doing this for a while and know their way around FA's particular quirks and ruleset. I can't imagine it's particularly good for morale either.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Aug 16, 2011)

Arshes Nei said:


> Dragoneer,
> 
> I don't mean to hijack the thread, but can you please give these details to our current staff so we understand what is going on?



So, what happened to transparency?


----------



## dinosaurdammit (Aug 16, 2011)

AshleyAshes said:


> So, what happened to transparency?



Well you see we had planned to put plastic wrap on the situation but someone knocked over a can of black paint.


----------



## Un_Chakal (Aug 16, 2011)

Xenke said:


> What do you mean?



http://www.furaffinity.net/user/photografuhrer
This for example. Even the replies are condescending, as is the About paragraph's reply to the concerns. And the name even, seems to want to show outright intimidation from the get-go.


----------



## dinosaurdammit (Aug 16, 2011)

Un_Chakal said:


> http://www.furaffinity.net/user/photografuhrer
> This for example. Even the replies are condescending, as is the About paragraph's reply to the concerns. And the name even, seems to want to show outright intimidation from the get-go.



I am blunt- and bluntly I say that person sounds like a douche. There are better ways to say "I AM AN ADMIN I DO MY JOB" rather than the garble mess in their profile.


----------



## jcfynx (Aug 16, 2011)

I hope this means people are going to be nicer. :C


----------



## Arshes Nei (Aug 16, 2011)

dinosaurdammit said:


> Well you see we had planned to put plastic wrap on the situation but someone knocked over a can of black paint.



haha sorry that reminds me of the origins of http://www.shitmykidsruined.com


----------



## Fay V (Aug 16, 2011)

I'm not sure what this is meant to accomplish. I understand new blood to deal with problems, but setting up departments (As if we understand what that means) making people Heads and such without really doing any work on this site before. What is this supposed to tell the current staff? Work hard as a volunteer and learn about the culture of the site you're moderating and you too can have someone brand new with little knowledge of the site as your superior. 
Yep why give new admins a chance to work with staff and learn about the site when they can jump in and do what they want?


----------



## Dragoneer (Aug 16, 2011)

Un_Chakal said:


> http://www.furaffinity.net/user/photografuhrer
> This for example. Even the replies are condescending, as is the About paragraph's reply to the concerns. And the name even, seems to want to show outright intimidation from the get-go.


Excuse me, but what replies? I see three comments on the site, none of which are "condescending". Can you show me where the comments were made? 

Thanks.


----------



## Xenke (Aug 16, 2011)

Un_Chakal said:


> http://www.furaffinity.net/user/photografuhrer
> This for example. Even the replies are condescending, as is the About paragraph's reply to the concerns. And the name even, seems to want to show outright intimidation from the get-go.



Uhm, wahwah boohoo?

All I'm really seeing is the kind of stuff normal people put in that section + what almost all admins put on their pages + site policy (for your convenience).

What's really the problem? The fact that he's not trying to be all cute and cuddly?


----------



## Tiger In A Tie (Aug 16, 2011)

Xenke said:


> Uhm, wahwah boohoo?
> 
> All I'm really seeing is the kind of stuff normal people put in that section + what almost all admins put on their pages + site policy (for your convenience).
> 
> What's really the problem? The fact that he's not trying to be all cute and cuddly?



I agree, I find his page quite professional. At least he's being honest. As far as his username goes, I don't like it, but I'm more concerned about an admin's actions rather than their usernames.


----------



## Un_Chakal (Aug 16, 2011)

dinosaurdammit said:


> I am blunt- and bluntly I say that person sounds like a douche. There are better ways to say "I AM AN ADMIN I DO MY JOB" rather than the garble mess in their profile.



He/she along with another Nazi-themed name are the photo admins. Brill.


----------



## Volkodav (Aug 16, 2011)

Un_Chakal said:


> http://www.furaffinity.net/user/photografuhrer
> This for example. Even the replies are condescending, as is the About paragraph's reply to the concerns. And the name even, seems to want to show outright intimidation from the get-go.


 I like them already. If you think their profile is bad, you haven't seen the profile that says "TROLL ME AND YOU *WILL BE BANNED.* "
Are you really gonna moan about their username? christ.



Arshes Nei said:


> haha sorry that reminds me of the origins of http://www.shitmykidsruined.com


This is now my fave website


----------



## Jesie (Aug 18, 2011)

No one else has said it so I will.


DEAR FA,

YOU FIRED ARSHE BUT KEPT WOLFE?
http://www.furaffinity.net/user/silverrwolfe

*THE FUCK?*


----------



## Ben (Aug 18, 2011)

Jesie said:


> No one else has said it so I will.
> 
> 
> DEAR FA,
> ...



To be fair, it's been a number of months since that whole "idle admins" fiasco. I'm noticing other staff were dropped from the admin rank as well (Glaide, Ariel), so I think it's reasonable to think Silver is doing his job (not to mention Arshes' has always been more involved with the forum from what I can tell, and as such removing her mainsite admin isn't really a huge deal).


----------



## Jesie (Aug 18, 2011)

She's still active on the main site non the less, and dose not deserve to just be dropped like a sack of potatoes.

From what I recall, Arshe did her job too. Much better than Silver to point a fact.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Aug 18, 2011)

Jesie said:


> She's still active on the main site non the less, and dose not deserve to just be dropped like a sack of potatoes.
> 
> From what I recall, Arshe did her job too. Much better than Silver to point a fact.



Since I'm being mentioned here, I'll reply.

First off, thanks for the support. 

There was a bit of a mixup and Gavin and I are working things out. It's correct that I am the head administrator here. 
I wanted to say this so people don't go all crazy and thinking the worst.


----------



## Volkodav (Aug 18, 2011)

Jesie said:


> No one else has said it so I will.
> 
> 
> DEAR FA,
> ...


... who is wolfe? [serious question]


----------



## Arshes Nei (Aug 18, 2011)

Clayton said:


> ... who is wolfe? [serious question]



Silverwolfe.


----------



## Dragoneer (Aug 18, 2011)

Jesie said:


> No one else has said it so I will.
> 
> 
> DEAR FA,
> ...


That's not entirely accurate at all. All the same, Arshes has been re-instated as an admin main site (not her main account). The issue came down when we reviewed Trouble Tickets and noted that admins hadn't handled tickets in a way. Some admins were removed during that time, some unintentionally. There was some communication problems (merging two teams together is going to have some bumpy spots). We could have handled it better, yes, but once we get over the hurdle things will even out.

And as an aside, perhaps FD2 isn't the best place to get your news from.


----------



## Fay V (Aug 18, 2011)

Neer ...you posted a link showing silver on staff but arshes not. People are getting info from you.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Aug 18, 2011)

Fay V said:


> Neer ...you posted a link showing silver on staff but arshes not. People are getting info from you.



Fay, for the record I was never listed on the staff page. I asked that I not be listed. 
However yes, the link is showing a different staff structure.


----------



## dinosaurdammit (Aug 18, 2011)

It also shows Nylak too.


----------



## Fay V (Aug 18, 2011)

I see I apologize then.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Aug 18, 2011)

Fay V said:


> I see I apologize then.



Thanks, I can see the misunderstanding. It came up before that I have the status rank on main site but not listed. I have been asked if I wanted to be but refused. Mainly because the staff page became more of the "Furry Hollywood Squares" than people actually working on the site. Hopefully with the new administrators it can actually mean something again.


----------



## Xenke (Aug 18, 2011)

dinosaurdammit said:


> It also shows Nylak too.



Nylak is an admin again.


----------



## Radiohead (Aug 18, 2011)

Would it be accurate to say that this thread is giving the impression that communication among staff is not going that smoothly?


----------



## dinosaurdammit (Aug 18, 2011)

Xenke said:


> Nylak is an admin again.



When did this happen? I haven't seen her or heard from her nor did I know about the reinstatement.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Aug 18, 2011)

dinosaurdammit said:


> When did this happen? I haven't seen her or heard from her nor did I know about the reinstatement.



It was fairly recent and you may have had other personal issues at the time which is probably why you missed it.


----------



## Ben (Aug 18, 2011)

Arshes Nei said:


> It was fairly recent and you may have had other personal issues at the time which is probably why you missed it.



Not to mention that if she is answering trouble tickets, people who are just forum staff wouldn't possibly know (not that it's a problem).

Regardless, I would think it would be better to raise questions like these in private, so as to not seem so disorganized.


----------



## Volkodav (Aug 18, 2011)

This "now I'm an admin, now I'm not an admin, now I'm an admin" shit seems very unprofessional to me.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Aug 18, 2011)

Clayton said:


> This "now I'm an admin, now I'm not an admin, now I'm an admin" shit seems very unprofessional to me.



Hence my request earlier. Forum staff are something of the first line of defense, so it's nice to keep them up to date on changes. If they aren't sure they can defer to me.


----------



## Ben (Aug 18, 2011)

So, just wondering, does this staff shake-up mean it'll be awhile before fresh blood is brought into the forum staff? I'm finding it hard to judge, given that a number of people were brought in and let go almost at the same time.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Aug 18, 2011)

Ben said:


> So, just wondering, does this staff shake-up mean it'll be awhile before fresh blood is brought into the forum staff? I'm finding it hard to judge, given that a number of people were brought in and let go almost at the same time.



We just went through forum promotions, and I've already discussed that there will likely be another round of mod auditions based on need. But if there's a delay it won't be too long. The delay would probably be more impacted by need than new folks on board.


----------



## timoran (Aug 18, 2011)

Arshes Nei said:


> Fay, for the record I was never listed on the staff page. I asked that I not be listed.



I humbly submit that this is not an option that a Fur Affinity staff member ought to have.


----------



## Corto (Aug 19, 2011)

timoran said:


> I humbly submit that this is not an option that a Fur Affinity staff member ought to have.


I'll play devil's advocate here:
Arshes' position as staff is more closely related to her work in the forum, as head forum administrator. She's not a "trouble ticket pusher", she's the head honcho over at FAF. I agree that all mainsite staff currently in service should be listed there, and they are. Arshes is in a special position because while a "mainsite admin", she doesn't solve TTs (or has her main focus there, the way mainsite staff do), but rather uses this position to smooth the work between FA and FAF. At least as much as I understand. Please keep in mind, this is not some official explanation, just something I inferred from posts in this very thread and just kinda watching the forums for all this time. If Arshes or anyone else wanna explain it better than I did, well, I may look like a jackass that's completely wrong.

Also I do agree there is some communication trouble. It took me 2 years as moderator to realize this is a furry forum.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Aug 19, 2011)

timoran said:


> I humbly submit that this is not an option that a Fur Affinity staff member ought to have.



I believe and humbly so, there are far more pressing matters than worrying about a page that is still manually updated, inconsistent, where (some and not all) former staff members made it meaningless, and still hasn't exactly explained staff roles for a long time. I'd rather that the security issues, bugs, and communication issues be fixed first.

But I suppose you can not count my opinion and dismiss me as one of those crazy admin/staff/people of authority and you know how they all suck


----------



## Armaetus (Aug 19, 2011)

Nah, Arshes is probably one of the few staff members I actually hold more trust (IE the lazy staff thread made by her months ago) than Dragoneer himself. Also, why do we still have dead-weight staff (IE Silverwolfe, tsawolf) loafing around who do little to nothing on the site?

This is not going as smooth and transparent as I had expected.


----------



## Corto (Aug 19, 2011)

Welp, now Arshes posted and I look like a jackass. Totally called it.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Aug 19, 2011)

Corto said:


> Welp, now Arshes posted and I look like a jackass. Totally called it.



pfft. That's nothing new 

But nah it's cool, you're correct that my main work is the forums and in many aspects staff training. A majority of the staff now were grunts on the forums.


----------



## Accountability (Aug 20, 2011)

timoran said:


> I humbly submit that this is not an option that a Fur Affinity staff member ought to have.



I don't think it's a big deal, there's really no reason to need a list of all the staff anyways. Now that there's "department heads" at the very least all that page needs is them and the owners, since you shouldn't be contacting other members of the staff directly anyways (that's what trouble tickets are for).

If I was in charge, all but the "specialty" (say, in charge of advertising, people that you need to know who does what) staff would be anonymous. It would hopefully cut down on the amount of people that do the bare minimum to keep their precious '@' since some see it as a status symbol and nothing else. You could tell people, but it wouldn't be broadcast to everyone. Sadly, I think there'd be less people wanting to be on staff then.


----------



## woofwoofwoof (Aug 21, 2011)

The TOS/User Help staff should probably be doubled, or even tripled.  Honestly, what is the proportion of trouble tickets dealing with technical issues vs. user/submission issues?


----------



## jayhusky (Aug 21, 2011)

I agree with woofwoofwoof here since I myself opened a TT a while back (I forget the reason) and there has been no interaction from any administrative party. So yeah, a few more people wouldn't go amiss to divide the deluge of TT requests from users.

That said, I had noticed that more names had appeared on the forum leaders page.
Ok fine there have been some additions to the pack of leaders, however a couple of things strike me as odd.

First, why have a moderators catagory with *ONE* person in it?
Secondly, these people that were added to the list (namely some in the super-mod section), how exactly??? I thought there was a *moderators audition thread* in which we applied for a position and then admins would decide who got in or out.

Has that forum grown legs and disappeared into the wilderness?

Finally, just as a question.. Could you define the meaning behind the *Senior Member * catagory?


----------



## Xenke (Aug 21, 2011)

jayhusky said:


> I agree with woofwoofwoof here since I myself opened a TT a while back (I forget the reason) and there has been no interaction from any administrative party. So yeah, a few more people wouldn't go amiss to divide the deluge of TT requests from users.
> 
> That said, I had noticed that more names had appeared on the forum leaders page.
> Ok fine there have been some additions to the pack of leaders, however a couple of things strike me as odd.
> ...



1) TT's have been being answered at a much greater speed than before. I can testify to that. It's quite possible that your TT just got buried under several others.

2) All the people in the Super-Mod category are either: Mainstie admins, Recently promoted regular mods, or Super-Mods which have been here for a long time. In addition to some repromoted Senior Members.

3) What are Senior Members? If I recall, they are people who were Mods/Admins, but resigned on good terms. Essentially, by being a Senior Member, they can return at any time to the administration.


----------



## Tiger In A Tie (Aug 21, 2011)

jayhusky said:


> First, why have a moderators catagory with *ONE* person in it?



If you look farther down the list Renard is also a Smod. And if you look at the forum homepage, you'll see that there are no more labels under each category as to which mod can do things where. So since there are no more specifics, they're all Smods with power on any board. The exception being if you look at The Writer's Bloc where Renard is a specified Mod, but is pretty much just a Smod with a specific location to work in along with other things. That's what I'm getting, anyways.


----------



## Azure (Aug 21, 2011)

I love seeing all these new names in blue and stuff with regdates of like, yesterday. Real command and control decisions going on in this place. Such awareness and sure handedness with this changeover. Disaster is inevitable, if not already occurring, and that's just the forums. The mainsite will probably continue to be as awful as ever.


----------



## Devious Bane (Aug 21, 2011)

You'd be a fool to expect different when it's clear the same mistakes are constantly being repeated.


----------



## jcfynx (Aug 21, 2011)

Restructuring the staff members will make no difference when the highest-level decision-makers demonstrate a lack of responsibility, leadership, and skill for community management. Most of the present staff are perfectly capable of running the site if they were properly trained in managing a community and their motivations and incentives were in the right place.

The changes as presented are like putting a band-aid on your child when your child is on fire.

Now he is just on fire and a little sticky.


----------



## Azure (Aug 21, 2011)

jc, why must you bring up sticky children?


----------



## Volkodav (Aug 21, 2011)

jcfynx said:


> Restructuring the staff members will make no difference when the highest-level decision-makers demonstrate a lack of responsibility, leadership, and skill for community management. Most of the present staff are perfectly capable of running the site if they were properly trained in managing a community and their motivations and incentives were in the right place.
> 
> The changes as presented are like putting a band-aid on your child when your child is on fire.
> 
> Now he is just on fire and a little sticky.


Everything you say now about children that I know you're 30 comes off as at least 50 times more goddamn creepy.
I used to think it was funny and a joke, but now I just imagine my dad saying it and it makes me want to stab you repeatedly in the throat so stop


----------



## Azure (Aug 21, 2011)

Clayton said:


> Everything you say now about children that I know you're *30 *comes off as at least 50 times more goddamn creepy.
> I used to think it was funny and a joke, but now I just imagine my dad saying it and it makes me want to stab you repeatedly in the throat so stop


Wait wait wait, what? Hold the goddamn phone, WHAT?!


----------



## jcfynx (Aug 21, 2011)

Azure said:


> Wait wait wait, what? Hold the goddamn phone, WHAT?!



Gosh, now I just feel awkward. I guess my secret is out; I'm in my _late twenties_ rather than my _early twenties._ Does that make me a creeper? Perhaps so. ):


----------



## Devious Bane (Aug 21, 2011)

I was 16 when I started admitted to loathing the adolescence.


----------



## Corto (Aug 21, 2011)

jayhusky said:


> I agree with woofwoofwoof here since I myself opened a TT a while back (I forget the reason) and there has been no interaction from any administrative party. So yeah, a few more people wouldn't go amiss to divide the deluge of TT requests from users.
> 
> That said, I had noticed that more names had appeared on the forum leaders page.
> Ok fine there have been some additions to the pack of leaders, however a couple of things strike me as odd.
> ...



I see you were already replied to, but I'll say it anyway so there can be no complaints that staff didn't reply:

There's more people in the Forum Leaders thing because of the site merge (or whatever happened over at FA) because mainsite staff get special status over here at FAF (hence, notice all these "new names" appear in the "FA site admins" section). There's more supermoderators because the last batch of regular moderators (which, yes, were recruited through the auditions) got promoted.

Senior Members are that, former staff that either quit for whatever reasons or otherwise abandoned the team in good terms. Basically means they are being thanked for their services with a funky brown nickname and the ability to return to their former status once they ask the admins to be reinstated, bypassing the whole recruitment phase (something I've done like 3 times).


----------



## Arshes Nei (Aug 21, 2011)

jayhusky said:


> Finally, just as a question.. Could you define the meaning behind the *Senior Member * catagory?



http://forums.furaffinity.net/faq.php?faq=faf_rules_administration_faq#faq_forum_staff


----------



## Devious Bane (Aug 21, 2011)

I hardly consider the title of "_Senior_ Member" is not something around the lines of _seniority_ based on those outlines. It's more or less something of _note_, so "_Notable _Member" would be a more fitting title for those individuals. The title given to ex-staff members who've left on "good terms" never done anything to piss off a buttload of people however is as significant as a screen door on a battleship.

Instead of looking down, I'm actually going to take the time to say that _*ONE*_ good thing has actually been done. Now, instead of having a bunch of lazy admins who do 9million different things, we have a handful of admins assigned to specific areas. Overall with sarcasm aside, the sectioning of the staff is a brilliant idea.
This is _*good*_ because if that specific area is  lacking progress or has been a growing source of problems, there is the  list of people who work in that section you can flood with PMs - You  know who to contact first instead of jizzing on Neercakes. This is also  good when it comes to labeling who is/isn't doing their job to  expectations. If one section drags, it indicates that perhaps more  qualified individuals are required and/or others may be needed/removed.


----------



## Xaerun (Aug 21, 2011)

jayhusky said:


> That said, I had noticed that more names had appeared on the forum leaders page.
> 
> Secondly, these people that were added to the list (namely some in the super-mod section), how exactly??? I thought there was a *moderators audition thread* in which we applied for a position and then admins would decide who got in or out.
> 
> Has that forum grown legs and disappeared into the wilderness?


Some got promoted, some came across in the Furocity merger. The Moderator Audition board is only visible to members when we are actually accepting applications, and is hidden once the application period is over. We do not want every Tom, Dick and Harry shoving applications in because they failed to read an announcement letting them know we're hiring, similar to how many employers don't really want huge stacks of resumes lying around when there's no positions available- hand your resume in and they'll probably just use it for handy scrap paper.
Just relax, man.


----------



## Devious Bane (Aug 21, 2011)

Dissonance said:


> hand your resume in and they'll probably just use it for handy scrap paper.


Frustrating, ain't it?


----------



## Xaerun (Aug 22, 2011)

Devious Bane said:


> Frustrating, ain't it?


<comment redacted>


----------



## jayhusky (Aug 22, 2011)

Dissonance said:


> The Moderator Audition board is only visible to members when we are actually accepting applications, and is hidden once the application period is over.



If that is the case then how come I can see it all the time?? What I'm getting at is I can see the forum and a thread I posted in there, nothing more, nothing less.
Also I'm going to be honest here, I'm fairly active on these forums, and I haven't really seen any Mod Application messages telling people to go to the forum to submit a "resume" as you say.



Dissonance said:


> Just relax, man.


 
I am relaxed, just a little perplexed in certain area's of the forum




Arshes Nei said:


> http://forums.furaffinity.net/faq.php?faq=faf_rules_administration_faq#faq_forum_staff



Thanks for the link Arshes


----------



## Xaerun (Aug 22, 2011)

jayhusky said:


> If that is the case then how come I can see it all the time?? What I'm getting at is I can see the forum and a thread I posted in there, nothing more, nothing less.


That one more or less comes down to a 'whoops'. To ease any concerns there, you now should not be able to view the board.


jayhusky said:


> Also I'm going to be honest here, I'm fairly active on these forums, and I haven't really seen any Mod Application messages telling people to go to the forum to submit a "resume" as you say.


The announcement was last visible on 06-02-2011 (MM/DD/YYYY, for you crazy Americans). When it is visible, it is a global announcement and appears in the announcement subheading on all boards, similar to the Forum Rules.


----------



## jayhusky (Aug 22, 2011)

Dissonance said:


> That one more or less comes down to a 'whoops'. To ease any concerns there, you now should not be able to view the board.
> 
> The announcement was last visible on 06-02-2011 (MM/DD/YYYY, for you crazy Americans). When it is visible, it is a global announcement and appears in the announcement subheading on all boards, similar to the Forum Rules.



You are indeed correct now, I can no longer see that board.
In the long run it would actually aid me somewhat as, during the time i could see it all the time i was never sure of the open period for applications
Now, given that i will only see it when applications are open it will be of benefit.


Ah I see, I tend to glance over the Global annoucements a lot of the time.

Thank you.


----------



## Devious Bane (Aug 22, 2011)

Dissonance said:


> 06-02-2011 (MM/DD/YYYY, for you crazy Americans)


Our educational system hasn't degraded to that level of ignorance (yet.) Give it about 2 more years.
I think it boils down to "Are you willing to shove your head up someone else's your own ass?" to be an admin type thing. Anyone with an ego as large as their e-penis will qualify, and we've seen the repercussions of such choices. If you would get a boner over the thought of being an FA admin moderator, you would have more or less noticed the application announcement.


----------



## Corto (Aug 22, 2011)

Thanks for the barely hidden insult. â€‹numbnuts


----------



## Devious Bane (Aug 22, 2011)

You're welcome.


----------



## Swampwulf (Sep 6, 2011)

Arshes Nei said:


> I would much rather be able to do what I want, behind the scenes, without having to be visible or answer to anyone.



FTFY


----------



## Carta (Sep 7, 2011)

I assume "FTFY" is internet speak for "I make shit up from taking invented quotes out of context".


----------



## Xaerun (Sep 7, 2011)

Swampwulf said:


> FTFY


Such a glorious and well thought out response.

Communication issues between staff are a _huge_ thing, and I too would prefer that all the new people being brought in in the merger know what's what, what they can touch and what they can't, and so on. I'd imagine that a lot of the artists would quite like the security issues fixed, as y'know, some people rely on commission-made cash, and hell, it'd be nice if the site was nice and stable. All of these things to me would take preference over reading a wall of text that will most likely essentially say "Staff should be friendly and impartial and also not be total dicks". Tryin' to put myself in your shoes here.

Regarding the staff code of conduct, what exactly do you think it is?
What do you _think_ is going to be on there? How do you think a staff member of a reasonably large art site _should_ act? You're pretty much spot on- unless you're pretty darn insane, what you imagine when you think "This is how I would want an authority figure to act" is pretty much exactly what's going to be on the COC.

It's not some crazy formula that we're trying to keep hidden behind smoke and mirrors because oh no it's super secret and we don't want you guys realising we strive to be impartial!


----------



## timoran (Sep 7, 2011)

Dissonance said:


> Regarding the staff code of conduct, what exactly do you think it is?
> What do you _think_ is going to be on there? How do you think a staff member of a reasonably large art site _should_ act? You're pretty much spot on- unless you're pretty darn insane, what you imagine when you think "This is how I would want an authority figure to act" is pretty much exactly what's going to be on the COC.
> 
> It's not some crazy formula that we're trying to keep hidden behind smoke and mirrors because oh no it's super secret and we don't want you guys realising we strive to be impartial!



Well, I think for starters, it should prevent the situation that prompted OdinWolf's thread. Right now there is nothing concrete to point at that the admin involved did not abuse his power, but it is pretty clear that happened. Without any standards to follow nothing will ever be done to prevent the problem from happening again nor will he ever get an apology from the owners for the abuse.


----------



## Xaerun (Sep 7, 2011)

timoran said:


> Well, I think for starters, it should prevent the situation that prompted OdinWolf's thread. Right now there is nothing concrete to point at that the admin involved did not abuse his power, but it is pretty clear that happened. Without any standards to follow nothing will ever be done to prevent the problem from happening again nor will he ever get an apology from the owners for the abuse.



That's relating more to site rules such as TOS or AUP, it wouldn't be even slightly relevant to a staff CoC.


----------



## timoran (Sep 7, 2011)

Dissonance said:


> That's relating more to site rules such as TOS or AUP, it wouldn't be even slightly relevant to a staff CoC.



Not true. For situations where something is not explicitly forbidden in the rules, there should be a warning first, and then if a suspension is called for, there should be a standard for how serious a violation merits how long a suspension.

Also, if someone writes the admin to contest the suspension, it's completely uncalled for for the admin to completely ignore the person.

Things like this are what I expect CoC to fix.


----------



## Xaerun (Sep 7, 2011)

timoran said:


> Not true. For situations where something is not explicitly forbidden in the rules, there should be a warning first, and then if a suspension is called for, there should be a standard for how serious a violation merits how long a suspension.
> 
> Also, if someone writes the admin to contest the suspension, it's completely uncalled for for the admin to completely ignore the person.
> 
> Things like this are what I expect CoC to fix.



I think we've just gone circular right back to my point of "How you would want staff to act is pretty much what it's going to say (sanity and reasonable level of maturity dependant)"


----------



## timoran (Sep 7, 2011)

Dissonance said:


> I think we've just gone circular right back to my point of "How you would want staff to act is pretty much what it's going to say (sanity and reasonable level of maturity dependant)"



If we say that the staff policy is "Don't Be A Dick" that's fine and good but it's subjective and you know people will try and weasel out of it.

There need to be some black and white, concrete standards for how admins should and should not handle specific situations.


----------



## Gryphoneer (Sep 7, 2011)

Is this one of those cases again where you have to go to ED to learn what's actually going on?


----------



## Corto (Sep 7, 2011)

Man if the CoC forbids me acting like a dick then I may just resign.


----------



## timoran (Sep 7, 2011)

Corto said:


> Man if the CoC forbids me acting like a dick then I may just resign.



No see, that's not how it works. The admins who do a respectable job, those are the ones who always eventually get fed up with this site's administration and quit.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Sep 7, 2011)

Carta said:


> I assume "FTFY" is internet speak for "I make shit up from taking invented quotes out of context".



Haters gonna hate.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Sep 7, 2011)

timoran said:


> If we say that the staff policy is "Don't Be A Dick" that's fine and good but it's subjective and you know people will try and weasel out of it.
> 
> There need to be some black and white, concrete standards for how admins should and should not handle specific situations.



Right but this goes both ways for members too who try to do the same to get a staff member for whatever reason someone pissed in their cherios that day. 

A Staff COC is good though. I don't mind it and I don't mind people seeing that there is one. However, end of the day the person should be fair minded and enforce it. Not someone who may cower to the squeaky mice, but actually look at the situation objectively and work on proper conduct with the staff.  Meaning, that the leader will enforce it.


----------



## Corto (Sep 7, 2011)

timoran said:


> No see, that's not how it works. The admins who do a respectable job, those are the ones who always eventually get fed up with this site's administration and quit.


Ok, I'll bite, how is that in any way related to what I said? Are you calling me a shitty mod? Because I am a shitty mod but I'm still confused by your reply.


----------



## timoran (Sep 7, 2011)

Corto said:


> Ok, I'll bite, how is that in any way related to what I said? Are you calling me a shitty mod? Because I am a shitty mod but I'm still confused by your reply.



I wouldn't know, but chances are you're one of the good ones. You actually communicate with us.


----------



## timoran (Sep 7, 2011)

Arshes Nei said:


> Right but this goes both ways for members too who try to do the same to get a staff member for whatever reason someone pissed in their cherios that day.
> 
> A Staff COC is good though. I don't mind it and I don't mind people seeing that there is one. However, end of the day the person should be fair minded and enforce it. Not someone who may cower to the squeaky mice, but actually look at the situation objectively and work on proper conduct with the staff.  Meaning, that the leader will enforce it.



It's more of a problem when the leader himself needs a CoC to be bound to.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Sep 8, 2011)

timoran said:


> It's more of a problem when the leader himself needs a CoC to be bound to.



So what is he gonna do when he breaks it, step down?
Sure there should be accountability, but then there is some rationale bout the consequences.


----------



## Accountability (Sep 8, 2011)

Arshes Nei said:


> So what is he gonna do when he breaks it, step down?
> Sure there should be accountability, but then there is some rationale bout the consequences.



Well...

What kind of consequences _could_ there be in that case?

Should he ban himself for three days?


----------



## CAThulu (Sep 8, 2011)

Arshes Nei said:


> So what is he gonna do when he breaks it, step down?
> Sure there should be accountability, but then there is some rationale bout the consequences.



Impeach :V


----------

