CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online
log in · register
Home › Miscellaneous › Feedback & Suggestions › Admin System Overhaul

Admin System Overhaul

Started by Henry Hernandez7 · · 👁 4 views · 14 replies

📡 Subscribe to replies

Participants Henry Hernandez7Daniel Ward87steelskipper5Sophia Thomas7Jerry Bishop4Sam Green73Nicholas King
Henry Hernandez7 Henry Hernandez7 Active MemberOP
128 messages
joined Apr 2014
#1 ·
So, basically, people on here are always venting about how the mods act, and honestly, they mess up more often than not. But when you try to take it to the administration, 99.99% of the time they just back the mods up.

We need a reform because the current setup just isn't fair.

Here’s what I’m thinking:

- Three Administrators would be picked by a town hall council (which itself consists of elected members), and we'd keep that number odd—like 3 or 5 people—to decide whether an accused user actually broke the rules through a simple vote (guilty or not guilty).

It’s just a classic jury system, the kind used in all the major democracies out there, whereas what we've got going on here feels more like something you'd see in North Korea.

Doing this would make the forum a much better, more honest place for everyone.

Feel free to throw out your own ideas.
Daniel Ward87 Daniel Ward87 Active Member
195 messages
joined May 2023
#2 ·
Henry Hernandez7 said:Basically, users often complain about how moderators handle things—and let’s be real, they mess up more than they should. But when people take those complaints to the Administration, it’s almost always a rubber stamp for the mods.

We need a total overhaul because the current setup just isn't fair.

Here’s what I’m thinking:

- Three Administrators would be chosen by a town hall council (which itself is made up of elected members) consisting of an odd number of people (like 3 or 5). This council would decide whether a user flagged by a moderator is actually in the wrong through a simple vote.

It’s basically the jury system used in major American democracies. Right now, our system feels more like something you'd see in North Korea.

Doing this would make the forum a much better, more honest community for everyone.

Feel free to weigh in with your own ideas.

Nope.
Henry Hernandez7 Henry Hernandez7 Active MemberOP
128 messages
joined Apr 2014
#3 ·
Daniel Ward87 said:Nah.

Why does this feel like déjà vu!?

Ward87, just let the majority make the call.
Daniel Ward87 Daniel Ward87 Active Member
195 messages
joined May 2023
#4 ·
Henry Hernandez7 said:Why does this feel so familiar!?

Daniel Ward87, just let the majority call the shots.

Nah, because Henry Hernandez7, you clearly aren't hearing a word I'm saying—this isn't some democracy.
Henry Hernandez7 Henry Hernandez7 Active MemberOP
128 messages
joined Apr 2014
#5 ·
How can you seriously not see that these are my attempts at starting a revolution?
Daniel Ward87 Daniel Ward87 Active Member
195 messages
joined May 2023
#6 ·
How do you not realize you're one step away from getting cut from the PŽK roster? Seriously, please quit this stuff before we actually have to bench you for good.
Henry Hernandez7 Henry Hernandez7 Active MemberOP
128 messages
joined Apr 2014
#7 ·
What’s the deal with this? I put together a proper thread with a formal proposal, so how am I even supposed to talk to you guys now?
Daniel Ward87 Daniel Ward87 Active Member
195 messages
joined May 2023
#8 ·
The answer is already a hard no—your proposal isn't going anywhere. It looks like you're just doing this because you barely scraped by on that Politics PDF.

NO, you aren't getting a pass, and YES, you could actually fail PŽK because what you’re doing is nothing more than straight-up spam. A revolution? 🤦đ

Give it a rest, please.
Henry Hernandez7 Henry Hernandez7 Active MemberOP
128 messages
joined Apr 2014
#9 ·
Man, you totally spooked me into thinking I shouldn't say anything else... just a quick heads-up though, this whole thread has absolutely nothing to do with my major in Politics.

I was honestly just trying to make this a slightly better corner of the internet.

Anyway, if anyone has something to add, go for it.

That’s all from me, catch ya later.
steelskipper5 steelskipper5 Active Member
176 messages
joined Feb 2010
#10 ·
Alright, I’ll jump in here as the resident killjoy.

First off, Henry Hernandez7, you seriously need to wrap your head around the fact that this place isn't a democracy.
It’s—how should I put this?—more like an absolute monarchy. It's basically a feudal system where the moderators are the lords of their own little fiefdoms, answering to the supermods and admins, who hold even larger territories (like specific subforums or the entire site).
Anderlon owns the place. He's the big boss. The head honcho. His word is law.
And there isn't a single vote from the user base that can change that, unless you're planning on writing a massive check to buy out the whole site from Anderlon.

I’ve been reading your threads over the last few weeks—specifically how much you’ve been picking fights with admins over your rating in Politics—and I honestly wonder how they even deal with you, even when they're being as brief as Daniel Ward87.
You’re chasing something you aren't going to get, and frankly, you can't have it. Ratings aren't handed out like candy anymore; they go wherever the admin feels like giving them, mostly because the admins who used to be that loose with things aren't in those positions anymore. I won't get into why you got your specific rating since I don't follow the Politics section closely enough to make a qualified judgment; the point is, those admins answered your question and showed incredible patience while you kept asking the exact same thing over and over.

Now, usually, ratings can be reviewed after a certain amount of time—typically at least six months. I have no clue if the admin team will be willing to revisit your case in half a year or a year, but some time has to pass. Go argue about this on other subforums; the mods and admins have made it crystal clear right here that your rating stands.
Attempting a revolution doesn't work. It just can't.
Even if the entire user base teamed up, nobody is going to topple an admin using the methods a mob uses to overthrow a feudal lord.
And if you want to walk away in protest, it has to be massive.

You don't stand a chance. You have zero leverage.
But you definitely have a very clear signal that the admins are getting fed up with you constantly beating a dead horse.
And now you’re proposing something that doesn't work on any forum in existence.
Admin teams are always absolute; the only thing that varies is how benevolent they choose to be.
That's just how forums are built.

The only forum I know of that actually fought against moderator authority by trying democratic methods ended up driving away almost all its users and died a slow, painful death (that was the FFZG forum, if you really care).
When you're ready to shell out your own cash to run the place, then you can have your democracy. Until then, learn how to function within the system we have.
Sophia Thomas7 Sophia Thomas7 Active Member
183 messages
joined Aug 2015
#11 ·
steelskipper5 said:The only forum I know that tried to fight back against moderator and admin authority by using democratic methods ended up driving away almost every single user before dying a slow, painful death (that would be the FFZG forum, if you really care).

You could also point to the old American Usenet days, where a lack of mods or admins caused entire groups of people to just pack up and leave all at once.
Henry Hernandez7 Henry Hernandez7 Active MemberOP
128 messages
joined Apr 2014
#12 ·
Look, I’m not out here campaigning to get rid of moderators entirely, I just think we need more honest discipline or, honestly, just letting people live their lives.
Jerry Bishop4 Jerry Bishop4 Member
46 messages
joined Nov 2014
#13 ·
Henry Hernandez7 said:Look, I'm not actually saying we should get rid of moderators entirely. I just think we need fairer penalties or maybe even just giving people more freedom on the boards.

Honestly, if they weren't here, what would this place even be? Just a parade of trolls. Besides, you've complained about everything else! I wouldn't have even pulled any partial bans myself. That's just how the town hall council crowd feels.🙂
Sam Green73 Sam Green73 Active Member
144 messages
joined Aug 2018
#14 ·
Chloe Scott27 said:Honestly, I wouldn't even dream of downloading a partial file myself. That’s just the typical consensus you hear from the crowd at the town hall council. 🙂

Are you honestly suggesting that even in a democracy, my colleague would still walk away with a partial win?
That’s a really interesting question.
Nicholas King Nicholas King Regular
716 messages
joined Jan 2023
#15 ·
Sam Green73 said:Are you honestly suggesting that even under a democratic system, my colleague would still walk away with a partial payout? I mean, seriously—is that really how you see things playing out?

Even if we were to completely ignore the fundamental fact that this forum is private property—making the proposal to introduce some sort of jury system about as sensible as my suggestion that a random handful of users should get to decide who attends a dinner party Henry Hernandez7 hosts at his own house tomorrow night—there is yet another absurdity baked right into the proposal itself.

So, here’s the deal—the proposal suggests that a "town hall council" would be selected by three administrators. Now, I guess you could look at that one way, but if you really sit down and think about the implications, there aren't exactly any safeguards in place to prevent those administrators from simply hand-picking three members who happen to agree with everything they've done up to this point—and, let's be honest, people who will likely rubber-stamp whatever they decide to do in the future, too. And just like that, we have ourselves a closed loop. The prospect of these sweeping reforms—if we can even call them that without rolling our eyes—is honestly quite exhausting to contemplate. I mean, I guess we were all expecting some level of upheaval, but the sheer scale of what’s being proposed right now feels less like progress and more like a chaotic restructuring of everything we thought was settled. It's all very much "move fast and break things," isn't it? Except, in this case, the things being broken are the very foundations of our current system. Maybe I’m being too cynical—perhaps I am—but there seems to be this underlying assumption that if you just tear everything down and start from scratch, the pieces will somehow magically fall into a more efficient shape. It’s a bold strategy, I suppose, though history suggests it usually just leads to more bureaucracy and a whole lot of wasted time. We see these grand gestures being tossed around by the higher-ups, and while they talk a big game about modernization and "moving forward," one has to wonder who actually bears the brunt of the transition. It’s rarely the people making the decisions, is it? It’s always the folks on the ground trying to navigate the mess left behind. It’s a delicate balance, really—trying to fix a flawed system without accidentally dismantling the parts that actually work. But then again, maybe nothing works perfectly, and maybe this radical shift is exactly the kind of blunt force trauma the country needs. I'm still undecided, but I certainly won't be cheering just because someone decided to shake the jar. We are facing a serious problem. 🙂.

You must log in or register to reply here.

Log in Register

🔗 Similar threads