Administrator Roles in Moderating

[Emma]

Mases should not have given Kitsu and Repentance database access so early after their promotions. This opened a Pandora's Box of issues and begs answers to questions such as why Djinn, someone who never trolled and was never banned, has the least permissions.

If tech admin is distinguished, a new user group with custom permissions should be created with Mases perhaps needing to reconsider who he gives DB access to.

This is what I meant when I said what Kitsu and Seth claimed about it being impossible were untrue claims. Database access is required for the kind of thing we're talking about. The thing some of you think makes it "impossible" to distinguish them. But database access is not part of being an admin, it has to be granted separately.

 

[Seth]

Mases should not have given Kitsu and Repentance database access so early after their promotions. This opened a Pandora's Box of issues and begs answers to questions such as why Djinn, someone who never trolled and was never banned, has the least permissions.

If tech admin is distinguished, a new user group with custom permissions should be created with Mases perhaps needing to reconsider who he gives DB access to.

And what horrible things have they done?

Fix the site too well?

 

[Snow Queen]

This is what I meant when I said what Kitsu and Seth claimed about it being impossible were untrue claims. Database access is required for the kind of thing we're talking about. The thing some of you think makes it "impossible" to distinguish them. But database access is not part of being an admin, it has to be granted separately.

I believe database access is also necessary to be a tech admin as well.

 

[(◕‿◕✿)]

This is what I meant when I said what Kitsu and Seth claimed about it being impossible were untrue claims. Database access is required for the kind of thing we're talking about. The thing some of you think makes it "impossible" to distinguish them. But database access is not part of being an admin, it has to be granted separately.

We had access to plugins. We could write a PHP plugin to run when we accessed a certain page and drop the database. It doesn't necessitate database access (which could also be gotten with a PHP plugin anyway).

 

[Mellow Ezlo]

One slip-up does not mean Kitsu should be demoted. He's probably done more for this site than most of the previous admins. Delete his rank, we're back to square one.

And like I said earlier, they don't need to be mods to have the mod privileges. Something needs to be dealt with but there are no mods around, then at least there's somebody around to deal with it. I know it's not even close to the situation from last night, but imagine if somebody was hacking the forum, blatantly bad-mouthing people with no motives, spamming threads in all the sections, and there's nobody around but Kitsu and Rep. By the time they are able to discuss it with the mod team, that member could have caused a lot of problems. But if one of them is there, they can deal with the problem before it gets bad. It's kinda like teachers sending a student to the principal's office even though the principal is not currently there; it keeps them out of trouble until somebody of higher authority can deal with the problem at hand. That's what I'm trying to get at, that's how I think Rep and Kitsu's moderation privileges should be handled. They don't need to be stripped of their rank just because of one permission, that's absolutely ludicrous.

 

[Emma]

I believe database access is also necessary to be a tech admin as well.

No, it's not. Some tech is on the forum itself, some is in the database. They are separate. Database access admins are technically supposed to be called, by industry standards, system admins. If someone abuses database access to get more power, it could be revoked.
So we could have system admins for database, tech for on-forum stuff, and community for managing the people on the forums.

 

[(◕‿◕✿)]

No, it's not. Some tech is on the forum itself, some is in the database. They are separate. Database access admins are technically supposed to be called, by industry standards, system admins. If someone abuses database access to get more power, it could be revoked.
So we could have system admins for database, tech for on-forum stuff, and community for managing the people on the forums.

System admin refers to someone who manages a server usually. Database access is almost always necessary unless you're just ticking off options in the ACP. Regardless this is missing the point.

 

[Jamie]

Deleting the forums isn't outside the boundaries of an Admins abilities, that's where the false equivalency lies. It's extremely malicious, and would result in immediate banishment, but it isn't outside of the boundaries set by the job description. Just like Garo can permanently ban a member for no reason, which would result in a demotion likely, Kitsu and I can delete the site. The punishment should not be for infracting someone (not malicious) but if it was unjust. Separating the roles only restricts people who are trusted with a lot. You are restricting us in a way that isn't logical. You trust us to edit files in the site but not to infract a user? I can make a judgment call, especially if I discuss it with other staff members first. I'm not incapable of moderating.

 

[Emma]

Deleting the forums isn't outside the boundaries of an Admins abilities, that's where the false equivalency lies. It's extremely malicious, and would result in immediate banishment, but it isn't outside of the boundaries set by the job description. Just like Garo can permanently ban a member for no reason, which would result in a demotion likely, Kitsu and I can delete the site. The punishment should not be for infracting someone (not malicious) but if it was unjust. Separating the roles only restricts people who are trusted with a lot. You are restricting us in a way that isn't logical. You trust us to edit files in the site but not to infract a user? I can make a judgment call, especially if I discuss it with other staff members first. I'm not incapable of moderating.

Given how badly that ability was abused, YES we don't trust some with moderating. And personally, I never specifically said you aren't capable of moderating. You haven't done anything wrong. But Kitsu has. Knowing how to tech doesn't mean they can moderate. One thing that is required is the ability to leave your emotions at the door and NOT take out personal grudges with the powers. And I think given his behavior in the last month, he clearly can't control his emotions and restrain himself. Besides this one case, he's made personal attacks several times in the shoutbox, and in the case of his response to my complaint about the warning I got. Someone who conducts themselves like he has should absolutely not be moderating.

 

[Seth]

I don't think it's fair to say "how badly it was abused" when it was a reversible infraction that didn't result in a ban...

 

[Jamie]

I was lead to believe that Kitsu and Rep did not have FTP or DB access.

I asked Kit and he apparently lied to my face. Ouch.

We just got it about a month ago, but all ftp and db access gives you is a gui (still extremely convenient). Php can do db operations and delete/add files in a single file.

With that being said:

Mases should not have given Kitsu and Repentance database access so early after their promotions. This opened a Pandora's Box of issues and begs answers to questions such as why Djinn, someone who never trolled and was never banned, has the least permissions.

You have no sweet clue what you are talking about. With PHP, I could delete the database well before I got access. I have been coding PHP for 7 years, Kitsu probably for a long time as well, all I am seeing coming from this thread from multiple users (3 is my count) is absolutely ill-informed, dare I say ignorant statements that do not even remotely reflect the actual situation. Please, if you recognize you do not know what you are talking about when it comes to this kind of stuff, don't talk about it. For the love of God.

 

[Emma]

I don't think it's fair to say "how badly it was abused" when it was a reversible infraction that didn't result in a ban...

Ever since Kitsu made those insults against me (which I brushed off because I thought he discredited himself with it), and then DM messaged him on Skype disapproving of what Kitsu said to me, Kitsu started making personal attacks against DM on Skype, and on the forums, particularly in the shoutbox, whenever he got the chance to. And infracting anyone, without giving a reason, immediately after making a personal attack against them is a very, very unethical thing to do. Completely ignoring it is wrong and it sends the wrong message and it will encourage this thing to happen again in the future because those who do it then would see that there was little more than a wrist slap for doing it.

 

[Justac00lguy]

Here's my two cents.

I think, generally, moderating should be done by mods (I mean that's our job). And this should be the case the majority of the time, but Admins (Rep and Kitsu) should still have the power to moderate if they choose to and it shouldn't be limited. The majority of big mod decisions (banning/infracting etc.) aren't made solely by the mods - it's usually a combination of the Mods, CCs, and Admins. So taking away their ability to moderate is a moot point considering they'll still have a say regarding moderating actions anyway.

Most cases, yeah, the Mods will (and should) usually handle things, but it shouldn't be out of their [Kitsu and Rep] jurisdiction not to moderate. There will be moments when they need to make an action then and there, and if they can't, then it creates an awkward problem.

 

[Jamie]

Matt, you are simply arguing for Kitsu's moderation abilities to be restricted, correct? So mine would stay? Then, wouldn't it be a bit silly if there was only 1 out of 4 admins who isn't a mod?

 

[Shroom]

Ever since Kitsu made those insults against me (which I brushed off because I thought he discredited himself with it), and then DM messaged him on Skype disapproving of what Kitsu said to me, Kitsu started making personal attacks against DM on Skype, and on the forums, particularly in the shoutbox, whenever he got the chance to. And infracting anyone, without giving a reason, immediately after making a personal attack against them is a very, very unethical thing to do. Completely ignoring it is wrong and it sends the wrong message and it will encourage this thing to happen again in the future because those who do it then would see that there was little more than a wrist slap for doing it.

I think the attention its gotten is more than just a slap on the wrist. The question for everyone here, it seems, is not: "Should Admins have mod powers? " to me it seems to be going towards: "Should Kitsu have modding powers?"

I still think with what had happened there in SB (from what I read, I have no knowledge of outside resources) was justifiable. I think a mod would have acted in some way just the same, maybe not in the same manner, but still an action needed to be taken in Kitsu's point of view. Even if you disagree, that's what the thread of contesting unfair infractions is for. To debate the actions that a mod/admin has taken.

The action was reversed, and I honestly don't think Kitsu has any ill-will towards the site. In the future he will now know to consult others before acting, but I think this one instance is rather extreme to try and take away his power.

Again, I think admins should be able to have moderation powers as necessary. I trust Locke, Djinn, Rep, and Kitsu's judgment enough for them to act in a rather fair way. If they don't, well we can always contest.

Edit: Rep beat me to it.