Jump to content

Moose

Joint Chief of Staff
  • Content Count

    6994
  • Donations

    25.00 USD 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    14

Moose last won the day on March 21

Moose had the most liked content!

5 Followers

About Moose

  • Rank
    Earl Post-A-Lot
  • Birthday 06/09/1991

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Array

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Moose

    Recruitment

    I may have missed some, but I feel like most were addressed. To recap most of what I saw: 1. Require reasons for votes / no votes to avoid circle jerking There's absolutely NO way to moderate this. Who gets to decide what is a valid reason? What length is valid. If someone doesn't like someone, technically that's a good enough reason imo, but the problem becomes as mark so greatly pointed out (even if he was arguing for voting) he will trust others opinions to form his decision. Also, if someone does something that is deemed as toxic, does that mean everyone that witnessed it can't use the same reason because it'd be "copy pasting" even though it is valid? Again, there's no way of proving with certainty that someone was asked, coerced, etc. to go and vote on someone. 2. Require activity to be able to vote We've slowly been addressing the activity issue through ranks, but this one is still VERY difficult. What qualifies as active, how do we monitor that? If someone comes around sG to play with their small group of 2-5 friends (not even on our servers but they use discord or something), are they active enough to see others actions and vote on them? I'd argue yes. But then, that becomes hard to moderate who is actually active vs not. As Bulletford pointed out, some of our most active staff honestly don't use forums much anymore. I monitor ranks, recruitment, CD, etc. but honestly very rarely post. I jump on towards the end of the month to see if there's anyone I personally know, that I feel like deserved a ref/vote, and most of the time my post wouldn't matter because they already have enough. 3. 30 refs seems like too much You proposed 20 yes votes I believe, yet this basically evens out to the same imo. If you need 20 people to vote yes (same as ref you essentially), but then you allow no votes, chances are you'll have at least a few people who dislike you. So now you're probably talking an average of 25-30 people voting yes to offset the no's. 4. If someone turns "toxic" I can't remove my ref I don't get it this at all. We've had VERY few instances of this, and most of them happened when voting was around. They just waited a full month to "change". I'm honestly missing what you hope to gain from bringing back voting.
  2. Moose

    Recruitment

    Had nothing to do with ruining the poll. It was mostly because we can see what the real votes showed, but it was an easy way of proving one of the few points of where voting can be a bad thing (also, I do think it was kind of funny to see all those old names on there, even tho it's private to everyone else). I'd also like to reiterate that while I can see what the majority of those that have voted say, that alone would not change things - but also does not mean we're ignoring the vote. If the majority wanted something, fine, let's talk about it. But I also saw many times ignoring travs questions, concerns etc. with moving back, and all of those would need to be addressed. No matter how much I disagree with you about adding votes back, I am still always going to listen if the other side listens as well.
  3. Moose

    Recruitment

    Please stop saying 70% of the community wants this. 70% of those who have voted say they want it. That’s nowhere close to 70% of our active members.
  4. Sean is gonna scam the raffle winner by sending them 20 Canadian monopoly dollars. Thanks for getting this up so quickly, I know a lot of people enjoy these.
  5. Moose

    Staff Update - 3/5/19

    First after bear of course. Congrats guys.
  6. Moose

    sG | CS:GO Prop Hunt - March 2nd to March 3rd

    TY for the clip. It was fantastic.
  7. Moose

    Jailbreak recommendations

    1. I've always done and try(ed) to do when I was actively playing JB. I hate seeing overly strict CTs at low pop specifically (you can still play the game mode without killing someone for taking one extra step...). 2. Kinda meh, whatever. Don't have much of an opinion, if people see it as being a problem and think it'll help, fine. Especially if it seems to be a common thing on other servers and regular JB players are used to that requirement. 3. I typically hate. AFAIK steam lightened their restrictions, but you cannot use any of the default skins provided by valve (you can have a krambit, but needs to have a different skin than what you can actually obtain). This does still keep the "look at me aspect" of actually owning a knife, however that also means that it adds downloads to the server for every skin you want to add (which is where I really dislike the addition). 4. I think it's been much lighter enforcement due to less populated servers, but it is still technically a thing. I'm not sure what @Clamps and @Bulldog have drawn the line of "enough" play time to not be on the watchlist / be demoted.
  8. Moose

    Jailbreak Map Removal (Post your opinion)

    It does, but there's no real barrier or anything as the Ts can get there in sub 3 seconds of running thru the teleport. I don't know how many times I've just ran thru and jumped, ran up the ladder and stabbed a CT in the back, and even if I die there's a good chance the CTs gun ended up in the pile of Ts. Also, if things are going badly, on that side of the teleporter, CTs holding the other side are most likely going to die going thru...
  9. Moose

    Jailbreak Map Removal (Post your opinion)

    The only issue I've ever had with clouds is the teleport... it's so hard for CTs to control if Ts are actively trying to rebel. It'd be nice if the teleport to go back to cell area was in a different location than where the teleport out of cells placed Ts, so they couldn't run back in immediately after going there. Also, placing CTs and Ts in different spots when going through is always a nice idea, so CTs can get thru if things are going crazy...
  10. Your application has been moved to pending status. You may now put on your sGr | tag to inform members that you are a Recruit. In order to become a member of Syndicate Gamers, your application will need to meet at least 20 referrals from sG members who are L2 and above. Three of those must be from our Staff team. Also, I hate you. Ref. 1/20
  11. Moose

    Sad.

    Thank you for your valuable input.
  12. Moose

    New donation from SmugJack

    I am so confused.
  13. Moose

    App [DENIED]

    Confirmed 18/20
  14. Moose

    Culture of sG

    First off, I'd like to say thanks @Destin for writing something up, but also providing what you see as solutions to the problems. Even if we don't agree on some points, I appreciate it much more than the typical user who comes in and says we have problem x, without any hint of a solution. If we had the solution to all our problems, we wouldn't have problems. First off, I would say the thing that I disagree with most is that we aren't a business, we shouldn't be compared to one. As Travesty has said, we're a gaming community, where yes, we provide some services (in which case we could handle some things better), but most importantly we bring people together that would probably never have met otherwise to game / become friends. I will admit that your example was one that could have been handled better, regardless of how we as Staff felt. People were upset after thinking they were going to receive something and were told they weren't going to. This is why after talking with Sean, it was decided that it was our fault as staff for a lack of communication, and the users would get what they (even if just an assumption) thought they were going to get for participating. We should have done this to start with, and it will be the manner in which we handle something like this going forward. As far as leadership goes, this one has always been a mixed bag. You have ups and downs for everyone as far as activity, motivation, etc. goes. But overall I'd agree with you. Things take too long to change for the most part. But that doesn't mean that nobody is doing anything - obviously everyone knows there's staff channels, that the public doesn't see. But there's also a lot more segregation than that. There's management channels, engineering channels, etc. that only particular people with those responsibilities have access to. I'm not giving the default excuse of "what we do is behind the scenes", as I've already said I mostly agree with you. But most of us, and most of staff I'd say in general, is at the moment pretty active. As Mimics last announcement hinted, there are staff changes coming that quite honestly, I've been pushing for for quite a few weeks now ( again, where I'm dissatisfied at the time it takes to make changes ), where we'll hopefully see some decent changes. As for community culture, I'd like to start out by saying that if you're going to make a thread like this, don't just dismiss other peoples opinions by saying they're wrong. You can agree to disagree, but if we're going to listen to what you have to say, then you shouldn't react like this I personally think we're the most inclusive we've ever been. It's easier now to join than it ever has been, and I know there are many people who think we should just let people in and wear tags as soon as they make an app if they meet certain play time requirements. I don't necessarily disagree with that, but you've been around long enough to see the storm that it makes with this community. Many people like to have some sort of say in who joins our "club", and we're just never going to make everyone happy. Personally I think we're at a pretty good spot overall in how it works, although I'm never going to turn down tweaks to continue to improve. Lastly, addressing toxicity. I personally don't think I've seen people be actually toxic in a while. Sure we have bickering, some trolling, etc. But I don't think I've seen anything that would warrant in my mind a demotion or JP in a while. I know some people have said they felt harassed, and yeah, maybe sometimes it's a little too targeted/constant. But overall I don't think anyone has been crossing any lines. At least the lines that we've previously setup... When people have made complaints that I've seen (directly come to me, pm to staff, cd thread, etc. ) I typically will go to the person and ask them to chill out. But I personally don't think we need to adjust community standards to create a protective online bubble for people. I'm not saying you just have to grow a thicker skin, I know some people just get offended easily. But there's lots of other ways that you can ignore / dismiss it (blocking them, not engaging them, ignoring it without blocking them...). Again, it's a large community with the purpose to bring people together that enjoy others' company. It's made up of small cliques, and that's fine, you don't have to like everyone... I can guarantee that these will only be looked at once in a blue moon without a complaint being written. We're not going to waste our time combing through logs to hopefully find an abuser and punish them. Not to mention logs give us close to no context of the situation. For those saying that SO's, staff, or other admins in the past haven't been punished, we do our best to evaluate each situation. Sometimes it's a private discussion with the person. Many times we don't want to remove a position / power off of one/a couple minor offenses, but eventually something is done if it needs to be (see: staff cash getting limited (RIP war3)). Also, some people mentioned us not branching out to new games. I'll say it over and over again. If you find some games that are actually popular and support dedicated servers, we're more than open to suggestions. Problem is, most current games aren't giving the option of hosting your own servers, so there hasn't been many choices going around lately.
  15. Moose

    WAR3 SO Situation *Please Read*

    Thanks for your concern, but I'm just going to say we won't be going forward with your suggestion. Although I get what you're trying to get at, it seems kind of silly to nominate and promote someone who potentially has no desire for the role. If they are good, active members, they can apply. There's no real hoops to jump through.
×
×
  • Create New...