Posts by erin

Quote from Ashaz

Object, no reason based on the OP but mainly on the basis that we have enough admins already and adding more will disturb the op-admin ratio

I've no concerns with the number of admins right now - it's a fair bit lower than it's been at times in the past year or so, although I do accept the player count is also lower. I'll keep an eye on things over the next while to see if anything changes.

I ask that the voting take place on the applicants own merit - I will place it on hold if it does turn out the ratio is too high.

Vouch, there is no reason for anyone to need to place more than a handful of beacons at once.

We're a bit over the deadline and I do apologise for that, but considering the support is unanimous I have no issue **accepting** this application and welcoming you into the team.

Youre added now in discord and in the forum and next time you get in game you'll be added to the admin list from there.

I won't be available myself today but if you contact a senior admin I'm sure they'll be happy to show you around.

Congratulations!

As the person in charge of admin applications I'm gonna go through this.

To save it being read any further, I don't think it's a very good idea and I have no plans on implementing any kind of forum point threshold.

The way I see it, considering our forum environment it would either need to be met via spam posting for the sake of posting, commenting vouch on suggestions and doing the daily wordle. None of these things really tell me, or anyone how good of an admin someone might be. (in fact, the first one would work against an applicant)

With that said then, any requirement set on forum activity would either be trivially easy to obtain because I don't have trust that it's a good barrier to apply, or tedious as fuck because it's hard to get the points without making silly or pointless posts.

Also worth noting we've had incredibly active players and even many admins who have little forum presence and it doesn't take away at all from their abilities.

Long story short this is denied.

Final bump for feedback, I'll be reviewing this soon.

For what it's worth I vouch myself, you interact and engage with the community very well, and demonstrate more than enough competence to handle the position.

This thread contains all the information one will need to know about the admin application process, with links to relevant threads for both applicants and those voting. The information in this thread is up to date as of 7th November 2022, any conflicting information from older threads is now obsolete.

If you once held admin status on the server, please skip ahead to the "Reinstatements" section.

Writing an admin application

Before you write your application, you should first take a look through the pre-application checklist, as it contains a mixture of requirements and recommendations before the application can be written.

Once that is looked through and you've met all points of the checklist, you are free to copy the application format, and write a post in this board of the forum.

Voting on an admin application

Once the application is posted, there is a voting period of at least two weeks. In certain cases, the EAO team might decide to process the application before or after this date, but the vast majority should be processed two weeks from the date of posting.

More detailed voting instructions can be found here, but to summarise, only vouches and objections with reasoning will be counted in the final tally. Neutral votes are permitted if you wish to add a piece of evidence or a comment to help other people decide, but "vouch" "object" or "neutral" will not be counted and will likely get moderated. What's more, as much as we will allow an applicant to respectfully respond to any points made in votes, flame wars or arguments will not look good for anyone.

Processing an admin application

Once the two-week voting period has ended, the EAO team will process the application. If at least 75% of the votes are vouches, then the application will be approved and the applicant will be promoted to admin status. If less than 75% of votes are vouches, then the application is to be denied, and the applicant must wait 30 days before attempting to reapply.

Other cases for denial may include not meeting the pre-application checklist requirements, which will cause an instant denial of any applications until those requirements are met. If an applicant is found to have lied on an application or plagiarised their application, further denial periods might be accrued. This list is not exhaustive, and the final judgment will lie with the EAO team.

Applying for senior admin

Senior admin applications are different from admin applications, in that they are only open once every three months. The most recent calendar for their availability can be found here, with the next window opening Friday, November 18, 2022. The prerequisites for senior admin include that you must have at least 12 months total service as an admin on the server by the end of the voting period - this doesn't have to be continuous, for example, two six-month spells separated by resignation for exams.

One recommendation from a senior admin is also required to post a valid application. If you do not have a recommendation, you can post a thread in this board (admin+ only) asking for one, with senior admins able to contact you via the forum or discord (if you have one) to let you know of theirs.

Once you have met the requirements and an application window has opened, you are free to use this template and post in this board.

Senior admin application process

The window to post senior applications will last two weeks each round, but unlike admin applications, voting is not instantaneous. Instead, the applications are locked from voting until the application period has ended and all applications are posted (Note: If votes are made on the application before it is able to be locked, those votes shall remain). Then, the two-week voting period will commence during which all members are encouraged to give their feedback on whether or not the applicant is fit for promotion to senior status, with the voting instructions still applying here.

If the application has more than 80% of the votes being vouches, it will progress to the final stage, which is a one-week voting period on the forum for senior admins only. During this week, senior admins will have the opportunity to privately air any concerns that they may, for whatever reason, not wish to be made public. If something comes up in this stage that will cause a denial of the application, the reason for the denial will be made publically available.

If the final week goes by without concerns arising, then the admin will be promoted to the responsibility of senior status. Any failed applicants at any point during the process are free to attempt to apply again during the next round.

Reinstatements

If you, at any point have held an admin status on this server then this is the section for you.

Firstly, you must accrue at least 9 hours (75% of the usual threshold) of active playtime in the 30 days prior to posting your reinstatement thread. This is to ensure that you have returned to the community before you return to a position of moderating it. However, if you were removed for activity or resigned less than 30 days ago, you instead require 3 hours within 7 days.

For non-indefinite suspension reinstatements, once the thread is posted there will be a period of voting no longer than 1 week before the thread is processed. If the reinstatement is successful, the applicant will be returned to their admin status. If the reinstatement is unsuccessful, there will be a 30-day wait before reattempting reinstatement.

More information on the direct reinstatement process, as well as the template to reinstate, can be found here.

For reinstatements from indefinite suspension, the process is detailed in this thread.

______________________________________________________

If anyone has any questions about anything detailed in this thread, feel free to contact the EAO team.

Quote from videogamesm12

Could we look into shitcanning TFM's reaction system?

No, it should remain in some way. It's actually used by many players as some light competition and to get coins.

I mean, each and every single one of these suggestions has been suggested by a member of the community and then, through community feedback, been seen as something people want.

I wouldn't want to start shitcanning things people actually want just because they're small features or whatever. Low priority or remain on the backlog? Sure, but not deleting them entirely.

For the most expensive item in the shop, the login message (which is currently uncustomisable), it takes 250 reactions, or 21 hours straight of winning every single reaction.

This suggestion would see it require 500 reactions - or almost 2 entire straight days winning every single reaction. In practice, this would be longer, since there's a lot of people capable of competing for reactions and obviously you're not gonna sit on the server for 2 days straight just for a login message.

You can also double that, give or take for every other shop item. It already takes long enough to get the stuff imo - the issue lies in that there's nothing to do with coins once the shop is bought out.

All the best.

Quote from Zarcana

erin (ratio)

Nvm I take that back.

Tbh vouch for something like this, provided it's limited.

The current system comes with long wait times as someone could in theory clog the whole epsilon queue and as it places blocks by hand you'd be waiting for hours to get a chance.

I've concerns about how this could potentially be abused though but I wouldn't mind something like this in theory.

Quote from root

what exact purpose would this serve?

Filling up disc space speedrun by the sounds of it.

To be honest the ability to only appeal if the ban is incorrect still doesn't sit right for me. I understand "don't break the rules if you don't wanna get banned", I do, but everyone fucks up and makes mistakes and would like us to err on the side of caution in cases.

Like, if someone signs up to the forum, appeals sincerely and apologises 2 months into their 4 month ban for crashing the server, why should we deny them immediately without such a second chance? The very worst case scenario is that they crash the server again, but we've got active enough staff members to sort out the issue and the server can restart in less than a minute. And that's the very worst - when we've got serial griefers or serial trolls coming back whose have less negative impact, there'll be even less of a nuisance caused if they return to their old ways.

The best case scenario is that for those 4 months we have someone actually coming and playing on the server. Even if they're not insanely active, it's still another player. Someone to build with, someone to talk to.

These appeals aren't gonna be coming in by the masses, I'm only referring to when someone's able to put up an appeal that would convince the community to let them back.

Quote from MagAgentV3

If it worked in the past why not try again

In my time here there have been a handful of SMPs and save for a honeymoon period, none have lasted longer than days. They were all close to survival, as per the suggestion.

Quote from matscalle

ryan why is it so bad that the server world size grows?

There's only a limited amount of space the server can hold, and storage can be expensive.

Honestly object since I believe our playerbase is too small to split across yet another server.

The leak contained the IP addresses of one banned player as the main piece of sensitive information. The rest were just a few conversations here and there, an announcement from myself asking admins not to crash clients anymore after the raids, and it rather notably included a public announcement about development.

Quote from characterslimits

May I propose an alternative suggestion where the senior voting round will be publicized only AFTER the voting has concluded, elimating the "pressure politics" problem?

People learn from other people, and the ability to see the thought processes behind each vote will aid in that. It allows the people to know what seniors find in people therefore enhancing the learning from other people.

To be honest, any publication of the senior vote makes the senior vote pointless. I see some of the points you've made, but the trouble is that I just can't get away from the fact that it defeats the entire purpose of the senior votes if they're made public in any way.

The idea behind them, from what I know, is that they allow for seniors to potentially express concerns that they might not want publicised. If they're going to be public one way or another, nothings gonna be said in there that isn't gonna be said during the public voting period. So there's no need to have a second voting.

As I said in my last answer, the debate as to whether or not the senior vote is still necessary is for another thread, so I still object.

Edit: also I just wanna say I appreciate your efforts to take on the feedback and compromise.

Tbh I vouch.

If someone actually wants to impose as a staff member, they usually bypass one of these measures with a subtle typo like "Admln" or incorporate the tag into their nickname to get around it. Like all filters, it's not that effective, and I've seen it all.

They're also usually pretty quickly shut down since if there's more than one player on the server, there's also either a staff member around, or someone who knows the server enough to see through the impersonation.

Especially I vouch further because most of the blocked phrases are for redundant staff roles we don't have anymore. There's no point preventing people from having the acronym for "telnet clan admin" when that has not been a thing for at least two years.

Unfortunately, due to you not having had a forum account for a calendar month, this application is denied.

You're free to reapply on the 17th November.

Please be sure to double check the pre-application checklist before you post another application.