write a reply

Staffing Confessions

aliasgraves
pronounshe/him
208written posts
gravesearned bits
offlinecurrently
graves
Full Member
graves Avatar
villain kissing is fun, actually
Kuroya Avatar
me: staff should be able to be on as many sites as they want and are reasonably able to keep up with without anyone else negatively judging them or their site for it
also me: *side eyes myself and everyone else when i see staff names on more than 2 sites*

i know this post is older but ohhhh i felt this one in my bones. i staffed for 2 sites at the same time once and found myself having to dedicate one week to one, and the next week to the other?? like legit a whole week where i wouldn't look at one to maintain the other it was absolutely wild never again (esp now that i'm a solo admin for one)

last edit on Oct 7, 2021 20:35:15 GMT by graves
0written posts
Deletedearned bits
offlinecurrently
Deleted
Deleted Avatar
Oh yes, I noticed that too. Though I think back than we mostly were on proboards I am not familiar with how popular invisionfree/jcink was back than but I do know there were other hosts I just don't recall the name of them. I feel like now jcink is just as popular as proboards if not more so since v5 came out and well the fear of what v6 will bring when it comes to possibly messing up codes because at least jcink hasn't changed much if at all. I feel like when it comes to making a site, it is a hit and miss on if you attract a group or not, so it is difficult to want to give my all when I know me and if I find myself bored I used to just drop the site completely unless threads were still happening. Though joining sites has become a whole lot harder for the sake of trying to become involved because I've seen first hand the whole trying to make everybody feel welcomed and people being excluded and I'm fearful if I managed to get a site that big I'd have the same problem with no solution just because I for one would want to write with everybody but I can't say the same for the members I may get on my site. I agree, it is easier to write with friends and have them be apart of the staff team just because I'm a true believer it takes team work to keep a site running.
last edit on Oct 29, 2021 18:57:01 GMT by Deleted
144written posts
Stallasearned bits
offlinecurrently
Stallas
Full Member
Stallas Avatar
ACT IV: HOOLIGAN TALES
Not sure how I feel about trend of increased staff supervision on sites lately. I've always thought that personal issues should be handled between members; staff shouldn't be used to confront things just because it's unpleasant to confront yourself.

This is exacerbated when the expectation is to go to staff straight away if you have any kind of issue with anyone. Doesn't that just escalate and stress everyone out? I thought that communities were nicer these days, but now I'm paranoid that it's all the same - just a lot less visible now.
aliaspor, sef, jdawg
pronounsshe | her
552written posts
porsefearned bits
offlinecurrently
porsef
Part of the Furniture
porsef Avatar
chichi wo moge
I just think it's nice for staff to know if someone is having a problem with someone else so forbid something does happen we're aware beforehand.

I wouldn't force anybody to come to staff. if they can handle it on their own then they should. But if someone truly needs help with the situation I think it's fine for staff to help them. In my experience it actually makes it less stressful for people.

But if it isn't a problem related to the site then there really isn't any reason for staff to get involved unless the problem is affecting the site as a whole.
Tidal Wave
aliasAkira, Tsunami, Tsu, Aki
pronounsAny
4,225written posts
AkiraTsunamiearned bits
offlinecurrently
AkiraTsunami
Part of the Furniture
AkiraTsunami Avatar
I've got a hurricane in my head, I can't feel a thing, but it's better than dead
As a staff member, I often prefer it for members to come to me when they're having problems with other members. But I am a bit of a control freak and have always been a mediator in all kinds of situations. It is a bit taxing on my own stress levels, but if it means there is avoided drama in the general populous then it's fine. I like to know how my members are feeling both individually and as a whole. We're a community and it's important to stay that way.

aliaspor, sef, jdawg
pronounsshe | her
552written posts
porsefearned bits
offlinecurrently
porsef
Part of the Furniture
porsef Avatar
chichi wo moge
AkiraTsunami Avatar
As a staff member, I often prefer it for members to come to me when they're having problems with other members. But I am a bit of a control freak and have always been a mediator in all kinds of situations. It is a bit taxing on my own stress levels, but if it means there is avoided drama in the general populous then it's fine. I like to know how my members are feeling both individually and as a whole. We're a community and it's important to stay that way.


preach
phantom of the black parade
pronounsshe / her pronouns
4,377written posts
Kuroyaearned bits
offlinecurrently
Kuroya
Part of the Furniture
Kuroya Avatar
what do you want to know? my height, hobbies, quirks, the color of my underwear?
personally, i'm not really a huge fan of staff involvement in interpersonal drama.

like don't get me wrong, if someone wants me there to mediate as staff, okay, i'll do it, and i also feel it in my bones for wanting to know if there's potential drama going down before it blows up the site and/or results in a mass exodus from someone storming off in a huff + taking their friends with them.

but as a member, it feels... really awkward to involve staff. i don't really want to make it their problem that someone isn't wanting to communicate with me. not really. if it's not causing a wider problem on the site, i don't really wanna get anyone else involved. (it smacks a little too much of "well i'm telling mom!" for my tastes tbeh.)

not to mention that i've had a lot more situations where involving someone else to be the middleman actively just made things worse because of what was getting lost in translation, and it just... really hammered home that at the end of the day, it's the people having the issues that need to work it out with each other, not with the staff.

i've never minded actually coordinating conversations and nudging them to happen and being a neutral party in the background to keep things from escalating privately, but. i just don't really think staff need to get involved with interpersonal issues unless it's something that's negatively impacting the site as a whole or unless they've been asked to be a mediator to keep things civil.

Rodent King
aliasditz
pronounsMale
1,748written posts
Mouseearned bits
offlinecurrently
Mouse
Part of the Furniture
Mouse Avatar
where fears and lies melt away.
I don't think it matters one way or the other. We give too much thought to the inconsequential in this hobby.

EDIT: The we in this includes myself. Cause Arceus knows, I do it too.
last edit on Oct 9, 2021 4:42:31 GMT by Mouse
Tidal Wave
aliasAkira, Tsunami, Tsu, Aki
pronounsAny
4,225written posts
AkiraTsunamiearned bits
offlinecurrently
AkiraTsunami
Part of the Furniture
AkiraTsunami Avatar
I've got a hurricane in my head, I can't feel a thing, but it's better than dead
Reading over what Kuroya says, I can see it that way too. Like I'm totally fine if members wanna work their things out via dm or something not publicly. It's just... 90% of my friend group has anxiety and are timid when it comes to confrontation. So someone has to do it. Might as well be me. Can I stand up for myself? Absolutely not. My friends though? You bet.

0written posts
Deletedearned bits
offlinecurrently
Deleted
Deleted Avatar
I don't mind assisting if members want me to, but would rather they try and handle it without staff being involved. But I'd rather know about it than have a surprise on my site later, so I'd play mediator if it would be required of me. Though I must admit, if my team has somebody else better for the role I have been known to ask if they'd handle it so that I wouldn't have to.
last edit on Oct 29, 2021 20:55:20 GMT by Deleted
pronounshe/him
809written posts
illidan mainearned bits
offlinecurrently
illidan main
Part of the Furniture
illidan main Avatar
To be honest I encourage members to handle disputes on their own and to tell me if the other party is 1) continuing to ignore boundaries or 2) suicide baiting in response to being asked to stop doing something.

I've had issues with both on my site, and that's about when I step in and go "yeah we're weeding."

avatar and hover by phobic art, commissioned for me
aliasnightbloom, bloom
pronounsShe/Her
711written posts
peachearned bits
offlinecurrently
peach
Part of the Furniture
peach Avatar
so it goes.
What are everyone's thresholds for banning someone? I know most people do a "strike" system but is there any time you would just forgo that because someone is just... So awful?

I personally think if someone is causing disruptions in the community, maybe not breaking rules but going into an active safe space and handing out passive aggressive remarks, but also just being rude to everyone. I say cut the loss, if they're harming the community's vibe. But I'd like to get more opinions about such things. It is always great to hear other ideas!
last edit on Oct 10, 2021 16:56:20 GMT by peach
pronounshe, him
561written posts
Sharpearned bits
onlinecurrently
Sharp
Part of the Furniture
Sharp Avatar
peach Avatar
What are everyone's thresholds for banning someone? I know most people do a "strike" system but is there any time you would just forgo that because someone is just... So awful?

I personally think if someone is causing disruptions in the community, maybe not breaking rules but going into an active safe space and handing out passive aggressive remarks, but also just being rude to everyone. I say cut the loss, if they're harming the community's vibe. But I'd like to get more opinions about such things. It is always great to hear other ideas!


Yea, I trust myself to be as patient as I need to be. I'm not going to give someone a roadmap to how many times they can be disruptive before I'll let them go.
aliaspor, sef, jdawg
pronounsshe | her
552written posts
porsefearned bits
offlinecurrently
porsef
Part of the Furniture
porsef Avatar
chichi wo moge
peach Avatar
What are everyone's thresholds for banning someone? I know most people do a "strike" system but is there any time you would just forgo that because someone is just... So awful?

I personally think if someone is causing disruptions in the community, maybe not breaking rules but going into an active safe space and handing out passive aggressive remarks, but also just being rude to everyone. I say cut the loss, if they're harming the community's vibe. But I'd like to get more opinions about such things. It is always great to hear other ideas!


im never quick to ban anyone. most people get a few warnings before i would even consider it. on our site we like to try to work things out with people if there is any behavior we don't find acceptable. to have as open communication as we can so that way the person knows right away.

multiple serious offenses or complaints about one person or a group of people, i'd consider letting them go. but before banning, i'd just ask them to leave rather than using such a system.