Forum:Inactive Chat Moderators

Sup

There are a few users who have chat moderator powers, namely http://onepiece.wikia.com/wiki/User:Pandawarrior, http://onepiece.wikia.com/wiki/User:KuroAshi98, http://onepiece.wikia.com/wiki/User:Imhungry4444 and http://onepiece.wikia.com/wiki/User:Ryuzakiforever, who have either been inactive for a certain period of time, requested to have their powers stripped or just haven't been on chat at all, and don't really need moderator powers anymore. (note: I'm just the messenger for the chat goers, people, this isn't any personal hit list I'm making) As for the other chat moderators, who have either a. been coming online at least semi-regularly or b. attended chat whenever there are at least 3 or more users online. These users are http://onepiece.wikia.com/wiki/User:Raptor_of_Love, http://onepiece.wikia.com/wiki/User:Calua, http://onepiece.wikia.com/wiki/User:12th_Supernova, http://onepiece.wikia.com/wiki/User:Jademing and http://onepiece.wikia.com/wiki/User:Straw_Hat_Boy. If anyone disagrees and believes someone else should be listed as inactive/active, speak up or the list is in rock. Again, this list was made by a few people who are regularly on chat, and not necessarily the entire community, so it's open to change. Since chat has been pretty dead lately, the purpose of the forum is to discuss possible demotion of inactive users, not to discuss potential candidates as replacements. Since it's not really a huge deal, let's just keep it as civil and simple as possible. 20:58, July 28, 2014 (UTC)

Discussion 1
Sounds fine to me. It's not like chat is active these days, so losing a few mods won't really make any difference. And some of them have expressed their desire to lose their mod rights anyway.

12:27, July 29, 2014 (UTC)

If you only want to demote the inactive ones, then certainly. But I really don't want to see new mods here, the chat has been really empty during this year so the 3-4 active mods are enough. 13:35, July 29, 2014 (UTC)

Look guys. This wiki means a lot to me. I entered the chat the very first day they added it, and I have personal connections to countless users. The community has been so supportive, I feel like it's shaped me into who I am and really pushed me forward in my dream. What's more is that's it's helped the people around me, my love Shay being strongly impacted by the friends she's made here. I've seen a million users come and go, and all I can say is that I really love this place. I still remember the day the chat encouraged me to become a chat moderator. They all told me to go for it and I left my request on DP's page. Now there are times, for the sake of my personal health, where I have backed off from excessive internet usage, but I've never left this community. I find it harder and harder every day to stay in touch as my schedule fills up and the chat remains dead. I promise that I actually am here, every day. I don't say anything, I just watch. It's a comfort to me. I check to see if anyone's in the chat, and there never really is. The truth is that I'm just really hopeful that one day things will return to the way they were, and that people will be chatting again and this community that molded me will feel less like the sickly bird you're waiting to die so you can stop feeding it. And if they day comes, I'll be there. So I would be very sad if you were to remove my chat moderator position. It means more to me than it probably should. And I realize I don't have much support for why you should let me have this, but it matters to me. If you feel a need to take it away from me, I really do understand and I will hold no resentment. But I don't feel as though my status is hurting anyone. Just please, take me off your wipe list, because I have no desire to lose my postion. 14:32, July 29, 2014 (UTC)

^ The chat is only dead because everybody is on Skype. SeaTerror (talk) 17:42, July 29, 2014 (UTC)

Too bad we aint shooting a drama movie about break-ups, you would be perfect for the leading role. 18:18, July 29, 2014 (UTC)

Calm it, Staw. Ryu, I get what you're saying, but if you only need the mod position to keep happy, then you probably shouldn't have it.

18:22, July 29, 2014 (UTC)

Mr. Whatever has joined the chat.

11:23 Mr. Whatever dead. back to skype

11:24 SeaTerror ^ point proven

Mr. Whatever has left the chat. SeaTerror (talk) 18:27, July 29, 2014 (UTC)

ST, don't be jelly cuz nobody invites you. 18:34, July 29, 2014 (UTC)

No matter the outcome of the Forum, DP won't demote anyone, Forum over. 18:38, July 29, 2014 (UTC)

Any mods who asked to be demoted themselves, they are definitely demoted. Any other inactive mod, we ask first, then if they don't respond or approve demotion, we demote. 20:40, July 29, 2014 (UTC)

Yata, I know for a fact that X, (now Raptor of Love), Hungry, Panda and Kuro all asked to be demoted and none of them got their wish. Even though X no longer wants to be demoted, it's no excuse for the other three. I do know that they made a request for demotion to DP instead of you or Deva, so that's something to consider. In response to Ryu, I support you keeping your mod position if it means that much to you, but still try to come on chat at least once or twice a week (when chat is active, of course), because even if I support you, chances are others aren't as ok with it. In response to ST, I agree that skype has been overused lately, as it was originally just used as an emergency replacement due to OP wiki chat crashing a few months ago. Since then, it's kind of become more of a little club for some members, which essentially excludes the rest of community (though anyone who wants to join is readily welcomed and need only ask). Again, not a huge deal, but something to consider. 21:32, July 29, 2014 (UTC)

Wow, this again, really? This is really immature of you guys, even if we have gone through many of these type of forums, you guys just can't give up even if it has already been agreed on. This is just complete bullshit. When clearly the reason why they are inactive chat moderators is because there is nothing to moderate! Why else do think we wouldn't get on for a long time? Most of the people on this forum are clearly on Skype and have ganged on us. Even if I'm practically assured to keep my position as a chat moderator, I'm sticking up for those you guys have listed as in risk. What is so hard to give up the idea? None of the moderators that you guys have listed have corrupted the chat or done anything wrong other than living their lives. We can't be on the chat for 24/7 like you guys want us to be. We have lives to live, so do you. When you guys are on Skype all the time, and using it as a chat, we can't moderate anything as there is no one on the chat anymore. Then we would be marked as inactive, making any chat moderator an easy target to remove their position even if they haven't done anything. I truthfully stand behind DP not demoting any chat mod, because as he explained they haven't misused their powers and if they want to come back anytime, they will able to take care of things. Having extra chat moderators that aren't as active or inactive will not harm the wiki, because it's kind of a separate thing when you think about it. We selected these chat moderators because we believe they will be responsible. Having the position will not kill anyone, other than Staw apparently. Even if you are a regular user, you can still report any sort of activity that does happen in the chat without a chat moderator present. It's simple and a chat moderator will probably talk to them or ban them next time they are on.

Staw, seriously shut the fuck up. You irritate me, and practically everyone on this wiki once in a while. We already got your view, you want demote as many people as possible. Maybe it's your weird fetish. You are acting really immature in this situation, putting down anyone who is fighting to keep the “inactive” chat moderators. I assume that you with probably Galaxy, as you guys are a duo, were the main ones to convince Fin to create this forum as you guys are known to make too many forums. How many times do we have to create this forum, in different forms, and have discussions whether or not to keep, when it usually ends with the same result as the previous one. How many times does it have to be done to get it through your thick skull? The progress is long and damn annoying. I still do not understand how you even became temporary admin, especially when you act like a tyrant whenever you do get it. You are a spoiled kid, wanting everything you lay your eyes on, and not giving up until you get it. In these situations, you will not give up until you get it your own way. I expect that you want to demote chat moderators so another chat moderator forum will be in action soon, asking for more active chat moderators. Probably will convince/manipulate someone to nominate you, and eventually somehow ending up winning it. Getting it your own way, like a spoiled brat. Fucking moron, I swear.

Anyone saying that it isn't Skype's fault is completely bullshitting themselves. I do blame Skype for the inactivity of the chat, I'll be one of the first ones to admit it. Many of the users that you have listed as "inactive" have actually come on randomly on random days to check on the chat, but in reality, there is nothing to check because there is no one on chat. It's a fucking ghost town. I get on the chat, and there is practically no one on there. What I figured out is that most are on Skype, which I get irritated by after a while. It's boring to just sit there alone on the chat. Poor ST, I feel you. So seriously, the currently problem is that no one is on it anymore, so there really doesn't have to be a reason to have a chat moderator when no one really is on it. If you did fix this simple problem, this stupid forum wouldn't have been created in the first place. So if you guys want to have more active chat mods on chat, then get on the chat, you lazy asses. 06:10, July 30, 2014 (UTC)

Hey, she's right. I don't need to be taking up the injured puppy position here, I haven't done anything to deserve my star taken away. The reason I haven't moderated the chat is because there IS no chat. If you think any mod isn't going to do their job, take it as a challenge. Actually fill up the chat. Get 5 or more people in there, I dare you. I'll be there, I've always been. The problem isn't inactive moderators, it's an inactive chat. 06:20, July 30, 2014 (UTC)

Blaming inactive chat moderators for an inactive chat is not the way to go. It's simple to make the chat alive once again, it's just assembling people to the chat. If you guys, regular users, don't show up on chat, then it'll probably stay dead. I know that not anyone of us wants that, since we have made many friends on it and it gets fun. 06:42, July 30, 2014 (UTC)

Yeah... no. Don't name me as a supporter of this forum. I don't give a crap about it. Mr. Whatever (talk) 09:24, July 30, 2014 (UTC)

http://i1182.photobucket.com/albums/x456/ShadowForce98/DemodMe_zps4874f1d6.png

No, seriously. It's dead, rotting, and even the flies and buzzards have grown tired and left. I asked DP to de-mod me months ago and never got a reply. I do pop into chat a few times every week, and every time I am the only one there. No wonder people think I've disappeared - they themselves are never around to see me. 09:30, July 30, 2014 (UTC)

^ this is literally the only reason I volunteered to make the forum in the first place

If a chatmod WANTS to be demoted, let's just demote them already. I agree that skype has way more traffic than op chat lately, and that overall you can't blame chatmods for being inactive lately because the chat's been dead as dirt, whereas the skype is alive and well just because people prefer using it. I honestly believe that if we demodded everyone, no one would care because that's how dead the chat has been. I didn't want to sound like a tight-ass, but the skype shit is getting way too popular, when it was originally just used as an emergency chat. But seriously, back to chatmods, I actually don't give a single shit about the inactivity of Panda and Hungry and whoever else as much as I do about ignoring their requests for demotion. The only one that was considered "inactive" and hasn't requested demotion is Ryu, and even if he were an inactive admin, I still wouldn't care cuz in the end, it's not hurting anyone. Anyway, people who want to be demoted should get demoted. This isn't some fuckin lifetime contract. 12:13, July 30, 2014 (UTC)

Seriously idgaf,and skype is way more convenient than this chat imo,but "Having the position will not kill anyone" was never considered whenever an admin/chatmod inactivity forum was opened in the past:/--

Well personally I also dgaf about the mods or the chat cause i am on skype with the exact same people that i was talking some months ago on the wiki chat, with the difference that the chat there is better and more efficient.

But my opinion on the matter is, the guys who ask to be demoded themselves should have the right to and as for the others who want to keep their star they should keep it since its not their fault for the chat being dead and actually not having anything to do. *If it was active and they weren't joining the chat then yes i would also support to replace the mods but thats not the case now since its dead.

As for the people who moan that the chat is dead cause skype blah blah (which is true) just shut up, you dont have the right to tell anyone on which chat to talk and be active. Also everyone is welcome in skype, just ask for it, we can't know who wants and who doesn't wants to be on skype. ST if you want to chat with us just leave your pride aside and ask to join the skype instead of moaning that skype killed the chat, and ignore staw, he's staw... 15:25, July 31, 2014 (UTC)

Calu, I know many people hate me on this wiki but they have reasons.. except you. As far as I remember, I never did anything bad to you to make you hate every fucking tiny thing I say, heck I rarely even talk to you in chat. So you'd better shut your fucking mouth, drop this obsession and get a hobby or something. And no, making voodoo dolls of me is not a hobby. And btw, you should read less Agatha Christie, there is not a conspiracy behind everything, Fintin decided to make this forum by himself, I'm neither manipulating him nor is he a sock of me.

As for Skype killing the chat, why do you people even care about us using skype? Most people in here actually are on skype or were at some point and left. Having a skype chat doesn't mean we won't come in wikia chat, and it also doesn't mean that you guys can't come in there too. Oh, and Kuro actually does come in chat, I've seen him many times in there alone. 15:35, July 31, 2014 (UTC)

FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT

Anyway, since we all appear to agree on the fact that mods who request to be demoted should indeed receive a demotion, I think we've come to a consensus! 15:43, July 31, 2014 (UTC)

"(note: I'm just the messenger for the chat goers, people, this isn't any personal hit list I'm making)"

"Fintin decided to make this forum by himself" Nice try Staw. SeaTerror (talk) 17:19, July 31, 2014 (UTC)

How did this forum become a vehicle for personal grudges? 18:27, July 31, 2014 (UTC)

Car or boat? SeaTerror (talk) 19:29, July 31, 2014 (UTC)

Helicopter, actually. You can air more grudges that way. 22:22, July 31, 2014 (UTC)

Day Two (since asking to have my rights removed): I wake up to find that I am still a chat moderator at the One Piece wiki. Members of the forum are more interested in personal attacks than actual discussion, and I am reminded of why I left this community. My request seems to have fallen on deaf ears. I cry, and then pray to Shrek that tomorrow may be better. 23:49, July 31, 2014 (UTC)

Geez, sounds like DP is being neglectful of his duties. Why didn't you just ask me for a de-mod? I suppose I can just remove the rights of all who have asked? 00:11, August 1, 2014 (UTC)

Sounds like a plan, Yata. Is there anyone who objects? 08:16, August 1, 2014 (UTC)

Jeez, harmful forum much? You guys need to stop taking pot-shots at each other and think about what will actually help the wiki. Maybe it's because I've been away for a while, or maybe it's just been a long time coming, but this forum seems to be much worse for us as a community than any other in recent memory.

I'll say my piece about mods here, but there needs to be a chat before we can talk about moderators. So I'm starting a new forum section to talk about the skype chat.

My thoughts on mods have always been this: There is no problem having extra mods, as long as the chat is fully covered. If people said they do not want their rights, then take em. If people have said that having their rights taken away will make them sad, don't take em. Ryu is incapable of doing any harm with his rights. The number of mods does not need to be a set number. Demoting the mods will not lead to new mod elections, and the ambitious people after their heads will not be elected. A chat that is not fully moderated leads to electing more mods, the removal of mods does not mean we need more mods. I see no logical reason why we have to make our friend Ryu, who has done a lot for our community with his presence, friendliness, service, and his pretty fantastic comic based on our community, sad by removing his rights. 01:57, August 2, 2014 (UTC)

Okay, Nova and KuroAshi de-mod. Anyone else wanting to forgo their mod status, give me a call. 05:07, August 3, 2014 (UTC)


 * So are we done with this section, then? Anyone still out for inactive mod blood? 14:27, August 4, 2014 (UTC)

Hey, I didn't go to 'Nam to get my rights taken from me! I'm a citizen of the United States of Wikia! I will not be treated this way. I know my rights!-- 14:39, August 9, 2014 (UTC)

^ This forum is finally getting somewhere Roranoa Drake II (talk) 19:45, August 9, 2014 (UTC)

^^ When white people start talking about their rights .. .. you know that shit just got REAL!

He's no Wikia citizen, he's a spy! GET OUT, YOU DAMN COMMIE!

20:55, August 9, 2014 (UTC)

Skype Chat Discussion
This forum (and Nova's blog) are the first I've heard of this Skype group, and I'm a veteran editor. But my first reaction to the news was that it was bad, but not that bad. After thinking about it for awhile, I've come to this conclusion:

The private Skype chat is the single worst thing to happen to the wiki in all my years here.

It's exclusionary, and if it continues, it will lead to a slow, agonizing death of our community. Sure, it makes sense at first, as the chat system is pretty buggy here, and it drops every so often, and it is missing a lot of really cool features. On paper, it makes sense to just move the community's chat there. However in practice, it will not be so perfect. New users will avoid it because they will need to jump through a number of "hoops" to get into it:
 * First, they have to actually come into our regular chat when people are actually there, a huge problem when it's empty all the time. Very unlikely to happen, as I've actually been looking for this for several months with no luck.
 * Then, they have to actually decide that the conversation is good enough to want to stay, which was hard enough back in the pre-skype days.
 * Then, they have to "earn" access to the skype. Someone here said, "just ask for the skype", but there's a few problems with that. First, they have to overcome their own nervousness to ask for it, then they need to ask someone who will give to them. Can everyone in that group honestly say that they would give access to EVERYONE who would ask for access? No matter how annoying/useless they are? I sincerely doubt it. It will be exclusionary, no matter what your intent.
 * Lastly, you have to have/be willing to use skype. You have to download and run another program to chat, which is far less convenient than just clicking on the chat button on the wiki. Also, most people I know who use skype (myself included) just use their own real name as their username on Skype. I've told a lot of people on this website some deeply personal things, my real name is not one of them.

So you'll end up with a small community of active people with no influx of new users, but in a more reliable and personal chat. Sounds perfect, right? Sounds like there's nothing really wrong with that, right? That's until you get sick of someone in that group and quit. Which is bound to happen, especially with the way you guys have been at each other's throats in this forum. Usually, the process I just described is how people end up leaving our community anyways, except with the Skype group you've found a way to make it faster and streamline it. Good job.

And I bet some people who actually have the stomach to read the wall of text I'm making might say that "It's just chat, it's not that important." To that, I have to say that it's actually the fastest and easiest way to become and remain an active part of our community. I love forums and talk pages, but they're a fucking joke when compared to the chat in terms of what it actually accomplishes for us as a community. You get to know your fellow editors and One Piece fans, help people discover and learn about the series and most importantly, help each other edit. Even before the loss of my laptop, I wasn't editing much, and I can pretty much credit that to two things: The lack of a chat to keep me interested in sharing my opinions quickly, and the loss of my ability to talk to Galaxy9000. Without talking to Gal, I don't actually know what to really edit anymore... I want to edit, but the motivation to go find something to work on by myself just isn't there. I'm sorry that the community drove him away, and if the rumors that he is actually Mr. Whatever are true, it still doesn't matter because there is no chat anymore.

If you're in the Skype group, I strongly suggest you stop it, for the sake of the wiki. I place no blame on Nova for creating it as well, for one, it does seem like a good idea at first, and as like he said in his blog, even if he disbanded it others would make it again. So I plead to all of you in there equally to just stop.

And if you've never even been in chat, but are still a regular user, I actually urge you to try it out for awhile. This wiki is better at conversation than these hateful forums make it seem. It's fun, and it can be an insanely great tool for editing projects.

Sorry for the wall of text, but I really feel the need to say this, as again, I think the chat is very important, and this behavior is the worst I've seen from the community. Under normal circumstances, I'd try to spout some crap about how I don't mean to offend anyone, but I won't give you that honor this time. If you are a part of this exclusive group on Skype that is hurting our community, you should feel bad about it. I'm honestly shocked I'm the first one to bring up the morality of it. I'm shocked. I thought we were better than this. By the rules of the wikia, I can't say that you've done anything worth punishment, but honestly, it's morally wrong, and you all need to think about that.

If you want your precious isolationism more than you want your community to thrive, by all means, go ahead. I can't stop you. But you do it without me.

Sorry for writing the least fun post I've ever made on the internet. 01:57, August 2, 2014 (UTC)

Did you people drink the water of stupidity or something? The fuck is wrong with you lot? You can't and won't fucking tell me what application to use and what not to use, is that so hard for your tiny little minds to conceive? You don't like our skype group? Then let me make someting clear: I DON'T BLOODY CARE! This is not really towards JSD, not him mainly at least. 02:10, August 2, 2014 (UTC)


 * It's true that I can't tell you what application to use. What you do with your time, with the friends you've made is not my business. But when you use an app to take people away from our own community and attempt to detract from our ability to survive, you have no right to be angry at people for asking you to stop. To try and replace OP chat with your own group isn't very good for us. We can recover from it, but it will take longer if you keep lying to yourselves saying that being on skype makes you a part of this community. 02:17, August 2, 2014 (UTC)
 * I still don't give a shit about your opinion on it, please do explain how you'll stop me from using it. 02:21, August 2, 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't know why you have the idea in your head that I want to take action against you. If you've read what I've said, I've repeatedly mentioned that I have no power to take against you. The only action I can take is to ask you and everyone else to stop, and explain why you should. 02:26, August 2, 2014 (UTC)
 * You shouldn't. What I do concerns nobody but myself. 02:27, August 2, 2014 (UTC)


 * Ok, well skype (and if you blame him, Nova) is not 100% to blame for all this. Though I do try and regularly join the op chat in order to at least be present in case new users come on by, the problem with trying to get back other wiki users now is that A. they're not obligated to help the wiki whatsoever by stopping with skype and coming back to wiki chat and B. skype's features are often much more convenient in contrast to wikia chat, which often crashes without notice, lags people out, or completely fails altogether, prompting many to switch from OP chat to Skype entirely. The chat, thankfully, has been more active lately due to people slowly trickling back in, but is still quite barren. I'd like to note, however, that a number of blog writers/commenters have decided not to come to chat, as JSD said, either due to their ignorance of the chat's existence or just their choosing not to join. If the latter is true, we can only guess as to why they have chosen not to if they've never been to the chat itself. Since many older regular chatgoers have left, we've had a shortage of chatgoers anyway in recent times, meaning that the small amount of people who are actually using the skype (around 8-9 people) can't be blamed for the inactivity of the chat. As such, rather than try and draw back the few people who were left on the OP chat, I suggest we try and draw in a new crowd of active users on the wiki to the chat using another method, as old users merely being present was clearly not working well. On another note, JSD, though some users have tried to maintain activity in chat (myself included), I haven't seen youin chat at all lately. Now, if you have a busy schedule that takes away from chat time, or you've been on a small hiatus from editing the wiki, or anything of a similar nature, then that is understandable. Another issue I'd like to point out isthat Nova did make the skype group public in a blog a few months ago, so although it is exclusionary in the sense that only those who know of it can join, it's innacurate to say that we've made it private, as we've offered invitations to various people to join the chat, some of whom have rejected. All in all, though the OP chat has indeed been heavily underused lately, the Skype chat is not 100% to blame, and we can make as many forum discussions as we want telling those who use it to stop using Skype, but in the end, they can do what they want and we are powerless to stop them. As such, I think the OP chat's saving grace is the attraction of new crowds of regular users who haven't yet used chat. If anyone disagrees or agrees so far, feel free to speak up.  02:38, August 2, 2014 (UTC)

Skype is to blame since as already mentioned it was ONLY supposed to be used for when Wikia chat was down. Besides that's also why we had Tinychat anyway. We could have just kept using Tinychat. Anyway the Skype people are also to blame for the fact that you can both use the OP chat and Skype at the same time. SeaTerror (talk) 02:44, August 2, 2014 (UTC)

Thing is, there's only 8 people that use the skype regularly. If that's the number of people it takes to kill an entire wiki chat, we clearly need to get some more people. Also, Tinychat is shit. 02:47, August 2, 2014 (UTC)

Because they don't use both at the same time. SeaTerror (talk) 02:52, August 2, 2014 (UTC)

It seems like the biggest problem with chat is how many bugs there are. Has anyone contacted staff about it? 02:55, August 2, 2014 (UTC)

I think there may have been a user who contacted staff about it. I never heard about the outcome. 02:58, August 2, 2014 (UTC)

Staff seems to do that a lot. They still haven't fixed the problem with the visual editor and the refs It seems like chat's pretty active now, though, so maybe nothing needs to be done. 03:01, August 2, 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, I know I haven't been in chat much recently, mostly due to the death of my laptop, but even before that, chat was still empty most of the time and I saw no reason to join and wait for others to show up. Personally, no matter how good Skype is, we can't link it to the wiki for new users to join as simply as clicking one button. That to me, is a feature so important it outweighs all the drops and lag of the wikia chat. And in regards to Nova's blog, I do vaguely remember that, but since it was months ago now and is I'm sure locked by now, it can't really be used as a basis for saying that the group is currently publicly open. And hey, I'd kill for even 4 people to use the OP chat regularly at this point. Anything is better than nothing. 03:02, August 2, 2014 (UTC)

Dude! Tinychat were the days! There was also FlockDraw, Cards against Humanity, and OMGPop, if anyone remembers them. But they did not manage to kill the chat entirely. 03:03, August 2, 2014 (UTC)

Probably because those rooms were made just as a fun little time with each other. It wasn't strictly for chatting alone. This Skype thing, on the other hand...actually, sometimes I find it annoying whenever I'm in a conversation on Skype and I keep getting messages from the group when I'm not even participating. I have to keep leaving. How is a new user supposed to know we have a Skype, anyways? If they see there's nothing in the chatroom, they'd probably assume that we just don't chat with each other at all. 06:31, August 2, 2014 (UTC)

The fact that skype killed the chat (star) for the most part is pretty undisputed at this point. Arguing about it any more is pointless. If we're going to look for solutions, I'd say trying to bring more new people to chat is one we should consider, as OP chat is just as exclusionary as Skype if people don't know about it. 10:14, August 2, 2014 (UTC)

I don't plan to stop from using the skype no matter what you say (pretty sure all the other active users on skype feel the same as well), but i can understand the problems that come to our comunity with our wiki chat being dead so I will be online as much time as possible on the wiki chat even if i am alone to attract new and old users to join as well. If you really care about the inactivity then do the same even if you are alone cause if everybody says 'i am alone why would i join?' then nobody will join from the very begining. Also before you blame only the skype and its users for the inactivity of the chat and the lack of new users make sure you come on chat yourself cause the only users i see on chat when its not dead is us from the skype + ST.

nada there's a mode called busy or you can just put it on silent from the settings. 11:19, August 2, 2014 (UTC)

Skype feels like that small Wal-Mart that just opened up across from your family market. Now everybody is heading to that and the store you bonded with is closing down. I've actually seen that happen. It's not a pretty sight. 18:02, August 2, 2014 (UTC)

I don't have Wal-Mart in Greece, therefore you didn't make a point. 19:45, August 2, 2014 (UTC)

Whoa whoa whoa, back the fuck up. How the fuck are you gonna take Skype if it's a completely different entity from wikia? And does it really matter if we're using it simply for the sake of chat and hardly to discuss wikia issues? Coffee-chan (talk) 00:26, August 3, 2014 (UTC)

^Skype also takes away from the wiki itself since people focus on that instead of editing. SeaTerror (talk) 00:29, August 3, 2014 (UTC)

I suppose that makes some sense. But hasn't the OP wiki chat been dead for months even before Skype? Coffee-chan (talk) 00:36, August 3, 2014 (UTC)

The Wiki Chat wasn't often used a little before Skype, but it was far from dead. After Skype came, though, seeing users on it was rare. NOBODY is using it now! 03:26, August 3, 2014 (UTC)

If we're going to keep arguing about how bad skype is and what it has done to the wiki and how it killed countless families or whatever then we might as well just break off the forum here instead of compromising or finding a solution, which would be way more productive. The skype guys themselves said that if more new people came to chat, they'd be willing to go to OP chat more. Just food for thought. 10:21, August 3, 2014 (UTC)

Essay after essay, complaint after complaint. People can do what they want it's there life. If you want to talk to them go on Skype. If you don't care good for you. If the chat become active again it becomes active again. If you are too stubborn to use Skype and will continue to bitch and moan about it then tough luck princess. This wiki is really good at making an issue out of nothing, but seriously keep it going it's an amusing read. I can't believe any of you take this bs this seriously. 15:10, August 3, 2014 (UTC)

"The skype guys themselves said that if more new people came to chat, they'd be willing to go to OP chat more." So the chat will never be alive again since they were the reason it died in the first place. SeaTerror (talk) 17:28, August 3, 2014 (UTC)

It seems like there's a cycle here. No one goes to chat because no one's in chat and no one's in chat because no one goes to chat. 18:08, August 3, 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, Fin's right here: This forum has pretty much hit a wall. I've tried to make my point that chatting elsewhere is bad for our comminty because it makes our wiki more innaccessable and more exclusionary for new users. I can only hope that the people on Skype have read my words and given them some deep thought. Beyond that, we all know that nothing can be done against the Skype group. You guys are free to stay in your own little world for as long as you like. So rather than use this tainted forum for ideas regarding the rest of us moving on with OP chat (that conversation should have none of the arguingof this one present in it), this forum should be closed soon. Unless pro-skype people have any more questions/comments on my or any other anti-skype arguements, this should be closed in a few days. While there is a need for them, no new mods should be elected until the chat is active enough to gauge fresh candidates. To jump the gun on that now would just extend the useless arguing and not completely fix the problem anyways. 14:24, August 4, 2014 (UTC)

Look, I'd love for the OP chat to become active again. I'd PREFER it. But since no one is on, I turn to Skype to talk to my friends there, because, well, they're my friends, not because I'm in some sooper-secret anti-wiki conspiracy or anything, like this thread seems to imply. And even so, in the past 4-ish days or so I've only seen about, like, three people actually online in the Skype group. What does that say about the wiki's chatting as a whole? I'd love for chat to return to the 14-20-people-a-day roster like it was when I first joined in 2011, but that ain't gonna happen. It's been dead and rotting even before the Skype group, like Kuro said. --Coffee-chan (talk) 16:02, August 4, 2014 (UTC)

Just want to throw in here that the skype group is ultra exclusive. I was banned from it by Nova cause I stole his woman I guess.--Botisme (talk) 19:27, August 11, 2014 (UTC)


 * http://i1075.photobucket.com/albums/w422/imhungry4444/Gifs/Eh2h5CF_zps11e205fe.gif

-- 19:33, August 11, 2014 (UTC)

Not picking sides or anything but ..

http://i1153.photobucket.com/albums/p520/ckusma/Misc%20Gifs/9e7c7012.gif

I'm not sure if the whole "exclusive" thing is true or not but IF it is .. Then those who are in favor of ONLY EXCLUSIVE MEMBERS Skype chat should be banned from OP WIKI chat till they feel the need to come back again.

I'm active on NEITHER of them so I'm just giving a neutral opinion ..

Poor Jess. SeaTerror (talk) 20:05, August 11, 2014 (UTC)

So is Jess available, or... 20:19, August 11, 2014 (UTC)

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ She never denied it ..

( -‿-) Awwww yeeeehhh  22:10, August 11, 2014 (UTC)

Hey Botsime, the only thing you stole was Jess’s time. Roranoa Drake II (talk) 23:03, August 11, 2014 (UTC)

In case of any misunderstanding, the reason Godisme was banned from the group is because the group was a backup OP chat group. It was never intended to be for anyone other than OP people who might need to talk when the wiki chat is broken. I believe that was made clear in my blog suggesting the idea.

 19:12, August 12, 2014 (UTC)

We all really doubt that. SeaTerror (talk) 20:39, August 12, 2014 (UTC)

Ahh.. the maturity of this community. Mr. Whatever (talk) 22:57, August 13, 2014 (UTC)

It's still better than youtube. 22:29, August 14, 2014 (UTC)

And none of you would have it any other way. 13:11, August 16, 2014 (UTC)

Discussion 2
I think it's about time this opened up again. There was no resolution last time. The current inactive mods are users http://onepiece.wikia.com/wiki/User:Imhungry4444 and http://onepiece.wikia.com/wiki/User:Straw_Hat_Boy Roranoa Drake II (talk) 16:30, March 6, 2015 (UTC)

Alright. If a chat mod asked to be demoded, demod them. If they don't, don't. And everybody agreed with Ryu's statement and the forum was closed. 16:26, March 6, 2015 (UTC)

The first discussion went off topic. I think it's time we come to conclusion and find a resolution for this ongoing problem. With chat moderators coming and going, we should define how much inactivity a moderator is allowed before being considered to have their rights stripped. "If a chat mod asked to be demoded, demod them." Kuro is the perfect example of this Ryu. Kuro requested multiple times to demoted and it never happened. When Kuro was finally listened too, he was re-given moderator rights shortly afterwards despite not wanting them. 16:38, March 6, 2015 (UTC)

How much time? Infinite. All time. Chat mods should never be removed without their consent. There's nothing stopping us from just adding more chat mods if it ever became a problem. Demod those that want to leave, keep those who have yet to express that. 16:42, March 6, 2015 (UTC)

If chat moderators choose to neglect their responsibilities, then they should be deprived of their rights. It's not like they were forced to do this job in the first place, they just volunteered. Roranoa Drake II (talk) 16:52, March 6, 2015 (UTC)

Are you even taking this seriously? Why do you need consent? If your rights are being taken away, they are being taken away. Do we give consent to people if they are being banned or blocked? No. My opinion is that currently we have too many chat moderators. Why would we possibly need more? 17:02, March 6, 2015 (UTC)

Why would it ever be a problem to have an inactive chat mod? We could have 50 and everything would function the same. Users take leaves of absence, as is human, and if a user comes back, I don't think they should be punished for time away. This is wiki is a fan-run non-profit project and the only danger with chat moderators is that we don't have enough to get the job done. Right now, we do. 17:24, March 6, 2015 (UTC)

We remove inactive admins so shouldn't we remove inactive moderators? Off course we should because it is following the same policy. We aren't punishing people by taking their rights away. It's simply giving a more active user that responsibility/opportunity to fill the gap. Similar to what happened when MasterDeva was removed as admin and new users were elected to the fill the gap. 17:42, March 6, 2015 (UTC)

Okay, so two scenarios: a chat mod goes inactive for a long time. In one scenario, we strip the star and add a new chat mod. The second scenario, we allow the original mod to keep the rights, and then we also give a star to a new chat mod, because it isn't a limited resource. In both scenarios, the position gets filled by a deserving user. So to take away the rights, it is punishment. Removing the star serves no other purpose.

Well, I've spoken my peace. Until some more users join the discussion, I'll stay out of this. 17:52, March 6, 2015 (UTC)

Once again we need to define inactivity. Taking rights away isn't punishment if you aren't using them. If you had your rights taken away for being inactive. How it be punishment if you didn't commit yourself to your job? 18:11, March 6, 2015 (UTC)

A quick clarification on the matter of Kuro: He asked for his rights to be removed, and they were eventually removed. Then, in the holiday season, I saw that we had inactive moderation/chat presence in the times that Kuro typically covered. Since I saw he was still active in other chats at the time, and we had no other users who could cover this timeslot, I asked him to come back as a mod for a little while. He accepted. Then several weeks ago, I asked him if wanted to keep the rights and he said yes. This is not a case of a user not wanting the rights.

Recently I also removed the rights of Panda, as she had stated she did not want them. Currently, as far as I know, there are no mods who do not want their rights. And I have been asking. I can assure you that I will be diligent in making sure our mods all want their rights, and removing the rights of those who do not want them.

As far as the issue of removing the rights forcefully, I am 100% in agreement with Ryu. If they ask for them to be removed, I will remove them. If they do not ask for them to be removed, I will remove them. I don't see how opinion on this will be any different from last time. There's nothing NEW that people who wish to bring this up again have brought to the table. This is a wasted argument at a time when we could be focusing on any one of these more important discussions. 18:13, March 6, 2015 (UTC)

Did it ever occur to you the reason some mods never ask to have their rights removed is because they aren't here anymore? Their abandonment is there way of saying that they quit Roranoa Drake II (talk) 18:20, March 6, 2015 (UTC)

People seem to view chat mod rights as some kind of a prize or a medal, which they are not. They are a responsibility. I don't think we should let inactive users keep their rights just because we don't want to hurt their feelings. 18:22, March 6, 2015 (UTC)

I am not the only one who can ask people about if they want rights either, you guys are more than welcome to ask people about this anytime you want, without making a forum. As long as I see evidence from them directly (on this wiki) of them wanting their rights gone, I will remove them.

And I think the mods we have are smart enough to know when they don't need their rights anymore. And mods in the future as well. Because of that, I think forcibly removing their rights if they don't do ____ in ____ amount of time is added stress that mods don't need in their lives.

And seriously, how many times are we going to have the same conversation until people understand a majority of users here don't care about inactive mods. The pattern is always the same here: People start complaining, we argue for a month or so, and then the people who started the argument don't care/aren't around when we close it. Do something new or we should be done here. 18:41, March 6, 2015 (UTC)

I'll even give a thousand "wiki-points" to the person who comes up with something not mentioned before! 18:42, March 6, 2015 (UTC)

Has anyone mentioned power abuse? Roranoa Drake II (talk) 18:50, March 6, 2015 (UTC)


 * We've never had a substantial dispute about mod power abuse before. If a user has a problem with a mod, they can talk to an admin about it (Publicly, or in a PM if they wish), and they will take the proper action that they see fit. But that has nothing to do with inactive mods. 19:14, March 6, 2015 (UTC)

Surely if we are continuing to have problem with moderators and their inactivity. Something that is similar to the admin inactivity system should set up. It would be nice if you didn't try push our concerns under the rug JSD, just so can promote forums people do not wish to participate in. Your an admin now, help us resolve the issue or don't bother commenting. 19:39, March 6, 2015 (UTC)

So far JSD, 3 people are for this and you and Ryu are only ones who are against it. It's obvious who the majority is for the time being Roranoa Drake II (talk) 19:42, March 6, 2015 (UTC)

No. 19:52, March 6, 2015 (UTC)

It must be the picture in the template that makes us all salty. Let's all remember to be civil~ 19:56, March 6, 2015 (UTC)

JOP's right, we need to stay civil. If this gets as bad as the first section of this, some bans might be in order due to rude behavior.

And here's my tip to help resolve the issue: It's not an issue. This topic has come up multiple times, and to the best of my recollection has always been settled without a poll and with a clear majority. The same small pocket of users brings it up, and the same larger pocket of users shoots it down. As many people have stated, having extra moderators does not actively harm the wiki, and I have never heard an argument to prove otherwise. The opposition only ever says "Moderators should be active, it's their responsibility", when in reality in no place has this community ever decided that activity is a responsibility for mods. In fact, the many times we've had this conversation before has shown that the community actually supports NOT requiring activity for mods. Your entire argument is based on a principle this community does not actually support.

And you may be right, I may be trying to "sweep this under the rug". But that's because it honestly makes me sad to see our wiki at such a fragile point in time, when we need to decide several larger issues, and all the editors flock to some forum filled with silly and bitter argument about a trivial idea, when we really need to focus more on the future of our editing community. I honestly believe that having this forum at this time is harmful to our community. 20:19, March 6, 2015 (UTC)

JSD once again you're one of only 2 people who oppose the idea. As of right now you're part of the small pocket users. Wait for some other users to voice their own opinions to add the discussion Roranoa Drake II (talk) 20:28, March 6, 2015 (UTC)

"here's my tip to help resolve the issue: It's not an issue. This topic has come up multiple times, and to the best of my recollection has always been settled without a poll and with a clear majority." Your wrong, wrong on so many points. You acknowledge the first discussion but fail to mention it was never resolved. Because this topic has come up multiple times like you mentioned. This is an issue. How many more threads and forums of the same topic will it take for you to open your eyes and acknowledge the problem? Once again because this has come up multiple times like you mentioned. This is forum is as big of importance as any other forum thread you seem so deeply care about. How can you expect people to remain civil you won't acknowledge the problem. It makes me sad when admins such as yourself ignore the views of wiki members. Especially when you claim to care. 20:58, March 6, 2015 (UTC)

I agree with Besty that we shouldn't ignore this issue if people from our community are genuinely concerned about it, but lets not get too emotional about it. I'm sure JSD means well. He's a great, hard-working guy.

Overall, I'm kind of indifferent on this topic, but in Ryu and JSD's defense, part of the reason we have so many chatmods is to ensure that our chat stays under trusted supervision 24/7, and since mods also have lives of their own, the idea was probably to have numerous mods to cover for the time period that other mods couldn't be there (the more, the better). Like in Kuro's case, it is entirely possible for an "inactive user" to suddenly pop back in during a time that we lack in mods. I think the reason we demote inactive admins as opposed to mods is because wikia rules and admin responsibilities tend to change (drastically at times) during an admin's extended absence, while the general guidelines of who to ban in chat do not change. Also note that we have a limited number of admins who constantly regulate the entire wiki themselves, hence requiring them to be active. As for power abuse, I doubt inactivity makes a user more prone to it than active mods, but if it ever does happen, the most a chatmod could ever do is ban a bunch of non-chatmods for no reason, which isn't nearly as hard to deal with as an admin going beserk. 22:44, March 6, 2015 (UTC)

Ok, while i disagree on the issue, I've still bern thinking of ways around the problem of measuring chat activity. It can't be done in a traditional sense, so I've been thinking outside the box. How about a page where chat mods "check in" once a month? If they miss a few check ins in a row, then they are demoted. Seems like a decent way to make sure they are aware of their activity, and allows them to consider resigning on their own as well. 00:34, March 7, 2015 (UTC)

I'm willing to support the idea. Having a check in system seems like a good idea to monitor activity and could be answer we have been looking for. 00:51, March 7, 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, sounds good. 00:54, March 7, 2015 (UTC)

Update: User:Imhungry4444 has stepped down, and removed his rights. He will not be replaced as a mod, fyi. We have enough American mods to cover his loss. 18:51, March 7, 2015 (UTC)

So... I'm against having inactive mods. Supervising the chat is the mods' responsibility, and the mod rights is certainly not a reward for being a good editor on the wiki. Why should we allow inactive mods to keep their rights? I get that some users want to allow the inactive mods to keep their rights, because it'd hurt their feelings, but the well-doing community is more important than a few users' feelings. There's a lot more reasons why I'm against having inactive mods, but I'm too lazy to list them out, and anyway, most of the reasons have already been listed by others.

And as for JSD's suggestion on having a check in system, well, IMO, I think that it's a pretty weak system to evaluate how active mods are. Any mod can simply sign in without having to go in the chat, which is where their responsibilities lay with, and before you go saying that mods are too good for that, let me say this about two certain users, which I won't say their names. They lied to an admin about the other mods' activity, in order to get mod rights, and if they're so willing to lie and manipulate in order to get their mod rights, who is to say they, and other mods, won't lie about their activity on the chat? The considerably better and reliable alternate is to have a chat log, to gauge the activity of the chat mods, which is a lot more reliable than JSD's suggestion, but Levi already suggested that, and the majority of the community was against it. Please know that I have yet to form an opinion on JSD's suggestion, and I am only pointing out that there are flaws with JSD's suggestion. 01:49, March 8, 2015 (UTC)

Guys, I hate to say this, but in the end, we have to remember that we're just a group of One Piece-devoted teens and young adults and if an issue like this isn't harming anyone, we don't really need to argue over it. It's not like we're getting paid, we're just here because we love One Piece. Just saying. 05:08, March 8, 2015 (UTC)

I am with Ryu and think its okay if the mods still have their rights, hungry has stepped down and I don't think we a new mod for american time zone. 10:54, March 8, 2015 (UTC)

We really don't need any new mods, and I didn't think inactive mods was this much of a problem. If it is, then I suggest a 3 tier system: a, contact mods who become inactive, b. warn them of demotion and c. demote. This sounded better in my head, but we can use something similar I guess. 13:11, March 8, 2015 (UTC)

No point in my belief that chat mods should be able to keep their rights is about feelings. I'm not worried about offending a chat moderator. In general, chat moderation is a different kind of responsibility than adminship. Giving the users these rights is because they are trusted and expected to keep activity on the chat civil and spam-free. The chat itself is an entirely social setting. Since chat mods have lives and have been known to come and go like any other user, it's reasonable that any one of us could take some time off. When we're back, though, we are just as capable of doing our duties as we were before.

In the span of two years, if I'm here for 10 months, gone for 5, and back for 9, I'll be covering my shift and doing a good job for all the time that I'm here. While I'm away, though, I'm not in any way distrupting the wiki. You can appoint a new mod in those 5 months, that's fine. Chat moderators should be able to keep their rights because their inactivity poses no threat.

I'm not going to say that we shouldn't do the check-in page, though. Just because we're not removing rights doesn't mean we can't track activity. I'm not officially for or against it yet, because I feel like if the chat needed more moderation, that would be apparent without checking. Typically the number of nessiccary active mods changes with the chat. We may be only getting 3-5 users a day, or it could be full 24/7. To make a set number of mods seems like a misguided way to handle the situation. 16:17, March 8, 2015 (UTC)

^agree. 16:34, March 8, 2015 (UTC)

So are we going to end this before or after the admin forum?

14:03, March 12, 2015 (UTC)

Same old shit with you guys... It's a chat.... 03:18, March 13, 2015 (UTC)

Well considering that this guy ^^^^ came back and Hungry resigned, I say we close this forum Roranoa Drake II (talk) 16:03, March 14, 2015 (UTC)

No. This needs to be resolved once and for all. If we don't reach a conclusion now, it'll inevitably be brought up again sometime in the future. 16:30, March 14, 2015 (UTC)

So we can have another poll where the majority of users vote to let inactive mods keep their rights until somebody brings it up 2 months later again? SeaTerror (talk) 22:41, March 14, 2015 (UTC)

It doesn't matter much. It's just chad mods. The only power they have is too kick, chat ban, and end chat bans. It only involves the chat. If they abuse their power it is a whole different story. We already have a huge amount of chat mods to begin with. When I first started out, it was only 3, then I got promoted to chat mod and it was 7. A silly forum was created to make sure we elect our chat mods, but look at it now, no one cares about it. Since then a lot of have become mods. Kage, you should have actually gone through the whole election process. So would have Kuro, Nova, Fin, Weirdo, and MoM who previously became chat mods before you without the election. But it's the chat, it doesn't impact the wiki as much, so everyone stop caring I guess. They can resign if they want to, and if they don't it won't be much of a problem. 03:48, March 15, 2015 (UTC)

You go girl! 04:16, March 15, 2015 (UTC)

You forgot to drop my name for "mods without election". Anywoo, there's a pocket of users here who would like the discussion to end, or more formally, would like the outcome to be that no policy for removing chat moderators is established. If you'd like it to go to poll, that's fine. Then we can have our answer and put it to rest. I think the question should be "Should inactive chat moderators lose their rights? Yes or no?" and assuming that 'yes' wins, we can discuss at what point they become inactive. I'm suspecting, though, that 'no' would win, which is why at the very start of this discussion, I made the claim "And everybody agreed with Ryu's statement and the forum was closed.". Inactive chat mods are not a problem, but if you want it in ink, here's your chance. 04:57, March 15, 2015 (UTC)

For the record, last summer we had a forum about election of mods: We decided that mods no longer need to be elected. Talking about who was elected and who was not does not help this conversation move forward.

SHB is back and active, we do not need to worry about the inactivity of any current mods. Now we can talk about the issue alone with personal biases aside.

Now, the way I see it, there are only a few ways this forum ends:

1) Poll. Get it solved once and for all through a poll.

2) Everyone just agrees to my "check-in" idea. That idea is that mods should check in once per month, and after X months w/o check in, mods are demoted. We probably just discuss how many months, etc, then close it.

3) This goes inactive and the current rule wins by default.

I'm fine with any of those 3 options, and will gladly help the community work with any of them. What does everyone else think? 05:54, March 15, 2015 (UTC)

Fuck it, let's poll :D 14:23, March 15, 2015 (UTC)

I support the check-in idea. It does have some problems as Jade mentioned, but at least it's something. A good compromise. 14:27, March 15, 2015 (UTC)

Check-in.

14:32, March 15, 2015 (UTC)

^^^^^^ What the guy above me said Roranoa Drake II (talk) 14:54, March 15, 2015 (UTC)

...or that. 15:03, March 15, 2015 (UTC)

We have two discussions here. We need to decide if inactive mods should be demoted, and also if we should check-in. You can be for the check-in without actually demodding anyone. So that's two polls. 16:56, March 15, 2015 (UTC)

Well, honestly, here's how I feel about things now: When I thought of the check-in idea, I hated it. But I said it because I felt the community would like it. Now, I'm more friendly towards it, but it depends so much on how it is carried out. Like how long is the check-in period? Is it miss _ check-ins a row, or _ check-ins in _ non-consecutive months? How many months?

And I think if we do the check-in system, it needs to have the power to de-mod. I really like the idea of using it more to allow mods to evaluate their status themselves and resign before they need to be de-modded. But without the threat of being de-modded, I don't think people will check-in as often as they should. However, if we're going to use it more for allowing mods to resign, we should evaluate things on a longer timescale, and make it more focused on eliciting responses from the mods than about actually de-modding them.

Right now, I like the following setup:
 * Mods check in during the first week of the month. (if users know they will be absent that week, they can check in early)
 * If you miss 3 or 4 check ins in the last 6 months, you're de-modded.

But my ideas on this are always changing, what do you guys think? 17:27, March 15, 2015 (UTC)

Oh! Ryu, LPK, Rici, and Roa as well, before it was really brought up. My bad Ryu. ._.'

I feel like the check-in idea might eventually be abandoned. For example, the feature article polls, we used to do them every month, but then it slowly got abandoned then just recently revived. So the chat mods will probably do it in the start, but then it'll lack its importance and slowly be abandoned. 17:42, March 15, 2015 (UTC)

Yeah JSD, that setup sounds good. I also like the fact that the check-in system would make mods more aware of their (in)activity and so on. And it definitely needs to have the power to de-mod. 17:53, March 15, 2015 (UTC)

If the subject of having inactive users with rights is constantly being brought up over the years, then yes, I think it's a rather important discussion for the community to have. You cannot just brush it off as a stupid and useless topic, while plenty of users are constantly bringing it up again and again, which reflects the issue's importance. Stop shrugging it off as just "a chat", while apparently plenty of users disagree with that.

And as for closing this discussion right now, even if the said inactive mods are either now active or have been demoted, we should resolve this now, to avoid having the same discussion again in the future. We have never resolved the issue at all in the past, and it's quite about time for us to close this issue once and for all.

Moderation of the chat is the chat mods' responsibility, it's right there in their title, for heaven's sake. And as such, they should be active in the chat, upholding the chat rules, intervening in when users are in arguments, etc. If they've been inactive on the chat for a long time, then they should be demoted, as they are not keeping up with their responsibilities at all. Who care about the past, if they were great mods in the past or whatever? We're talking about the present, which take priority over the past, and obviously, the inactive mods are not being dependable at the moment. I'll say this again: Chat moderators' rights is not a reward or whatever for users for whatever they did in the past or present, it's responsibilities given to trusted users, and the right should be removed if the said users will no longer follow up with their responsibilities.

I agree with Calu, about the check-in system being abandoned eventually. We'll stick to it for a while, but afterwards, we'll end up forgetting about it. Still, it's probably the only good option for both sides... which brings up the question of should it have the power to demote inactive mods or not, and a lot more questions such as how long a mod is inactive in order for us to demote the said mod, or so on. IMO, if we're not going to demote inactive users, then the check-in page is useless. 21:13, March 15, 2015 (UTC)

What if we demod inactive users and then mod them again as soon as they're back? It's not like we have a lengthy system to promote users to mods anyway. 23:44, March 15, 2015 (UTC)

This is getting waaayyyy too complicated people. Chatmods are so uninfluential wikia-wise that we shouldn't even be having a discussion this lengthy. I thought this forum ended like days ago, but whoops, I WAS WRONG! The mods have never and will never be a 100% perfect organization of trained individuals ready for responsibility, and personally I'm fine with that. Not like the chat is a blazing hellscape of raging children and spammers in the first place, so if you ask me, I'd argue we could have only 2 mods on the wiki, demod the rest, and the chat would be exactly the same. If scrutinization of mods and their power usage becomes a constant and persistent thing these days, then you might as well demod me now because I'm not interested. p.s. "dp mod rights plz" - never forget  01:53, March 16, 2015 (UTC)

All it will take for the check-in system not be abandoned is for any users to bring it upon themselves make sure its done each month. The process does not need to be run by admins, or by mods. It can be anyone. Since so many people seem so keen on going after the rights of mods in these forums all the time, I do no think this will be an issue. 06:52, March 16, 2015 (UTC)

Jade I am still not able to comprehend how you take this so seriously, it is just a chat, it's not a big deal in the slightest. Many of the people who have brought forums like this up in the past have been people who were annoyed that they hadn't been given chat mod previously, essentially just being a pain and making a huge deal out of nothing. When I was active the only time I would use mod powers was, to clean up the many messes made by you on a daily basis and constant complaints from users about your insanely long ban lengths. My point is people not just Jade need to remember that the chat is supposed to be fun. I have meetings at work about children with mental health issues less serious than this. Reading this I am begining to regret coming back. 11:38, March 16, 2015 (UTC)

Well, I'm not sayin', I'm just sayin'...--Xilinoc (talk) 20:14, March 16, 2015 (UTC)

^^^ Due to the result of the mods neglecting their duties, feeling were hurt, friendships were broken, and Enrik is in a bathroom crying next to Pau. Are you proud of yourselves? Roranoa Drake II (talk) 20:17, March 16, 2015 (UTC)

Check-in is fine for now. And II, don't mention me because then I have the feeling I should join in too è_é 00:14, March 17, 2015 (UTC)

Well, it seems the clear majority agrees with the check-in. Now, do we discuss the specifics here or open another section/forum? 00:40, March 17, 2015 (UTC)

Well I'm completely against the check-ins if it means demotions. So I think before anything else we need to decide if inactive chat mods should lose their rights. And I think we're ready for a poll on that, no? 11:58, March 17, 2015 (UTC)

OK, but if we vote to not install any check-in system and keep all inactive mods, then we need to implement this decision as final until something changes drastically, so we don't repeat this discussion again. 12:02, March 17, 2015 (UTC)

Alright, currently for the check-in: Against: The rest are unclear. Could more people post their opinions on the check-in, please? The basic outline for it as suggested by JSD: But obviously the specifics are still up in the air. 17:39, March 17, 2015 (UTC)
 * JSD, Besty, Awaikage, Drake, Jade, Nova, Enrik
 * Ryu
 * Mods check in during the first week of the month. (if users know they will be absent that week, they can check in early)
 * If you miss 3 or 4 check ins in the last 6 months, you're de-modded.

Hang on, hang on. I will be for the check-ins if we decide not to demote. Inversely, JustSome would be against them. It's too conditional to pick sides as of yet. Decide if inactive mods get demoted first, and then we can deal with how to measure inactivity.

Again, if I or any other chatmod took a leave of absence for 4 or 5 months out of 2 years, it doesn't mean they can't do their job. Unlike an admin, an inactive chat mod poses no threat on the productivity of the wiki. The number of needed chat mods is entirely elastic.

The check list is great because it encourages chat mods to be aware of their own activity. Perhaps it will inspire a retirement. And it would be useful in determining when it's time for a new mod. So let's take this one step at a time, please. Inactive mods, yes or no? 18:19, March 17, 2015 (UTC)

Trying to turn this into "A or B" again, huh? The problem with that is that some people might be fine with demoting through the check-in system, just not under some other conditions. Currently you're the only one arguing for check-in without demoting.

I asked for opinions on the outline suggested by JSD, so let's just see what people have to say. 21:46, March 17, 2015 (UTC)

Three part poll. First part asking if we should even have check in system. Second part being if that wins asking if we should demote due to it. Third part asking what the length of it should be if second part wins. SeaTerror (talk) 21:55, March 17, 2015 (UTC)

Seeing how this topic has been sidelined due to other forums. It's time we wrap this up and decide how too solve this issue for good. We should now take this to a poll, similar to what ST suggested. Seeing how everyone doesn't fully agree with the check in system. 17:06, March 29, 2015 (UTC)

Agreed. There's no clear majority that I can see, so a poll makes sense.

16:41, March 30, 2015 (UTC)

Check-in System Discussion
When a discussion gets as long and old as this, it's time for a subsection.

Here's how I think this forum is going: Right now, there seems to be a clear majority in favor of the check in system and a clear majority in favor of using it to demote mods. I don't think we need a poll for either of those issues, unless more people supporting the minorities post in this forum. This is how clear majority cases work, and if you're in the minority on that, further argument here will not help us resolve this.

What we do need to discus now is how it works. I've said before, I like a "miss 3 check-ins in 6 months, you're demoted" system, where check ins are always last throughout the first week of the month.

Any other proposals there? Because the only poll I see being necessary moving forward is about the specifics of the rule, and not about the rule itself. 21:15, March 30, 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm fine with those specifics. 21:21, March 30, 2015 (UTC)

I'm also fine with the rules you suggested, JSD. 00:47, April 5, 2015 (UTC)

Sounds good. I support using the idea. 00:53, April 5, 2015 (UTC)

Sounds fine to me. User:X-RAPTOR 16:47, April 5, 2015 (UTC)

Seems fair

Make it happen. 04:34, April 6, 2015 (UTC)

This sounds fair and easily doable. I support it. MizuakiYume (talk) 04:40, April 6, 2015 (UTC)

No to everything. 14:57, April 6, 2015 (UTC)

Sounds fair to me. Implementation might be more challenging, but the principle seems good.

15:10, April 6, 2015 (UTC)

I'd be fine with this. --k-0-r-0-m-0 (talk) 22:47, April 7, 2015 (UTC)

Go ahead, Mistur  JostSemDid--Xilinoc (talk) 22:07, April 8, 2015 (UTC)

I'm fine with this idea. 22:25, April 8, 2015 (UTC)

ye  13:54, April 14, 2015 (UTC)

Alright, I've been spending the last couple weeks tracking down all the mods. We've gotten responses from all who wish to post here, and they are all unanimous among those mods.

I think it's more than safe to call this a clear majority. I will close this now.

So I'll make up the check in page, make an example of a check in and we can start in May. 01:51, April 15, 2015 (UTC)

Elimination of the Check-in System
I came up with the idea for this system, and I've always hated it. In the 7 months or so we've had it, we've lost no mods to it, and all we've ever done is catch some good mods with their pants down at the beginning of a month. I've had much more success just privately asking mods who are less active if they want to keep their rights.

We tried this little experiment, and it didn't work. Can we get rid of this system now? If we must replace it with something, just say that admins can remove rights when a user is "obviously inactive" after trying to contact them. How does that sound to everyone? 17:08, November 28, 2015 (UTC)

It's been proven not to work efficiently. Get rid of it. 17:13, November 28, 2015 (UTC)

Yes, get rid of it. All it did was let some mods game the system while not being active on chat or the Wiki in general 18:41, November 28, 2015 (UTC)

Yeah sure. 19:33, November 28, 2015 (UTC)

Get rid of it for sure. Mods have been abusing this system since the beginning, they don't go on the chat, but still sign the check-in. 20:57, November 28, 2015 (UTC)

Rid 04:16, November 29, 2015 (UTC)

Burn the check-in system! Leave it behind! --Jojo risin&#39; (talk) 05:06, November 29, 2015 (UTC)

Not much point in keeping it if it doesn't work. 07:50, November 29, 2015 (UTC)

Seems like there's a lot of support for getting rid of the check in system, but what about my proposed rule for the future? That is "admins can remove rights when a user is "obviously inactive" after trying to contact them." 19:28, November 29, 2015 (UTC)

Sounds fine to me as long as the admins try to contact them first. 19:39, November 29, 2015 (UTC)

Yeah sure, you can make a rule like how at least a month (or more) must have passed between the contact before any action might be taken. 19:43, November 29, 2015 (UTC)