Forums  /  The Site  /  Concerning a "selectively inactive" Supermod
  Gelly

I will try to make this as concise and as neutral as possible. I run a game called Type:Rider, and at the time I started, the leaderboard had one category, "any%", that required no verification, with duplicates on that board. I posted in the forums about adding more categories, as I and at least one other player had run them in the past. No response from the supermod.

Months later, I decided to request for mod, as I really would like to have additions to the board for myself, eventually, and future players. I first made sure to ask the supermod through all available vectors. No response from the supermod.

Eventually, after asking the "Leaderboards moderation thread" about it (and getting no response), I was added on as supermod. I added ILs, some theming, and additional categories, and was happy with it.

Someone submits a run to the IL table and within 24 hours, before I had the chance to see it, the other supermod accepts it. Which is, ultimately, very frusturating. They choose to have no interest in the game, which would be fine, except they accept runs within the day, for whatever reason. I do not trust this person to care about runs in the future and doubt they put in the effort to watch it.

What should I do? I would prefer to remove them as a supermod, but for one, I probably shouldn't, as more mods is comforting even if one of them is less than stellar, and for two, I can't, as it's not available to me as only a supermod.

Thanks for your time.

 
  ShikenNuggets

Not having any way to communicate with another super mod on a board you're working on together is definitely a problem, but if they're verifying runs then perhaps they shouldn't be completely removed. A good middle ground here might be to demote them to verifier. That way they can still continue helping by verifying runs, but they're not in charge of anything so not being able to communicate with them wouldn't be an issue.

 
  NihilistComedyHour

I mean, assuming the runs he is verifying are legit, what's the issue?

 
  Gelly

Well, that's just it - I can't assume that the runs he verifies are legit because I'm not even sure he's watching them. If I have to go through the process of verifying the run for myself in order to make sure a run that was incorrect or cheated wasn't vetted, then what's the point of having him on the team?

I do not have the option to downgrade his status, no - if I did, then I would also have the ability to remove him from the board.

 
  ShikenNuggets

@Gelly "I do not have the option to downgrade his status"
I'm aware of this, I was just proposing having the site mods demote them as opposed to having them removed entirely. But yeah, if you can't trust their verification at all and you can't communicate with them at all then it might be best to just cut them loose.

 
  NihilistComedyHour

If I'm a moderator of a game, and there are any other moderators, there is no way to be sure that they "watching them." But if you check out a run of his and there isn't an issue, then why assume there is one. Now, I mean, if he was clearly verifying things that are obviously wrong, I'd see the issue.

Otherwise the run in question, the IL run, has an IGT. The run literally does the run (which is 48 seconds), and then the player exits the game and goes back in the level selection menu and it clearly shows his new best time as being 48 seconds. So, yeah, I don't really get the paranoia.

YoniArousement, Habreno and blueYOSHI like this.