Don't you think there should be some decision making process for deciding mods?

Sure, choosing the first mod that way is fine, but what if that person doesn't do a good job moderating? What if they don't want any other mods so that they get to make all the rules regardless of what everyone else thinks?

This is a big concern I have with this site as a whole. Rules for games, leaderboard layout, and run verification all need to be done by the players that actually play the game, and be decided by the community as a whole, not by the person who creates the leaderboard first.

There should be some way a community can say "Hey, we don't want this person to be the only mod, instead we want this/these people to be a mod".

The "talk to the current moderator" system doesn't work well if that moderator doesn't agree with you / the community. If that's the case, then the leaderboard is run by a tyrant instead of a moderator.

There needs to be some kind of merit behind mods or democratic process to decide mods after the first.

Why is there still no thread / submission form for this to be done?

It could be based on run times, experience with the game, community vote, etc. Anything would be better than how it is now where it's solely up to the discretion of the first mod for that game

[quote]Don't you think there should be some decision making process for deciding mods?[/quote] Such as? I'm assuming you mean upon leaderboard creation. Well, how do you decide that? [quote]Sure, choosing the first mod that way is fine, but what if that person doesn't do a good job moderating?[/quote] They can be removed as mod. [quote]What if they don't want any other mods so that they get to make all the rules regardless of what everyone else thinks?[/quote] They can be removed as mod. [quote]This is a big concern I have with this site as a whole. Rules for games, leaderboard layout, and run verification all need to be done by the players that actually play the game, and be decided by the community as a whole, not by the person who creates the leaderboard first.[/quote] And they are. What makes you think that one person controls an entire community? Just because they have mod? They can be removed, just have to ask site mods and explain the situation. [quote]There should be some way a community can say "Hey, we don't want this person to be the only mod, instead we want this/these people to be a mod".[/quote] https://www.speedrun.com/The_Site/thread/63nr7 [quote]The "talk to the current moderator" system doesn't work well if that moderator doesn't agree with you / the community. If that's the case, then the leaderboard is run by a tyrant instead of a moderator.[/quote] So talk to the site mods and explain the situation. What do you propose otherwise? Leaderboards are community lead, they try not to get in the middle unless they have to. [quote]There needs to be some kind of merit behind mods or democratic process to decide mods after the first.[/quote] Well ignoring the fact that there are games out there that only have a community of about 2 people, most games end up with the right mods because they're the people that play the game and know it the best. What exactly are you suggesting? You usually only end up with a bad mod when they decide to request some shit game that no one will play, and several months or years into the future you get someone that wants to submit runs and OOPS that mod hasn't logged in in 3+ months. Leaderboards are community lead. If you wanna take votes on who should mod, then do exactly that I guess? It's not up to SRC site mods. [quote]Why is there still no thread / submission form for this to be done?[/quote] Cause people that speedrun the game and know it well should be mods, not randoms that have some arbitrary merit that you haven't clarified on. [quote]It could be based on run times, experience with the game, community vote, etc. Anything would be better than how it is now where it's solely up to the discretion of the first mod for that game[/quote] It's not up to the first mod that requested the game, it's already up to the community.

Welcome to SRC, enjoy your stay.

If you find a case of a sole mod mishandling a board's moderation then you can collect some evidence and make your case in the "Leaderboard Moderation Requests" thread, if that user is indeed mishandling the board and going against that particular game's community's wishes then a site mod or admin will usually get involved and transfer mod to a more capable user.

The problem with a merit based system for picking a first time mod is that if a player with no previous runs or posts wants to submit a game they have been speedrunning, why should they be barred from being picked as a moderator just because they have no prior history on sr.c? Should they be forced to wait until eventually a 'more qualified' user shows up to submit the game, and then to have the game go through the submission process a second time? The moderators already have quite a bit of game requests and other moderation responsibilities and it'd add a bit more to the plate to require to do additional research on every individual that submits a game. It's what the leaderboard moderation requests thread is already meant to take care of if they are misbehaving, which happens far less often than a user being capable of running a board for the game they submitted.

You're suggesting to add further complexities for a seemingly rare situation where a moderator becomes a tyrant and attempts to completely dismantle an entire community's ethos. As the others before me have pointed out, there are available avenues to replacing the current moderators of a leaderboard. The "talk to the current moderator" is given often because of a seemingly common failure to ensure that this is the first action done when suggestions from a community member are placed forth to a speedgame (numerous cases where people want to change up the leadership behind the current moderators backs). Your suggestion would launch the current system into a political pit where moderators would be fighting with each other and with other candidates to ensure they maintain their position in an "upcoming moderator election."

It would be more beneficial to explore methods of how to educate community members on what they can do to better communicate with the current leaderboard's moderators and what options they have should they seem dissatisfied with the incumbents. There is no right way to run a leaderboard and it is impossible to please every speedrunner for your speedgame, but normally a suggestion like this stems from an inability to comply with the current leaderboard's guidelines with an assumed support from the speedgame's community. I find that most of the current leaders for most of the leaderboards on this site are doing fairly well in their duties. If they are not, then there should be more discussion with the next level in the chain to determine how to replace them.

The issue of a "tyrant moderator" is really a non-issue, it basically never happens and when it does it's very easy to resolve by taking it to the site moderators.

Do you have a specific alternative in mind to the current system? You've mentioned a merit-based or democratic system, but those are somewhat vague.

1. I think moderators of a game should have at least one run on the board.

2. I think when decisions need to be made regarding a game's categories or rules, a good moderator would run that by the community before making any kind of change.

3. Ideally, moderators would have decent people skills and know how to interact with their peers without being demeaning or dismissive.

Just one man's opinion.

Also remember to read the Guide to Good Moderation

@CriscoWild I would agree, but what about when someone wants to mod a game that's their first speedgame?

How does that change anything Crisco said? You can’t request a game without providing your run so even if it’s someone’s first speed game they’ll still have run on the board (unless they don’t post it after the LB is created for some odd reason). And the latter 2 points have nothing to do with whether it’s someone’s first speed game or whether it’s their hundredth.

That's fair.

Why do people even respond to these threads when the OP invariably never interacts with it again

Serves as valuable information for future users to find if they ever contemplate asking the same question and end up using the search function to find previous threads on the matter.

Implying the people who create these threads think of searching in the first place