Web Ew, forums. Move helper applications somewhere else

[DrHam]

Hello,

While it’s a big improvement and people who apply will *finally* get feedback, I believe moving them to forums looks bad and might get tedious to look after many applications.

So, I suggest making something similar to reports/appeals. Similar to them, you apply on a separate page (not forums). I believe this can be helpful to both appliers and reviewers:

• For appliers: They can get notified by e-mail when something changes in their application. Apart of that, there’s no other big difference from using the forums.
• For reviewers: More data can be displayed (% successful reports, ban history and whatever other data they have), instead of having to look it manually. Additionally, the name/rank of whoever applies can be hidden until the “Interview” stage to prevent bias.

It should look good, it should be easy to do (even I managed to do something similar), so why not?

 

[Keanu]

While I definitely see where you're coming from, it's quite hard to pull off without a Web Developer.

 

[LeCastel]

While I definitely see where you're coming from, it's quite hard to pull off without a Web Developer.

Aren't the application threads hiding for everyone but the applicant and the staff already?

Seems like the most obvious way to deal with it and the forum already does this for other categories.

 

[DrHam]

While I definitely see where you're coming from, it's quite hard to pull off without a Web Developer.

Many stuff can be reused (aka copy pasted) from the reports system, adding some stuff shouldn’t be time consuming nor difficult.

Aren't the application threads hiding for everyone but the applicant and the staff already?

Seems like the most obvious way to deal with it and the forum already does this for other categories.

Yes, those are hidden for everyone but staff, but the name/rank of the person isn’t hidden to them. It just adds another layer to prevent even the slightest bias

 

[AnimalTamer1]

While it’s a big improvement and people who apply will *finally* get feedback, I believe moving them to forums looks bad and might get tedious to look after many applications.

To be honest there is no truly non-"tedious" (as you would call it) way to go through applications. Every system has its flaws and every system has its downsides. This system we have in place now, has been proving to be quite valuable and assisted in making the review process of applications fairly smooth. It allows us to ensure they have a forums account, that they can not troll and apply for other users (we have had this) as easily, and that we can quickly/easily find their forums account without relying on them linking it every time they apply.
Yes this system may not be flawless, but it is new and like everything else new it will take time to be adjusted to and could have a few issues we will work through when they appear.

For appliers: They can get notified by e-mail when something changes in their application. Apart of that, there’s no other big difference from using the forums.

As far as I know, you can set up alerts to send you an email for threads you watch (like your application) under the preferences section of your personal settings. This also shows an alert on the forums, if you have that set up, for when we reply to their application! This means having it on the forums vs another site will not really change the way their alerts pop up.

For reviewers: More data can be displayed (% successful reports, ban history and whatever other data they have), instead of having to look it manually. Additionally, the name/rank of whoever applies can be hidden until the “Interview” stage to prevent bias.

While having the other data all at face value/in one place would be convenient, there is still other research we have to do and to top it off this would require a developer of some sort to sync all the data up.
There is no bias for rank vs non-rank players. I understand this was a worry and a rumor that went around for some time, but currently we do not hold a preference if you are a ranked player or not. The reason it has been a majority (not all players have had a rank but most) that have gotten helper and were a ranked user, is because the majority of our applicants have a rank. If someone that is a stone rank does not apply, then we can not accept them right?

That being said, there are still players that have stone rank and do apply. They are given the same exact chance as any other user. Yes we appreciate those that have bought a rank, but a rank does not show they are capable of being a staff member any more than someone without a rank, it just shows that they wished to purchase a rank to support the server (and were able to do so) where some users can not afford to.

Yes, those are hidden for everyone but staff, but the name/rank of the person isn’t hidden to them. It just adds another layer to prevent even the slightest bias

The name/rank would still not be hidden, by the way. Even if we move the system, we can still look up their username anywhere. We can not assess a user without knowing their username (as we need to be able to assess them for more than their reports or past punishments, like their personalities etc) so applications can not be anonymous. This means that their username would be known and we would learn their rank, which again does not affect our decision, I can assure you.

 

[DrHam]

To be honest there is no truly non-"tedious" (as you would call it) way to go through applications. Every system has its flaws and every system has its downsides. This system we have in place now, has been proving to be quite valuable and assisted in making the review process of applications fairly smooth. It allows us to ensure they have a forums account, that they can not troll and apply for other users (we have had this) as easily, and that we can quickly/easily find their forums account without relying on them linking it every time they apply.
Yes this system may not be flawless, but it is new and like everything else new it will take time to be adjusted to and could have a few issues we will work through when they appear.

While having to click every post/application might be the same on the system *I imagine*, wouldn’t it be easier to have more read space, slightly bigger fonts and even a different background to make reading easier? Maybe I’m just a lazy ass, but I believe that if all of the application reviewers said one thing they’d love to have to make reading or going through applications and that were put there’d be a major improvement for everyone.
Also, wouldn’t you love to have some sort of pre-defined decliné messages for common “bad” applications (eg “You do not meet the minimum requirements”)? I don’t know how you currently handle that, but clicking a button (and perhaps having the option to edit/add more information) is easier and faster than copy pasting.

As far as I know, you can set up alerts to send you an email for threads you watch (like your application) under the preferences section of your personal settings. This also shows an alert on the forums, if you have that set up, for when we reply to their application! This means having it on the forums vs another site will not really change the way their alerts pop up.

Yes, I know perfectly that feature exists. But, what’s more profesional and good-looking, a generic xenForo notification or a custom message with ccg branding and a nice title?
“Helper Application - New thread in watched forum” vs “Congratulations, you’re now on the Interview phase” or similar.

While having the other data all at face value/in one place would be convenient, there is still other research we have to do and to top it off this would require a developer of some sort to sync all the data up.

There’s really no developer capable here of doing what I’m suggesting? I’ll sell the you the code for 20€

[QUOTE="AnimalTamer1, post: 1093109, member: 165008"]There is no bias for rank vs non-rank players. I understand this was a worry and a rumor that went around for some time, but currently we do not hold a preference if you are a ranked player or not. The reason it has been a majority (not all players have had a rank but most) that have gotten helper and were a ranked user, is because the majority of our applicants have a rank. If someone that is a stone rank does not apply, then we can not accept them right?

That being said, there are still players that have stone rank and do apply. They are given the same exact chance as any other user. Yes we appreciate those that have bought a rank, but a rank does not show they are capable of being a staff member any more than someone without a rank, it just shows that they wished to purchase a rank to support the server (and were able to do so) where some users can not afford to.[/QUOTE]
Even if you don’t intend to, there’s a slight bias, be the name, where they’re from or rank. Not displaying the name on the first phase might prevent this. Of course, as I wrote, the name must be revealed on the second stage.
“Some people say they have no bias against anything, and that’s laughable - Faye Cocchiara on https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20180806-how-hidden-bias-can-stop-you-getting-a-job”

 

[TeamTMS]

Hey, I can see why you might think that.
I personally think that the forums is the best option for having Helper applications. With it previously being Google Forms, it wasn’t really a professional application manager in my opinion, because I think anyone can just go and complete a form without thinking too much of it. With it being on the forums, people actually have to read through how to actually apply and where, so it shows how determined they are. And a plus side is that you can add your own comments/concerns and possibly a little introduction without sticking to the given format. It also shows how good you are at presenting your application.
I’m not too sure about how the old Helper application was runned, but chances are the application wouldn’t have been as organized. On the forums, other admins can look at the applications, organize applications, etc. I think it’s just better on the forums where everything is in one place, and admins can look directly into your forums account.
I think I can see where your coming from though. Thanks for the suggestion, that’s my opinion anyways :)

 

[Nikoshka]

Love the use of the old UD staff panel ahaha (the memories....)
Tbh, I think this is a bit more work than it's actually worth for now. Maybe if CCG gets a full time web developer to work on specifically web stuff, then yeah, it would be a good idea.

 

[AnimalTamer1]

While having to click every post/application might be the same on the system *I imagine*, wouldn’t it be easier to have more read space, slightly bigger fonts and even a different background to make reading easier? Maybe I’m just a lazy ass, but I believe that if all of the application reviewers said one thing they’d love to have to make reading or going through applications and that were put there’d be a major improvement for everyone.

I mean you can change the font, size, and color as well as bold, Italicize, and underline, all on the forums as well. Sure you can't change the background color, but with text color and other features available on the forums when creating a thread there are plenty of ways to make it legible and this allows the applicant to format it the way they find the most appealing. Lets them be creative with it! :)

Also, wouldn’t you love to have some sort of pre-defined decliné messages for common “bad” applications (eg “You do not meet the minimum requirements”)? I don’t know how you currently handle that, but clicking a button (and perhaps having the option to edit/add more information) is easier and faster than copy pasting.

I mean considering our main minimum requirement is a minimum age of 14 years old, with only a few other things that we have to search for ourselves (can't set a preset minimum for), there is no way to automatically deny someone, except for the age of 14. Plus we like to research the applicant a bit for ourselves to be able to give them the most feedback on how to improve that we can!
It may be faster to click a button, but copy and paste does not take too much time either.

Yes, I know perfectly that feature exists. But, what’s more profesional and good-looking, a generic xenForo notification or a custom message with ccg branding and a nice title?
“Helper Application - New thread in watched forum” vs “Congratulations, you’re now on the Interview phase” or similar.

It may look nicer, but that would take coding and having a proper site for it. Then there is the issue of troll applicants, spam applicants, phony applicants, fake links or bad links on applicants and many other issues. The alerts may not be as pretty, but when it comes to where and how they apply, the forums has so far proven to work well.

There’s really no developer capable here of doing what I’m suggesting?

I didn't say there was no developer. I just said it would require one. This means dev time, basically to sum that up it would take time from other projects when it isn't as readily needed for this application process. It being on the forums is not a broken concept and thus there is not a lot to fix, maybe some aesthetics, but we can always find ways to sort that as time goes on and the need arises.

Even if you don’t intend to, there’s a slight bias, be the name, where they’re from or rank. Not displaying the name on the first phase might prevent this. Of course, as I wrote, the name must be revealed on the second stage.

I can assure you there is none. In case you didn't read how our application process works: There is a team that gives an initial opinion (which is the recruitment team). This means that if the applicant is not denied for something blatantly against our requirements i.e. swearing, toxicity, massive inactivity, actively punished or being younger than 14 years old then they will be discussed by this team. From there is this:

As we mentioned earlier, the decision is not solely up to the recruitment team. The main reason for this is, as stated, to prevent bias. Although another reason is to ensure that the staff team is able to give opinions and have a say in who they work with.

Once an applicant has reached the interview prefix, they will get an interview first. After which, the recruitment team will discuss the interview with those who did not attend it. Once a decision is reached, the rest of the Moderators are brought in on the decision. They will give their opinions and based on all of that, the applicant will move onto a successful or unsuccessful tag.

Now, this sounds quite intense and may worry you, but the way the opinions are decided is based on a majority. This means if you have one staff member that you fear dislikes you, it will not be the demise of your chances. It just means their opinion will be taken into account and discussed!

We do not have one person making a decision and do not deny applicants without a solid reason. This reason could be anywhere from immaturity, dishonesty, past punishments (if they are hiding them or have repeatedly been punished and maybe were punished 2 weeks ago), or even them never doing a single report (we don't have a minimum requirement, but we still look to see if you have done any reports at all as they show us some of your desire to help). All of this comes from a discussion between the recruitment team. From there, as stated above, after the interview the applicant is discussed with the moderation team (as long as the interview did not raise any massive concerns).

Yes, I know there can be hidden biases, but with a whole team giving an opinion, it makes this a lot harder. Not impossible, that is true, but a lot harder. Especially since we don't look for every single staff member to say yes. It is based on a majority (as said) and then we discuss through the dislikes/negative opinions to ensure we are hearing them out and seeing where they are coming from.

Hopefully this eases your mind of any worries of bias and helps you see how we are taking steps to ensure that there is no bias. (:

 

[DrHam]

Hey, I can see why you might think that.
I personally think that the forums is the best option for having Helper applications. With it previously being Google Forms, it wasn’t really a professional application manager in my opinion, because I think anyone can just go and complete a form without thinking too much of it. With it being on the forums, people actually have to read through how to actually apply and where, so it shows how determined they are. And a plus side is that you can add your own comments/concerns and possibly a little introduction without sticking to the given format. It also shows how good you are at presenting your application.
I’m not too sure about how the old Helper application was runned, but chances are the application wouldn’t have been as organized. On the forums, other admins can look at the applications, organize applications, etc. I think it’s just better on the forums where everything is in one place, and admins can look directly into your forums account.
I think I can see where your coming from though. Thanks for the suggestion, that’s my opinion anyways :)

Have you actually read my post? I’ve never said that Google Forms was a good way to handle applications, in fact, I believe this is a positive change. My suggestion is moving them to their web infrastructure (or however you’d like to call it), similar to reports (in case you don’t know, they used to be on the forums and they were a mess). Adding simple, basic questions could allow a rapid check of the candidate, while still having a ”here, be free to write whatever you want” question, where you can still add your “comments/concerns”. By having them somewhere else than on the forums, even a vote system can be implemented to select candidates.

mean you can change the font, size, and color as well as bold, Italicize, and underline, all on the forums as well. Sure you can't change the background color, but with text color and other features available on the forums when creating a thread there are plenty of ways to make it legible and this allows the applicant to format it the way they find the most appealing. Lets them be creative with it! :)

Yeah, I meant on the reviewers side. It might be me, but I still it’s easier to have a different font and bigger text area, without the distracting stuff found on forums.

I mean considering our main minimum requirement is a minimum age of 14 years old, with only a few other things that we have to search for ourselves (can't set a preset minimum for), there is no way to automatically deny someone, except for the age of 14. Plus we like to research the applicant a bit for ourselves to be able to give them the most feedback on how to improve that we can!

Staff comments section on the application is the solution. And, uh, there’s this:

Then there is the issue of troll applicants, spam applicants, phony applicants, fake links or bad links on applicants and many other issues

I can assure you there is none

I read that post, two times in fact, before making this thread. I know how it works. I just believe

It just adds another layer to prevent even the slightest bias

 

[AnimalTamer1]

Yeah, I meant on the reviewers side. It might be me, but I still it’s easier to have a different font and bigger text area, without the distracting stuff found on forums.

I mean I have read through some the applications, and have not found it too difficult. I know where the questions are and answers. They are formatted by the applicant nicely usually! (:

Staff comments section on the application is the solution. And, uh, there’s this:

I mean with the way we have it now vs having a staff comments section, it would be the same. If I understand your suggestion it would be to have an area for staff to comment on the applicant we see to asses the other requirements (since we couldn't set up an auto deny for applicants with a different system, except for the age). We have this now, so it wouldn't reduce the work all that much, maybe take out a few applicants that are under 14, but that is about it.
The issue of faulty applicants was removed when we moved it to the forums (almost entirely) since they have to now have a forums account to apply.

I read that post, two times in fact, before making this thread. I know how it works. I just believe
NotGingerGeek said: ↑
It just adds another layer to prevent even the slightest bias

Yes I can see how it may seem to add another layer, but in reality it will not. We do not deny/accept applicants solely on what they say in their application unless its a fake one, they swear at us, it is not in English, or they are not 14. We read their application then go to do a bit of research to ensure they are not actively punished etc. before moving them to the considering tag.
So we would move onto the next step of needing their name relatively fast.This would mean, with where I think your fear of bias is coming in, we would automatically jump to alleged bias. With the system we have, this bias is basically removed. Yes some staff may say no because of their bias, but the applicant will not be solely denied on that no, as stated previously by me and by the process thread.

 

[DrHam]

I mean I have read through some the applications, and have not found it too difficult. I know where the questions are and answers. They are formatted by the applicant nicely usually!

I'm not saying the current system is a mess, I'm saying that adding abigger text area, removing distracting stuff (like the ranks color, the plus thing shinning, profile pcitures, etc) can make reading even easier.

I'm lazy to reply to all you said, so I made a quick design (using inspect element) on how I imagine it, to, hopefully, make things clear.

As can be seen, no distracting elements, bigger textarea (should've made the background a different color, though), good-looking, etc. I added the priority thing because it's something that could help when dealing with applications

 

[DrHam]

Anything else to comment, now with a mock-up design?

 

[DrHam]

Added a poll, because commenting seems to be too hard

 

[DrHam]

3 people voted "no", no comments stating their thoughts. Nice.

 

[Nikoshka]

3 people voted "no", no comments stating their thoughts. Nice.

Probably because someone (like Animal or myself) already commented on reasons why this shouldn't be introduced. They'd just be repeating something that was already said.

Besides, why create a poll "because commenting seems to be too hard" and then complain that people aren't commenting their thoughts? xP

 

[DrHam]

Probably because someone (like Animal or myself) already commented on reasons why this shouldn't be introduced. They'd just be repeating something that was already said.

Besides, why create a poll "because commenting seems to be too hard" and then complain that people aren't commenting their thoughts? xP

6 people said 'No'. Of those 6 people, no one but @AnimalTamer1 (who hasn't replied after the mockup) has stated a reason

 

[Nikoshka]

6 people said 'No'. Of those 6 people, no one but @AnimalTamer1 (who hasn't replied after the mockup) has stated a reason

"Tbh, I think this is a bit more work than it's actually worth for now. Maybe if CCG gets a full time web developer to work on specifically web stuff, then yeah, it would be a good idea."

Pretty sure anyone who wasn't replied agrees with what Animal has already said, or what I said above.

The points that Animal or I have made generally aren't invalidated after the mockup. The mockup looks great but I don't think it's worth it at the moment without a full time dev.

 

[Story]

To me it just seems pointless, I dont think this would improve recruitment enough to even be worth the investment, they have just moved to the forums recently so we've yet to see how the recruitment team deal with it, it doesnt really matter whats most efficient but rather what they are most comfortable with at the moment.

This is definitely a future possibility but not a current one for a multitude of reasons, I'd vote no in CubeCrafts current position.

 

[DrHam]

To me it just seems pointless, I dont think this would improve recruitment enough to even be worth the investment, they have just moved to the forums recently so we've yet to see how the recruitment team deal with it, it doesnt really matter whats most efficient but rather what they are most comfortable with at the moment.

This is definitely a future possibility but not a current one for a multitude of reasons, I'd vote no in CubeCrafts current position.

Thanks for saying something reasonable. I added another option to the poll, check it ;)