X All The Y

151 views • 6 upvotes • Made by Fallen-lucifer 3 years ago

27 Comments

peachytroopa-kashythra
2 ups, 3y
Sounds good

I especially agree with the no head owners rule
[deleted]
2 ups, 3y, 1 reply
1. Yes



2. if there's owner position, then yes



3. 100% agree, msmg's USSR stream 😎😎😎😎😎😎😎
Fallen-lucifer
1 up, 3y, 1 reply
The main issue i have with this is...how many owners do we need to have to agree to this in order for it to be put in place
[deleted]
1 up, 3y
Depends on necessity
Fallen-lucifer
2 ups, 3y
This is a system I kinda use for my streams (aga, anime_army)
illu_
1 up, 3y, 1 reply
Okay, so on the surface this is a good idea

But MSMG is, uhh, special. People don't like change. I personally agree with this system but it's just not possible for it to be implemented without any problems. We had drama when head owners were removed, when the mod application was added and removed, etc. So even though this is a great idea, I think we gotta stick to what we have.
Fallen-lucifer
0 ups, 3y, 1 reply
I think the problem with what spire tried is that she implemented it abruptly without warning and without people slowly getting used to it



I was thinking of slowly implementing this (if enough owners agreed to it) by reviving the mod request stream
illu_
1 up, 3y
A slow implementation would definitely be a good idea

So if you can think of a way to slowly implement this, then I'm on board with the idea

But let me just say, if this causes drama, it's your fault, alright?
Poke.
1 up, 3y, 1 reply
This system is SO MUCH BETTER than spires system. I like the idea. Also about the mod and owner limit, how many mods are there and how many owners are there right now?
Fallen-lucifer
1 up, 3y, 1 reply
Gotta check
Poke.
1 up, 3y
Mk
[deleted]
1 up, 3y, 1 reply
i say you should send this to the owners. each one of em individually
Fallen-lucifer
0 ups, 3y
Ok
saintly.
1 up, 3y
I think so
Fallen-lucifer
1 up, 3y
Now, idk how many owners have to agree to this to make this happen, but we'll see what the others say
[deleted]
0 ups, 3y
[deleted]
0 ups, 3y, 1 reply
A mod limit is impractical on such a large stream- the ranks can be cleared out if necessary, and the more the merrier

maybe a owner limit of 20-30 and a lack of a mod limit whatsoever

And maybe 5 months for an owner request? I've been a moderator for just now approaching 3 months, and I don't feel I deserve owner after 4 solely due to the lack of real experience.
Fallen-lucifer
0 ups, 3y, 2 replies
The more owners we have, the higher of a chance that an arkuum can happen and completely ruin everything, that's why the current owners are tedious about an owner limit
[deleted]
0 ups, 3y, 1 reply
i don't know what you mean by arkuum but do you mean takeover?

if that happens we just pull in a site mod to ban the offending account.
Fallen-lucifer
0 ups, 3y, 1 reply
If that keeps happening, more and more people are just gonna leave out of frustration how the owners are unable to prevent such a situation from happening AGAIN, and then msmg will die
[deleted]
0 ups, 3y
MSMG won't die for as long as there are interested parties. We don't just willy-nilly give out owner- if it's agreed upon by five owners, it's probably safe, and if it isn't, it's on them. "decreasing the chance" is a bunch of bull- we're people, not numbers defined by constant nature. We're the definition of variability. Wallhammer could go crazy right now and remove everyone's owner, ban every user.
[deleted]
0 ups, 3y, 1 reply
Plus, the reliability of a person is generally apparent
Fallen-lucifer
0 ups, 3y, 1 reply
People on the internet act differently than their irl selfs (at least most people at least)



That's why trust is necessary
[deleted]
0 ups, 3y, 1 reply
So then, what's the purpose of a cap
Fallen-lucifer
0 ups, 3y, 2 replies
To limit the possibility of the owners agreeing on making a user who plans on stsrting an arkuum in secret



And to make creating and enforcing rules easier
[deleted]
0 ups, 3y
As the owner count increases, increase the number of owners required. The likelihood an owner goes inactive and makes it impossible to do this is high with such a low cap. Creating and enforcing rules cannot get easier than with a higher owner count
[deleted]
0 ups, 3y
Searching Arkuum brought me this from 11 months ago.

That's why we don't get concerned about an arkuum. Attempting to control the stream by limiting those who can control it is not the way to go. I'm not even suggesting a lack of an owner cap, simply a raise.

oh and a mod can't cause an arkuum so there's no reason to limit the mods

Show More Comments

Caption this Meme

Created with the Imgflip Meme Generator

IMAGE DESCRIPTION:

SO, I THOUGHT OF AN OFFICIAL MOD SYSTEM FOR MSMG: THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN MEMBERS OF MSMG FOR MORE THAN TWO MONTHS CAN BECOME MODS IF THEY HAVE A GOOD REPUTATION, AND CAN REQUEST TO BECOME MOD WITH THAT MOD REQUEST STREAM I MADE AWHILE BACK...IN ORDER FOR THEM TO BECOME A MOD, 3 OWNERS MUST AGREE FOR SAID USER TO BECOME A MOD (LIMIT: 20-25); OWNERS: THE USER MUST BE A MOD FOR AT LEAST 4 MONTHS, HAVE A SOLID, GOOD, REPUTATION, AND NOT HAVE ABUSED MOD IN THE PAST. IN ORDER FOR SAID MOD TO BECOME AN OWNER, THEY WOULD ALSO ASK IN THE MOD REQUEST STREAM, BUT THIS TIME, 5 OWNERS MUST AGREE THAT THEY ARE FIT TO BE AN OWNER (LIMIT OF OWNERS: 12); ALSO, NO HEAD OWNERS OR ADVISORS, IT'S JUST A FAIR SHARE OF POWER AMONG THE OWNERS AND THEN THE MODS AS WELL (ALL THE OTHER POLICIES WE HAVE IN PLACE DON'T NEED CHANGE TO MY KNOWLEDGE)