Jump to content
Dallas

Social doesn't meet Official standards

Recommended Posts

I personally don't think Social is being managed adequately. I don't think it should lose its official status, though. I'm all for transferring ownership to a new user and reviving it again. One would say its glory times are gone, its legacy has been destroyed or Chat covers its purpose (which I don't agree with — I believe an English lobby is necessary), but I'd still give it another chance because of users like you, who actually care about the chat and would like to see it back to life again.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Dallas said:

Then a certain situation on Discord for "Social Staff" happened because Mike couldn't discuss things

with me about it. (I wasn't staff but I made it because I make good set ups for Discord.)

Because of this, he decided to have someone else make another Discord for the chat staff.

The lack of communication with Mike had resulted in negative outcomes because I was upset about it.

I was banned, because I was being accused of false accusations.

False accusations? No sir. All legit accusations and there was legitimate proof. Don't try to lie your way out of this one buddy. You are NOT good at setting up discords as we all left it because of you and the drama you had. If you had tried to discuss it privately to try and get it sorted, I'm sure you would've been made an owner. It was YOUR drama that caused it all. Including the diss track, which wasn't necessary.

 

 

50 minutes ago, Dallas said:

I came back.

I got busy with things happening outside of xat so I wasn't on for a bit, but come back 2 days ago

and I see a lot of people, but usually the people you see at "Lit" and "Vibes."

I was sitting at the chat for like a couple of hours watching and observing and I just see nothing but people cursing,

causing problems, and posting fake addresses, inappropriate statuses etc. I was very concerned for the chat

as I used to be a owner and I care about Social, I want to see it succeed but not like this.

You have to ask yourself, what line do we have to cross before we say enough with this?

Nobody was cursing, from what I've seen from screenies, people who curse get kicked as a warning, then banned by staff or the bot. You can't say that's cursing. Not sure about the fake addresses or whatever that means. 

 

On the other hand

 

I do agree ranks aren't being earned, but the chats were merged. Mike has also been doing a good job with staff. While some of them are garbage in my opinion, others don't seem to have a problem. 

 

It also doesn't help you were flaming. 

 

43 minutes ago, Arthur said:

I personally don't think Social is being managed adequately. I don't think it should lose its official status, though. I'm all for transferring ownership to a new user and reviving it again. One would say its glory times are gone, its legacy has been destroyed or Chat covers its purpose (which I don't agree with — I believe an English lobby is necessary), but I'd still give it another chance because of users like you, who actually care about the chat and would like to see it back to life again.

Mike is doing fine, it's <name removed> who caused the havoc. <name removed> was the one who brought all the users from lit. The only reason was because all the contributors were constantly out to get Mike so he did what he had to do to keep the chat in his possession. This isn't his fault. If you sign into social, you'll see a full chat. I can't say I agree with Glitch as the main owner, but at least there's chat activity and one less thing for the contributors to complain about.

 

None of us at social had a problem with you until those "accusations" started. I honestly was forgetting about the past and starting clean, then that happened. I can't say the same for others who have known you. 

  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good, I was a noticias staff for 2 years and I managed it for more than 1 year. I know how that works, and I agree that users should earn the rank that they already have. When this happens, they appreciate more and take care more the rank, not simply because it was given to them by a friend how Glitch does it.
Also, as they admit the spanish language was a great initiative but has had shortcomings because more moderators are needed to handle the spanish language very well, because there are users who do disturbances in this language.

That's just my point of view.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Social has had its ups and downs i agree, its a difficult chat to run and take care of due to the vast amount of people who use it, its a chat that allows users (if they behave) that might be banned at other officials. Social gives chances and can be quite the fun chat when done correctly, however i do not believe you care for the chat @Dallas due to past complications.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess if a thread is being made about this, I might as well share my input on the matter:

 

Unfortunately I wasn't around during Social's early days when Jamesey was running the chat at the time. I first came in December 2016 when Life was the current main at the time and I had a genuine interest in helping out the chat. I've been a long-time staff member of Social since January of 2017. Around the time I got owner later, I felt like it was a big accomplishment for me, but then the chat was dying out, and not many users including Life came on so much. I can confirm Dallas's memory of 2017 is true. Social HAS gotten quiet around that time, and he was foreverbanned for a reason I can't even remember anymore. I was really looking forward to running Social as the next main owner, and I even came very prepared too, but unfortunately Mike got placed instead. Was I mad that I wasn't the next person to get appointed to run the chat? Of course I was. I didn't really have a problem with Mike up until recently when I noticed the "big changes" that he made to the chat that he told me about when I returned from my vacation. Despite these "changes" I tried to keep it together, as I wanted to continue to help Social chat, but it was really hard to when I noticed that Mike's friends have been unfairly promoted and granted owner access on bot and that made me madder than ever because that is NOT how an official chat should be run. In addition, most rules even severe ones warrant only a 0.5 hour ban because they want to "keep users in, not throw them out." And on top of that, Mike's also driven away many other loyal long-time staff members who have worked hard for their position! I can understand that the intended goal was to get the chat active and full of users, but I feel like that was their ONLY intent! I think it's BECAUSE of the bias, favoritism, short ban times, and other "changes" to the chat that it's full, which aren't good reasons for an official chat to maintain its status. My opinion about these "changes" is that it should be taken TO THEIR OWN CHAT and NOT ruin a perfectly good official! I want to continue to help Social chat, but not Mike. I have a bad feeling that Social will soon get delisted, lose its autopromo, and removed from the wiki before giving a DECENT main owner a chance to run it who actually knows what they're doing and HOW to do it! I want to help steer Social in the right direction and STOP all the favoritism, short ban times, promotion of friends of other staff, and all other toxic activity if I'm ever given the opportunity, but I guess we'll never know now will we?

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Several of your points regarding the manner in which the chat is run either holds no relevance or are just plain incorrect.

 

5 hours ago, Dallas said:

people cursing,

Every user who I have seen using inappropriate language has received disciplinary action from a staff member. Perhaps you should provide screenshot or some other form of evidence that supports this allegation. There have been several users unwilling to come to Social despite it becoming increasingly popular due to the infractions they have received from disobeying this rule.
 

5 hours ago, Dallas said:

causing problems,

I don't know what this implies. Users who initiate drama receive appropriate disciplinary action.

 

5 hours ago, Dallas said:

posting fake addresses

This is irrelevant. Although I do know what you are referring to, I do not see how posting the address to a Chinese Restaurant or a Barnes & Noble mars the integrity of an official xat chatroom.

 

5 hours ago, Dallas said:

inappropriate statuses

Perhaps you should provide some screenshots regarding this, I personally have no idea what you are referring to. However, remember that no chat is perfect. Perpetually scrolling through the chat checking whether users are using inappropriate statuses or names would be a huge inconvenience to staff members, especially considering the immense amount of users who go on the chat.

 

5 hours ago, Dallas said:

Everyone that is staff on there is because of a merge with "Vibes" and "Lit."

 

From what I saw, most if not all original Social staff retained some sort of staff rank. What they decided to do after seeing changes to the chat is a separate matter.

 

5 hours ago, Dallas said:

 The ranks weren't earned and felt like it wasn't "special" they were moderator, owner, because of who you know.

 If you had a connection with someone you were basically given a rank.

Official chatroom should feel like you have some self achievement feeling when you earn a rank.

You should earn your rank, you should take what you do seriously to represent xat in the best way.

Although there were users who earned ranks rather quickly, there are reasons to justify this. The chat is becoming increasingly popular, there has to be more staff members to adequately moderate the chat. These staff members are chosen based on a consensual agreement among the main owners. It is not necessarily arbitrary as to who receives a rank or not. In addition, Mike has seemingly been receptive to any problems or complaints regarding staff members, perhaps you should refer to him if you have any issues.
 

5 hours ago, Dallas said:

This chatroom is a auto-promo chatroom and feels like it will scare new users more than recruit them.

People say xat is dying and because of this change to Social it doesn't seem at all friendly for the new users joining.

Can you elaborate as to how it scares new users?

 

5 hours ago, Dallas said:

People who are cool with the staff, if they get banned, they will just get unbanned right away as if it didn't happen.

I have only really seen this if the punishment the user has received was too harsh in retrospect. In very unambiguous cases of users breaking rules, they have received full disciplinary action.

Edited by Poke
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally think what is happening with the Social chat room is great - especially since it is a chat on display on xat's homepage.

Social having other populated chats merging into one is a good quality over quantity move if it works.

The English community on xat has for sure dwindled so honestly the personalities and conversations you see on these chats is what you get and sign up for.

Although there is truth to a claim that xat does have a culture when it comes to ranks I do not think that is the driving force of a chat room - conversation and different personalities are.

To be honest I think a post like this should have just been sent to the main owner of Social instead of here but it does bring up potential for bringing to light the idea that perhaps xat should amend rules of promotion to cater to the population of users rather than to put on display a picture of what xat is not - a site where official standards are enforced strictly at all times.

 

  • Thanks 1
  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel that at times the chat can be a little more rowdy than others. 

30 minutes ago, Life said:

its a chat that allows users (if they behave) that might be banned at other officials

Is this you saying that the rules are more lenient than other officials? If so, I agree. As a lobby chat it can be difficult to police it. I think for the first few days post-merge it was a little messier in main chat than it should've been, but I think with leaving past drama out of the discussion, this new rendition of the chat shows promise. Are there some staff members I trust more than others there? Sure, but it's because I've experienced them dealing with other chats as staff. I think if the punishments stay consistent with not letting others slip through the cracks too often it's a chat that has promise.

 

3 minutes ago, HelperNate said:

I want to help steer Social in the right direction and STOP all the favoritism

I mean honestly I'm sure every chat has favoritism. It's hard to say since I'm just recently coming back to xat after being away from it for a while, favoritism is inevitable. You're more likely to give a friend, someone you trust, a chance over someone you don't really know. Can this backfire? Of course! But I think it's going to be a learning process for everyone. 

 

I think the common goal between both sides here is to make Social, and xat in general, active again. It'll be tricky, but it's possible. 

 

Basically, the TL;DR of this is that I think this could work if everyone leaves the past in the past and the users focus on keeping the chat as clean as possible while the staff work on consistently punishing for rule breaking (and begin to iron out clear offenses to rule breaking at that) Social could really work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(My old comment got deleted but i'm going to explain it much better than before without being inapp or anything) 

Most of the users do get away with a lot of things on social. Recently one of my friends got flamed at and abused, even though he may of flamed back..there's no reason why a mod or owner should flame someone. On the other hand, i think it was yesterday Mike was calling a few people out for being "Anti - Social" even though they wanted to make Social back the way it was, without people insulting each other and etc (i do have screenshots but i'm not posting them cause i'm not naming names) They also demoted someone who actually wanted Social to be a better environment for other users. I also have to admit i've seen some favoritism, including the mains making mods and owners who actually haven't earned their rank or they aren't active enough and some of the mods they choose don't even do their job when someone curses (someone recently argued with one of the mains because the mods/owners weren't doing their job, they were just sitting there). 

 I'd also like to agree with Nate. If someone says they want to keep other users and not throw them out, they should at least let the old staff have a chance again like everyone else they've given a chance.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

QiiHTMd.png to help with my explanation, i included this because of the moderators not being active or owners not being active but simply earning their ranks without even trying. Simply favoritism. (And most of the mods i've seen have been forever banned before for breaking rules and such but not naming names.)

Edited by Ravey
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ravey said:

QiiHTMd.png to help with my explanation, i included this because of the moderators not being active or owners not being active but simply earning their ranks without even trying. Simply favoritism. (And most of the mods i've seen have been forever banned before for breaking rules and such but not naming names.)

I don't believe that most of Socials moderators have been banned forever there before.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel like I should put my input in here given this is discussing the chat that I run and manage.

 

I'll just try to explain in brief some of what has taken place on Social in the past, and what has led to where we are now and why we have ended up where we are.

 

The Beginning

 

Originally, I saw that Social was basically nearly dead and I knew it wasn't going anywhere because Life simply did not have the time to dedicate to the chat anymore due to being busy with real life things. This is understandable. I asked him if I could take over ownership of the chat and he agreed. I later then asked the admin to run the chat as Life had agreed that I could. I took the chat with very specific goals in mind once I had gotten the chat.

 

  1. Revive the chat. Bring back activity, and users to the chat and make it active and alive again.
  2. Bring back old Social staff that had either quit, been demoted in the past, or overlooked users that had been loyal to the chat.
  3. Work with the staff and the users both to create a fun enjoyable active environment where everyone has a place to hang out, watch movies, and chill.
  4. Make the chat more lenient while still staying within the "official" standards.

In the beginning of getting the chat I was able to acquire some old Social staff users that had quit or had been removed. I was very happy to have old staff on board with my plans for Social. In the beginning it was still very much empty and for a few months I struggled to keep the staff and users interested in the chat. I can understand people don't want to sit on a dead chat. The main problem I had was that a lot of the staff I had picked either became flaky, caused drama and fought with other users, or just outright quit.

 

This had been an ongoing problem and frustration that made me want to give up on Social. I figured if most of the staff and users didn't care about the chat then what was the point in putting in so much effort for the place just to have no one bother to help or care? That wasn't the only issue either. I had been told numerous times that users were reporting the chat for being inactive and dead. That they wanted to take Social from me because I had the chat. That they were looking for what they could to get me kicked out of the chat. I was constantly told that I was running a risk of Social being redirected to Chat if it continued to be inactive.

 

The Change

 

Recently a user by the name of Thug (an old staff member of Social / regular) came by the chat when it was entirely empty and basically I had about given up. He offered to help me if I listened to his advice. He convinced me he could help bring back Social and the goal could be met of the chat being active again. I agreed. We spent time working together changing EVERYTHING about the chat to better fit the users desires. Changing backgrounds, changing the bot commands minranks, changing the smiley line, updating the blog, changing staff. We did a lot of work to get the chat into a better position to handle more users. Not even a day or two after these changes were implemented we gained about 18 users total. The chat had gone from being dead, to overnight being active and alive.

 

Glitch took notice of Social and decided to come hang out there. He is someone that is always targeted by volunteers and other users to be reported and then delisted. That is because his users can be "toxic" and spread personal information or cyber bullying. This is not Glitch's fault inherently, but it does give the others more reason to target him. It's also the fact he has such a large following and user-base. 30+ usually on his chats before they get torched. Anyways, Glitch started coming to Social and me, thug, and Glitch all discussed the benefit of having him merge his chat into Social. He agreed and he merged his chat over. Not even a day or two later we had 30 + users in the chat. We were active literally 24/7. The chat had not only been revived, but it was fully active and popping with users.

 

The Challenge / Issues

 

The downfall to the influx of users is the difficulty of managing a larger user base. It is harder to moderate a populated chat and it's even harder to find competent staff when most had either quit, or turned against Social for the changes that had been done. This led to more drama and complaints about Social being "toxic" and poorly managed. The reality is, Social is managing just fine. In the start yes the staff were messy because it is hard to find suitable staff for this chat. We aim to give moderator to the users that are active, and follow the rules, as well as can moderate the chat without being overly strict.

 

The changes people are most unhappy with is the fact that I made Social more lenient, I allowed Glitch to become main owner and run the chat with me, and the fact that his user-base is known for being toxic. They are also unhappy that they were demoted or banned. The users that were demoted were either removed for being entirely against Social and the plans I had for it, (actively reporting, attempting to make Social look bad, reporting anything they can in attempts to take over the chat) being inactive or quitting, or removed for other reasoning. No one was just removed without thought as every staff is an asset to the chat and was. In fact, the proof that I was not purging staff off without thought is the fact that in the start for the first few months I allowed previous old staff to remain. I allowed staff that even were against my way of doing things and even caused drama to remain for a long time before finally removing them.

 

The Summary

 

Long story short. I changed Social for what I believe is the betterment of xat, and promotions as well. I made the chat more lenient so that more users feel less intimidated to be there and feel less worried about being banned off rapidly for minor infractions. My goal is to unite two user-bases together. Officials, and non officials, so that there is a mix of users, and that English users as well as Spanish have a Lobby they can enjoy their time on xat. Nobody likes strict rules. The only reason these are enforced is because they HAVE to be enforced. I am working to both enforce the rules, but in a more lenient and forgiving manner. This would draw more new users into xat rather than make them feel alienated simply for breaking rules and being forced to sit on Flirt.

 

If you have any problem with me, or how I run the chat then I will be happy to hear what you have to say. I won't tolerate you reporting the chat and trying to undermine me behind my back sending in reports of every little thing you don't like or deem as unfair bias corruption. I am more than willing to talk civil to anyone that has an issue with these things. There is exceptions to this of course. I will not waste my time discussing with users that are close minded or openly against me and have no interest in helping Social at all.

 

Thanks for the long read. Hope this addresses most of your concerns and complaints.

 

aA8vbAA.gif

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • No 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Dallas said:

 

Should Social get a new Main Owner?

 

no mike is great

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Social needs a new main owner hands down and let’s make it urgent.

 

Not only have I been forevered for no reason but so have serveral other users recently and it’s not fair. I’ve been banned for personal reasons rather than legitimate reasons. I haven’t been on xat in months and the main owner still refuses to let me appeal to my ban. This is disgusting and people like HelperNate should NOT be forevered on an Official chat especially when he’s been trusted to run the chat in the past.

 

Mike needs to pull his socks up and fix Social rather than turning it into a chat only built for the people he’s neutral with or his friends. Get over the beef you have with some of the users on here and stop being childish. The admins trusted Mike to run Social properly with no bias bans, unbans, staff-making of users. Enough’s enough let’s just take Mike out, we’ve established he’s incapable of running a chat box. Perhaps you’re not fit for Official moderating.

 

I rest my case.

#FixSocial

Edited by Angel
Typo
  • Like 2
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mike said:

Glitch took notice of Social and decided to come hang out there. He is someone that is always targeted by volunteers and other users to be reported and then delisted.

Sure not. None of us did that. I have my own idea on who did, and I think you know well about it. I think Glitch knows too. You're lucky to have common interests.

 

1 hour ago, Mike said:

My goal is to unite two user-bases together. Officials, and non officials, so that there is a mix of users, and that English users as well as Spanish have a Lobby they can enjoy their time on xat.

Social if an official chat, its purpose is to be an ENGLISH lobby. Allowing another language not only is against promo rules but also defeats the purpose of Social chat itself. Not to mention that most Spanish user base is either on Noticias, or on Chat already. You are just allowing Spanish users who already spent most of their time on English chats to speak their own language, i.e. that is exactly the same user base and you are not uniting anything. Nonetheless, whatever happened with past staff members, what was done has just achieved to divide the comunity a bit more... Not sure you hit the target correctly.

 

1 hour ago, Mike said:

Nobody likes strict rules. The only reason these are enforced is because they HAVE to be enforced. I am working to both enforce the rules, but in a more lenient and forgiving manner. This would draw more new users into xat rather than make them feel alienated simply for breaking rules and being forced to sit on Flirt.

There is a reason why we have rules in this world. If I want to do something does not mean it is good to do it and that I have to do it. This is exactly why law exists. The freedom of one stops where the freedom of others begin. On the short-run, of course users would enjoy flaming, making fun and cussing. On the long-run, I question the ability of such rules to "welcome" new users. Social and Chat are the first chats new users see when they enter xat website. Do you really think it gives a good image to allow cussing? I do not call it professionalism. Although I admit you're listening to my feeback and trying to find an equilibrium.

 

Once again, we've discussed plenty of times in private, Mike. I'm not trying to make plans to destroy your goals. Just be fully honest and act accordingly. If you do mistakes, we all do, admit you did them and fix it, don't imply it is others fault. Also keep in mind that the best way to be accepted as who you are is to act positively, fully.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, JoshuaRivenbark said:

 

Regardless of whether he was banned forever or not, the fact that he was even banned to begin with seems fishy to me.

i was there when he go banned, he was causing drama with mike, that's why hes banned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ITT: People who would be the first ones to complain about abuse on official chats yet banning their friends for 0.5 hours and everyone else forever 

Edited by Daniel
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, the only problem is people who want the chat changed hands are people with something against the current main, it happened the same with me when i ran the chat and it seems to be the same people again. The whole thread seems rather silly to me.

 

I also find it rather stupid to ask if Social needs to be removed as an official or a new main needs to be made.

Changing either of those wont fix your current "issues".

 

Edited by Life
  • Like 4
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Angelo said:

I was unfairly foreverbanned several weeks ago from the social chat because I refused to unban someone from the Help chat. To protect that user’s best interests, I will not discuss the details of the ban on Help, but I will discuss why I believe it makes Social look very unprofessional. 

Were you not one of the people trying to get the chat taken away from him? If I remember correctly, you looked for any reason to have social redirected to chat. 

 

Aside from that; originally you were banned forever but the reason to me is unknown. A few hours later he used manage to unban you from social. It was a glitch in manage that left you banned, as he wouldn’t have just left you banned over silly help drama, it would’ve been unfair and he would’ve been reported for abuse. Trust me, the owners would’ve done something.

 

While I do agree he ban wasn’t fair to begin with, he did unban you in the end and resolved everything.

 

 

The best part about all this drama is that nobody had an issue until [UNNAMED] merged his chat with social.

Edited by Phin
  • Meh 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Life said:

Honestly, the only problem is people who want the chat changed hands are people with something against the current main, it happened the same with me when i ran the chat and it seems to be the same people again. The whole thread seems rather silly to me.

 

I also find it rather stupid to ask if Social needs to be removed as an official or a new main needs to be made.

Changing either of those wont fix your current "issues".

 

100% agreed if i wasn't main then nobody would be crying.

  • Haha 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion. merging chats means keeping the old staff and NOT making them leave. If they're inactive, demote them, it's simple. No one is trying to be "Anti - Social" they just want the chat the way it was before.

And i'm pretty sure no one has grudges against any of the mains. I may of caused drama before but i do not have grudges against anyone.

Edited by Ravey
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.