• 149 Players on Java
  • us.mineplex.com
  • 2378 Players Online
  • 2229 Players on Bedrock
  • pe.mineplex.com
!
Attention Internet Explorer Users
To have the best user experience on our site please consider upgrading to Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox

(HTRM) How to Restore Mineplex to its Former Glory - Part 1

Discussion in 'General Idea Discussion' started by clouddistrict, May 15, 2022.

  1. In the past, Mineplex has been the largest Minecraft server in the world. However, because of many changes internally and externally (that I will discuss in this part and future parts), Mineplex has dramatically declined in popularity. This post is for people who want a way out of this darkness, to see the restoration of Mineplex to its former glory. Part 1.

    For the privacy of both staff and community members, names in this post are censored.


    The overall job of Mineplex staff is to ensure that players have the best experience possible. In general, this means that staff have a high quality relationship based on mutual respect with players. Staff members in management positions should especially have these high quality relationships as they are the ones making the decisions. However, this type of communication (that’s necessary to have a prosperous server) between players and staff is nowhere to be found. Countless times players are ignored, even when criticizing the server to try and improve it. (Scroll down to other posts and you will likely see staff members dismissing what I have written here.)

    I was interested in what community members had to say about problems within Mineplex, so I asked them. One community member I spoke with was a former staff member. When I asked them about the problems with management, they said: “The Mineplex staff team is a mess. It’s managed poorly. StaffManagerA does absolutely nothing and is the most stubborn and arrogant person on the server. I’ve had many ideas rejected by them. That’s why rules discussion was deleted. (I asked this former staff member what “Rules Discussion” was. It was apparently a channel where mods could privately discuss rules and rule changes amongst themselves.) StaffMemberA couldn’t handle the arguments between staff. Obviously nothing ever came out of it. All in all [the] staff team is bias and [a] competition contest to see who can get the most sub team badges.”

    When people feel like what they are asking for is being met, then they have a good experience. But when they see broken promises (I’ll get into detail about this later), lack of respect, and poor communication, the relationship between the community and the staff is harmed. This toxic competition staff members are put into to see who can get the most sub team badges is reflected in the relationship between staff and the community. Staff are unable to ensure players have a good experience. So how are these problems fixed? How can we improve the staff team to improve the relationship between staff and community?

    For those who love Mineplex and want to see a return to its former glory, we must advocate for a new system. A system that recruits staff not just for passing the application process, but for having a strong relationship with the community. We need to bring populism to Mineplex. I call this system “Democracy with Mineplex Characteristics”. Instead of community members becoming Trainees after passing the interview, DMC has another step to ensure that they build a genuine relationship with the community. Applicants are put to a vote where the community can decide who they like and who they don’t. I am not suggesting DMC to be an unchangeable system. The specifics should be decided and edited depending on the situation. Here are some ideas though (the variables can also be changed to fit the given situation):
    • Putting all applicants against one another and only the top 50% are accepted.
    • In order to be accepted, applicants must have at least 25 votes.
    • Putting each applicant against another applicant and have people vote for which of the 2 they prefer. Whoever has the most votes in each pair gets accepted.


    There are other things that must be done to see the restoration of Mineplex to its former glory, but I do not want this post to be too long. I will make future posts about what else must be done. Stay tuned.

    Questions, comments, criticism, and anything else you’d like to say is welcome.
     
    Posted May 15, 2022
  2. I understand your sentiment in this thread, but the staff hiring processes should only be done/decided by recruiters & higher-ups. I feel populism/favoritism in a staff setting will always have high potential of harm to the community. A person who worked hard to pass interview stage should get their praise & dedication rewarded with a chance to prove themselves during the 2-month trial phase.

    Mineplex is doing great with showing they still care with the recent beta testing server infrastructure. I feel Mineplex can make a greater comeback by investing into more full time developers & finding ways to provide more sufficient staffing to their successful bedrock server. We also must do our part by donating, I buy stuff from the store as much as I can so I can put my money where my mouth is. The more we work together as a community, the better Mineplex will become, perhaps even reach higher milestones.
     
    Posted May 15, 2022
  3. Hey, I'll leave my thoughts here

    I can assure you many staff members are frustrated with Mineplex's declining player count, as we all want the server to thrive. I personally have never had issues with any members of StM, however, that ex-staff should know that they can always reach out to Toki or Dean and they will happily look into any misconduct or unfairness.

    I don't really agree with the statement that staff members are "put into a competition to see who can get the most sub team badges". I've never felt any pressure to join any subteams, whether they're community teams or not.

    Moving onto your "Democracy with Mineplex Characteristics" I'm going to have to disagree. Immediately I see future problems of favoritism regarding who would be accepted as a staff member. A non-deserving player could potentially become a staff member if they were well liked by the community, and if there were two deserving players, I don't find it fair to put them against each other in a vote. I think that the current process that Recruitment is working fine.
     
    Posted May 15, 2022
  4. Hello There, You do make some good points within this thread however. There will always be bad apples in a group of good apples we just have to hope there's more good than bad. From the few staff I know they do actually like what they do for the community and a lot of the time its the player base that causes problems. I have seen people in the community get mad at staff for taking to long to ban a hacker or responding to late to a report. Now I do agree they are some bad apples in the staff team *not going to name any names*. But not everyone is. Lastly regarding your Idea of Democracy of With Mineplex Characteristics. I disagree entirely. Making it a game of Popularity when there good be a less known player who wants to help the server grow and they lose to someone because they are more known in the community is really bad. Mineplex does need to listen to the community more and fix the issue of people being able to Bhop without getting gwen dedicated. But that's all from me for now.

    -C2
     
    Posted May 15, 2022
    officer401 likes this.
  5. Why should the staff hiring process be done by the higher ups? The reason is because it will make sure that people qualified to be staff get accepted instead of a popular, but unqualified person. But DMC doesn’t have the problem of unqualified people being accepted because the community only votes on players who are qualified.



    Unfortunately that’s not how things play out in reality. Staff who have weak relationships with the community still get promoted to mod. This means the Trainee process doesn’t solve the problem. One possible reason as to why bad Trainees still get promoted is because with the Trainee process, applicants are only observed occasionally. However, with DMC, applicants are observed at all seconds they’re online. We need something else to solve the problem, and DMC solves it.

    I will go into details about the failures of management in future posts so stay tuned for those. For now, I want to clarify that I do not believe management has not done anything positive. And this post is exclusively about Java. I have no comments about bedrock.

    If people want the server to thrive, they must support changes that will lead to the server thriving. DMC is one of these changes that is needed. I personally have had issues with members of StM. I often did reach out to Toki (many times) and Dean (once or twice) about different things. I did not feel that I was taken seriously at the time (If I recall correctly, Dean would even ignore my DMs with him!). The problem this former staff member had isn’t just with misconduct and unfairness, the problem is one that’s more structural. It must be overhauled for Mineplex to be restored to its former glory.



    I completely agree with the statement that staff are put into a competition. When I was staff, I felt the EXACT same way. I speculate that you may not feel this pressure because you are in subteams, but it is only speculation… I was honestly surprised for this former staff member to say the same thing I’ve felt. Who knows how many countless staff felt the same way as us but kept quiet over the years. This is their voice.


    Players who are not deserving of staff will not pass the first part of the application process. The community will only vote on players who have passed this process. If you understand how DMC works and still believe non deserving players can get staff, it means that you agree the application process is flawed and non-deserving players can get staff as the system currently stands.

    DMC motivates players to actually build positive relationships in the community. And those who do not pass can be added to next week’s vote before being rejected. DMC is fluid so that it’s adaptable to different situations. For example, suppose the top 50% rule is the way the system works: If an applicant isn’t in the top 50% a few weeks in a row, they probably aren’t liked by the community. This is good because it filters out people who do not have the community’s interests in mind. It filters out people who do not have a strong relationship with the community.

    There is more that we can do than simply hope for more good than bad though. DMC helps to remove these bad apples before they get power.

    That’s true, but that isn’t what the focus of my post is about. This post goes over some of the problems in the structure of the staff team, and what can be done to restore Mineplex to its former glory.

    It isn’t a game of popularity. The community votes after recruiters have decided who’s viable. Applicants who want to help the community more would be more involved in the community and therefore more known in the community. At the end of the day, what DMC does is ensure that players have the best experience possible.

    Thank you for your comment!
     
    OP OP
    OP OP Posted May 15, 2022,
    Last edited by a Moderator May 16, 2022
    GRGoodGame likes this.
  6. Staff members absolutely should only be hand picked by recruiters & higher-ups. You are contradicting your own arguments by creating more pressure, and creating a popularity contest for current & potential staff. What makes you or me able to determine who should be staff? The only time the community should step in the staff process, is by reporting staff members they feel are corrupt to the support team. The process already vets hard so that only qualified applicants make it through.



    You are still adding more stress to an already tedious process, causing more pressure than need be.

    Again, I say we should only report troublesome staff members. The community is not able to see what staff do behind the scenes, we can not accurately judge staff members solely based on how much they directly interact with the community. Trainees are expected to make mistakes; If we immediately demoted Trainees for making a mistake, there would be little to no staff members today. It is how Trainees learn from those mistakes, move foward and to continue to grow as a person overall is when they get promoted to an official moderator.



    I do not play bedrock, it was just another thing I suggested they can do to continue making their brand come back. How can you be so sure they have not done anything positive? You are saying all admins are just negative? That is a very bold claim to make, considering how much they do for the server. Yes, companies can fail on decisions, but it is about how they rebound from it.

    I like your sentiment, but your solutions & methods are just completely wrong.
     
    Posted May 15, 2022
  7. Now you’re saying that there’s added pressure if DMC were implemented. But applicants are already under pressure from the system. And the only people who would feel any additional pressure from this would be those who have weak relationships with the community. We want only quality applicants being accepted, and quality applicants are not only fit to be staff (as decided by recruitment), but also have strong relationships with the community.

    And how am I contradicting myself? Please be specific. As community members, we can determine who should be staff by how these people interact with us. If we have positive encounters with them, we will like them and vote for them. If we have negative encounters with them, we will dislike them and not vote for them.

    This is entirely false. The process does not check enough for strong, positive relationships with the community. DMC solves this problem.

    The purpose of community members voting is not to accurately judge staff on their ability to be effective staff members. The purpose is so that applicants who pass the written application and the interview but do not have strong relationships with the community will not be accepted onto the staff team. The purpose is to ensure that players have the best experience possible. I am not suggesting that Trainees should be demoted immediately. I am saying that DMC will improve the relationship between staff and the community by weeding out potential staff members who have bad or weak relationships with the community.

    This is not what I said. I said “I do not believe management has not done anything positive.” In other words, I believe that management has done some things that are positive. This post isn’t to make Mineplex look bad, this post is to guide all people, staff and community, who love Mineplex and want to see it restored to its former glory, on what must be done.
     
    OP OP
    OP OP Posted May 15, 2022
  8. I have read the thread and some of the subsequent replies so far; what I'll say firstly is fair play for coming out and advocating for a change. You also seem to have more things to say which you're understandably saving for future posts - I hope these go smoothly as well.
    It's a safe assumption to say that you're writing or going to write these threads and post them to gather public support and traction for your propositions, as you should; this is how things should be done in any healthy community. I disagree with most of what you've said though, so I cannot back what you're proposing.

    As someone who has been playing at various points since around 2013/2014, I agree with the assertion that Mineplex has lost a significant amount of players; it did indeed have tens of thousands of players at one point, while now it only has a meager few hundred in comparison. Identifying the reasons for this drop in numbers is a different story, however. You claim that there are many internal and external factors which have had an impact;

    1. This thread only mentions and explains one problem, which seemingly contradicts the above assertion of "many".

    You seem to be intent on writing a series of threads; I think if you're going about this as a series, it'd be wise to at least highlight these "many" problems in the introductory thread, which would be this. Otherwise, this predicate appears flawed to me.

    2. I'm not too convinced about the authenticity of what you can say about the internals.


    You claim to have been a former staff member yourself...what position did you hold? When were you a staff member? When did you (presumably) resign? Can you prove that you were at one point a staff member?

    Fair play for asking around. Although, where's the testimonies of these other people? You've only given one, it seems.

    For me, one isn't enough. The only thing that lends any credulity to your following description that I find is your claim of them being a former staff member. However, the same questions I asked above can be applied to them, raising my doubts about the verity and accuracy of what they've apparently said.

    You've also based a number of points on what this one person has said;

    Agreed, however when you're alleging that these negative things are happening, you should probably define them, or cite examples of each to prevent any doubts regarding their occurrence.

    I'm registering this as a number of propositions without sufficient proof. Furthermore, statements like "staff are..." and those without any quantifiers just come across as a generalisation which ignores the legitimately good people who are in the team.

    Giving the benefit of the doubt and assuming that both you and the one person from the community were staff members, your analysis of the system that you're criticising seems to only be based on the little that two people have said - and one of them is yourself. I'd have an easier time believing that management is flawed if there were more recent and concrete testimonies to read. I'm not convinced of the urgency, and as a community member that has never been on the staff team, I don't think that I can make an informed opinion on management at this point. On that matter, you're preaching to a choir in which the majority has most likely never been, or isn't a member of the staff team you're talking about. I know you've said that you don't want the post to be too long, but this could've been a lot more meaty, and believable as a result.


    At this point, I'm not convinced that a new system is necessary.


    I disagree. Populism is not needed, and I'd argue that it may be detrimental.

    Your proposition seems to be to add an extra step to the recruitment process.

    If I understand correctly, rather than

    written application --> interview --> become a staff member

    it'd be

    written application --> interview --> vote --> become a staff member if voted

    The addition of an extra step to the process would make things more complicated, require votes to be organised by people who are already staff members, and make the induction of new staff members slower.

    Furthermore, if you are familiar with Socrates's criticism of democracy (if not, google "socrates democracy") it can be applied here.

    When I googled the above, the top thing is:

    "It is no secret that Socrates was highly critical of democracy. He has famously described democracy as a system where many uneducated voters make decisions that they are not fit to make. Like a ship sailing, people knowledgeable in sailing should make decisions on where the ship would go, not just anyone who had a voice."

    As I see it, the current system is like the analogy of people who are knowledgeable about sailing - we have a Recruitment Team et cetera. You seem in favour of allowing anyone to vote. There are problems with this; an obvious one is whether people are fit to vote or not in the first place...how are they vetted, and in this online environment, how are they proven to actually be people and not bots? Staff team candidates will also seem to be accepted based not on their ability to carry out their work as a staff member, but on how much they appeal to people... I would raise concerns about their welfare; this environment may allow another sort of toxic competition to emerge where people will end up selling themselves and not care about the job at all (which is sort of ironic, given that you call out some toxic competition in your thread...). It's a Minecraft server, not some political jurisdiction. One marker for eligibility is being 13+, so questions should be raised about this sort of competition.

    So, TL;DR, I think what you're proposing here is not necessary, although you have good intentions, as far as I can see.
     
    Posted May 16, 2022
  9. Of all the things they could possibly do to revitalize the server, I'd hardly consider giving recruitment power to the people to be a good idea. I've dealt with the current recruitment process before, and I've gotta say, it's pretty solid. It's improbable they'd pick an unworthy candidate.

    Honestly, the current mods are one of the best things 2022 Mineplex has going for it. They're optimistic, outgoing, courteous, just, fair, well-vetted, well trained, and incredibly effective.

    If I were you, I'd think carefully before continuing whatever argument you're trying to make. While I'm as big of an advocate for server improvement as the next guy, laying out madcap ideas that you and you alone are certain will cause Mineplex to make a 180 is somewhat foolhardy, and you aren't winning much support for your ideas or yourself in your efforts. Don't be shy to share ideas, and be open to how they may be flawed.
     
    Posted May 16, 2022
  10. As mentioned before, I am certain that every staff member isn't satisfied with the player count nowadays. However, there is a significant improvement present. It's just a thing that you can't change, so I would say just enjoy the Mineplex community how it is nowadays!

    And remember, Mineplex is never dead!

    Good day to y'all.
     
    Posted May 16, 2022
  11. Thanks for this thorough reply. I appreciate it.

    I was staff 2017-2019. I was a moderator. My mentor was someone named zdemon98. If you don’t believe me, ask Toki.

    I don’t want this post to be too long. I made the point and then moved forward.

    What would be sufficient proof in your opinion to prove this claim? If many people agree this is how they felt, and there’s no reason to doubt these people, why is that not sufficient proof?

    Yes, yes, and yes. Applicants are given an interview after submitting a written application. This interview make things more complicated, requires interviews to be organized from people who are already staff, and make induction of new staff members slower. But it also helps to weed out poor candidates.

    The Mineplex community is not a bunch of uneducated voters. The Mineplex community knows exactly who has good relationships with individuals and who does not and these relationships will be reflected in votes. I wasn’t familiar of this until now, but it absolutely does not apply here.

    And this analysis comes from the occasional times that they are being observed. However, this analysis could be even more thorough, and that’s what DMC brings.

    Why would giving recruitment power to the people not work the way I have suggested it? Be specific.

    And I’ve dealt with the current recruitment process too and it does not weed out candidates who have poor relationships with the community. You can sit in Lobby-1 and answer questions while still having a poor relationship. DMC helps solve this problem.

    In my experience and the experience of others, not all of them are. Some even have very poor relationships with the community. How do you explain these staff existing while also claim that they are “well-vetted”?

    If DMC will not improve Mineplex, please make an actual criticism so that I can reply.

    At the end of my post, I write “Questions, comments, criticism, and anything else you’d like to say is welcome.” I am not shy to share my ideas and am open to how they may be flawed. Please be specific about how they are flawed.

    The player count reflects many things, one of which is the relationship between staff members and community members. The current system allows for poor relationships to exist, and that is reflected in the player count. DMC will help to improve this to restore Mineplex to its former glory.
     
    OP OP
    OP OP Posted May 16, 2022,
    Last edited by a Moderator May 16, 2022
  12. I don't really wanna comment on your actual idea, but I'm interested in where this statement (The part about the sub teams) is coming from.
     
    Posted May 16, 2022
    officer401, neropatti and CookieBilly like this.
  13. No such thing. A for-profit business does not need our donations. [Especially this one, which still rakes in $millions a year].

    Giving them more money now is exactly the wrong signal: "Hey, you guys neglected the server for all these years. Now it's close to dying so here you go have my money."
    Assuming that more people donate when the server is close to dying, would they a) Fix the server with this money or b) keep it in a perpetual state of almost dying?
    Assuming that the money people/immortals donate stays constant no matter the server quality, would they a) Fix the server with this money or b) do the absolute bare minimum and pocket the money?

    The only time they have an incentive to fix is if they believe they can make more by fixing. Neither of which is true, if we "keep supporting them through donations" now.
     
    Posted May 16, 2022
  14. Good question. This came from how me (and this former staff member) felt about the situation. I cannot speak for their experience but I can speak for myself (although it may be the same). As someone who was not part of many subteams, I felt as though people treated me as lesser. As if there were some ingroup and outgroup and those on the ingroup were the ones with the most subteam badges. And even in the subteams I was part of, this ingroup/outgroup dialectic existed there too. The staff team absolutely had a toxic competition for who can get the most subteam badges and unfortunately it looks like it still does to this day. DMC helps to remove these toxic relationships and build a staff team that ensures that players have the best experience possible. Mineplex can be restored to its former glory, but it won't happen with the way things currently are. Things clearly do not work. We need to bring populism to Mineplex.
     
    OP OP
    OP OP Posted May 16, 2022
    GRGoodGame likes this.
  15. I don't think I've seen any examples of this happening.

    I don't really like the idea of publicly disclosed teams though, separate thread though.
     
    Posted May 16, 2022
  16. Hi,

    I appreciate the suggestions to the Trainee process!

    We've always kept the intricacies of the Recruitment process very close to our chests, and I don't foresee that changing in the near future, if ever. I'm personally not fond of letting the people going through this process dictate the terms of it and the results, which is why feedback and suggestions regarding our standards (or our process) I have to take with a heavy grain of salt. Not really 100% related to your suggestion but I just wanted to throw this out there.

    I want to start off with trying to understand why there's such a heavy focus on Trainee applicants having relationships with the community? I've talked about this in length in previous posts on the forums, so I'm not going to rehash everything. However, I do want to highlight that I don't think it's warranted to judge a staff member based entirely of their community interaction (or lack thereof). A lot of different things satisfy different people and we'd be doing ourselves a disservice if we'd brick out one dedicated part of the community in favor of another. Equally, it's not like if we set less "focus" on recruiting in-the-shadows applicants we'll magically gain more community-oriented applicants.

    Now, from that viewpoint I don't see a system like this to ever work. In all honesty, even without that viewpoint I don't think that system will ever work. For one, when you are introducing this voting system to decide on new staff members you're never going to have representation from the whole community. The amount of people following Mineplex on the forums and on Discord is only a portion of the whole community spread across all platforms. It's even more prevalent on the Bedrock side of things, where a seemingly low percentage of people have any interaction on the forums or on Discord.

    Similarly, if we look at the Mineplex Oscars, which is a annual event that Mineplex hosts, and has a voting system such as the one you are suggesting here. The amount of campaigning and scouring for votes turns it into not only a popularity contest, but also just a competition of who can "spread" their name out to most people. I think it's fair to say that there's less stakes to gaining votes at the Mineplex Oscars vs. the possibility of gaining votes for getting staff... so it goes to reason it would be worse in that case?

    For the changeable variables:
    - You mention complaints about a competitive environment within the staff team and wants to rectify that, yet suggest pitting Trainee applicants against each other in a voting contest. If that's not a one way ticket to a vile competition then I don't know what is.
     
    Posted May 16, 2022
  17. I agree, a staff members standing within the community is important, however having a system where community members dictate the new trainee's would throw whole system into disarray. Peoples personal bias would be totally prevalent and the format would be easily abused. Applicants have always had to submit an application and do an interview ever since I can remember and the process allows the recruiters to gain a greater understanding of not only you as a person but also wether you are capable. Also, with any job application there are always trained people to judge applicants and staff are important for any server or organisation for obvious reasons so it is important to get the recruitment part right.

    This isn't to say that you're wrong for suggesting changes to the recruitment process but I personally think your recruitment system would only exacerbate problems.
     
    Posted May 16, 2022
  18. I feel like this thread is rooted in a lot of misinformation and on the idea that recruitment is overloaded with applicants and people to select from, which doesn't appear to be the truth. I also think a lot of people have this image in their heads that team managers are on cloud 9 and refuse to acknowledge the server's downfalls and declining state, which couldn't be further from the truth. @Looof basically summarized the sentiment which was still prominent back when I resigned last September, staff were just as frustrated as the community were over various issues and I find they've been able to relate a lot more with the community.

    As for what you said regarding competition for the most badges, I'd really love to see the evidence you have of this happening and how it negatively impacted any community member personally. As the staff team gets smaller, to me it's only natural that more of the same people are going to be in multiple positions as there are fewer options for team managers to select from, as well as more vacancies from a higher turnover rate. On the idea that only 'favourites' are selected for positions on a team, I wouldn't say this issue is nonexistent per se but to me it is quite exaggerated, in my opinion it's a narrative that was pushed by unhappy staff members who were unable to see past their flaws which may have contributed to their rejections. I have also seen many individuals who stay committed, take criticism in stride and actively work on improving, make it onto their dream teams in the end.

    As for your idea about an extra step in the recruitment process, I see where you're coming from, I agree it's always a bonus when the newly promoted staff member already has good rapport with the community but in my opinion it adds an absolutely unnecessary step when they are already extremely limited on applicants. In my opinion, it's completely unnecessary to be "popular" to be accepted, I've not only had mentees who I never even heard of prior to being accepted, but turned out to be fantastic staff members who built excellent relationships with community members and I would hate for this to be a criteria that was actually implemented and considered by Recruitment as it would lower a lot of these instances I had witnessed in my nearly 4 years as a mentor.

    Even with the popular members getting staff, as a former Staff Management manager who had access to a lot of information regarding our staff members' behavioural issues and issues with community members, I've seen the absolute witch hunts community members have on our staff and I can say with utmost confidence, that I wouldn't have a single ounce of trust in allowing community members to judge who is fit for a staff position. Sadly from what I've seen, many people are quite unreasonable and forget that everyone has a past and I feel like this would cause a lot of unnecessary drama when we accept our new staff members.

    Either way, kudos to you for trying to come up with ways for the server to improve, it's nice to see people who don't want to give up on the server just yet.
     
    Posted May 16, 2022
    Toki, MC_Minium, CookieBilly and 4 others like this.
  19. I have been on and off the staff team since 2015 and haven't ever really experienced a toxic environment/subteam competition. Yes, there are lots of staff members who want to join certain subteams with limited spaces, so not everyone can be accepted, but that doesn't mean it's toxic. Being disappointed you didn't get on a team =/= toxic environment. But again, this is in my own experience. I cannot speak for the whole team. But pitting applicants against each other would definitely create one.
    Not disregarding what may have happened to you while you were on the team, just saying that it seems to be the opinion of the minority, and if it isn't, these staff members should try bringing it up to an admin, team manager, or their mentor.
     
    Posted May 16, 2022
  20. heyo

    first off i just want to say that personally, i've never felt any pressure to join as many subteams as possible. and i really can't name a single person who has actually said that they do over my 4 years of being here, and it's not like i don't talk to anyone. nor have i ever felt like i'm in direct competition with anyone on this team at any point. you apply for a team; if you're good enough, you get it. if you're not quite there yet, you don't. that's how i've always viewed subteam application processes and in certain aspects that's how i've always viewed our trainee application process. direct bias and favouritism hasn't been prevalent in my entire staff team journey for the past 4 years, so whoever you asked perhaps was older? the staff team did used to have these issues and they were bad, but at least since i've been here that just hasn't applied. at least not to my knowledge. and i don't think adding a favouritism contest (which is essentially what this would be) is a good idea for our trainee application process.

    during the process of an applicant applying, the recruitment team learn a lot about them. dependant on circumstance, some applicants might have personal things in there that they say to get a point across to us that they wouldn't really want broadcasted to the rest of the world. i did that in my application, and i know others have. so, with that being said, if that was you in the position would you feel comfortable? i doubt it. you might say that we could leave out these personal matters from the public view, but to get a good opinion on an applicant you need to look at the whole picture- not just a name and "oh i know him! he's my friend!!" or "who's that?". as recruiters we have logs to the past- the past history of an applicants' process (if they have one) which tells us how they used to be vs how they are now. unless we were to expect all community members to look at these applicants' whole histories with no bias, no prior expectation, no insensitive judgement (etc., etc.) then this doesn't work. we are the recruitment team and we've all been on this team for a long time, and i dare say we do know what we're doing in regards to our applicants in 99% of cases. for me, and i'm sure everyone else on the team, protecting applicant privacy and dignity is of upmost importance. to share somebodies whole process with the rest of the world just so the community can vote based on prior bias is not an idea i'm personally bouncing off walls about.

    additionally, i get it that you want "people you know". but, what if people you know aren't applying? or what if they are, but for whatever reason, they're not yet suitable for trainee? if you were to see what we were seeing, the applicants we get and everything that goes along with that, how would that change anything? these people who aren't ready for trainee do have their reasons for not being ready (whether that be the actual not ready rejection or something else). we aren't just denying because we feel like it. we have processes, discussions and alike. meaning it's not a bias or favouritism thing, it is something we have picked up on that they can and need to improve upon before they become a staff member here. and, as for if "people you know" aren't applying, how does your suggestion make them be a trainee? i don't know the people you know. but by the sounds of it, they're not trainees. are they applying? if they are and they get rejected, tell them to message the recruiter who denied them for more information as to why that was. we respond to these messages, we answer these messages to the best of our ability with our adherence to the mineplex staff policy, and most of all we appreciate when people message us back.

    i'm not even going to go into why i think "democracy" within a potential public trainee application process is not the best thing i've heard today, but all i'm going to say is, imagine yourself in the situation. just because you're not famous in a minecraft server's community means you can't get trainee? i got trainee when nobody knew who i was, my igt was incredibly low and i wasn't extremely active on the forums either. but did it affect my time as a staff member? no. did it make me bad at being a staff member? no. did it change how people perceived me 4 years later? no. and with that being said, if this was to have been implemented back then, i wouldn't have become a staff member. i had and still have never had any interest of making infinite friends to vote for me. which is exactly how this would turn out if we were to implement it.

    you can always send recruiters nice words about people who you think would make good trainees and why. these things are great, and we don't mind when this happens and we take it into account when/if the time comes that the person applies. if people really want to try and make a difference with getting people they know on the staff team, then that's one way. the other way, is to tell them to apply.
     
    Posted May 16, 2022

Share This Page