• 195 Players on Java
  • us.mineplex.com
  • 2382 Players Online
  • 2187 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. The testimony I shared in this post was from a recent staff member.

    This is just part 1 of a series of posts I will make on how to restore Mineplex to its former glory. More is planned.
    It’s not just community interaction that decides who gets staff and who doesn’t. The community judges ONLY for community-oriented applicants. In order to restore Mineplex to its former glory, all staff should have positive relationships with the community.
    If applicants know that they have to be community orientated to be accepted, they will change to be staff, not by some “magical” force.
    Not everyone will participate, but part of why people don’t want to is because they’re discouraged from doing so. DMC (and other changes I will propose later) will encourage them.
    A popularity contest is good. To be popular is to be liked by the community. To be unpopular is to be disliked by the community. However, the way DMC will work is that only applicants who recruiters believe are of quality can be voted on. The difference with the Mineplex Oscars is that people vote for who they have good relationships with, not who would be best. However, DMC filters out applicants so that only the best are able to be voted on.
    The competitive environment is caused in part by the recruitment process being unable to recruit sufficient community-oriented staff members. To solve this will help to solve the problems that stem from it. We must have Democracy with Mineplex Characteristics to ensure that players have the best experience possible.

    How can it be abused? People will vote for applicants that they like. In other words, people will vote for applicants that they have strong, positive relationships with. And only applicants who pass the interview can be voted on. How is this a bad thing? How can this be abused?
    OP OP
    OP OP Posted May 16, 2022,
    Last edited by a Moderator May 16, 2022
  2. It can be abused in the sense that people may have unreasonable biases against certain individuals, and it would be a shame if they didn't get accepted because they didn't get enough votes compared to the upper half of applicants, like your idea suggests. Besides, the upper 50% of very few people = very few people and I don't think this is the time to get even more picky on something which I don't think is really the source of Mineplex's downfall, nor would it revive the server in any kind of significant way.
    Posted May 16, 2022
    Toki, MC_Minium, SpitefulNick and 2 others like this.
  3. You're contradicting yourself by saying the staff team is a toxic competition to see who can obtain the most sub team badges and then suggesting democracy aka a toxic popularity contest to see who can obtain the most votes. When these community elected individuals are present on the staff team how do go about remedying the 'toxic sub team competition' that is apparently occurring. Personally, I can't think of a fairer system for joining sub teams. There are multiple factors contributing to Mineplex's current decline but implementing democratic elections to recruit new staff members will not help imo.
    Posted May 16, 2022
    Toki, MC_Minium, C2MineCraft and 2 others like this.
  4. So essentially you want the Trainee position to be some sort of popularity contest which makes trainees go through an interview only if they are liked by others?
    To be honest, I don't think you have fully thought through how many players are everything but objective in evaluating skill and that a LOT of people on Mineplex have a liking for traits that are incompatible with these of a staff member: Toxic players like toxic players and if these are the majority you will have a toxic trainee getting access to an interview that will be rejected anyways because they're obviously unfit for the position.

    Moreover, it would be everything but fair to have a very skilled applicant cut out from the position, just because he is not well known in the community. Vice versa: It is unfair for a person who is well liked but with less skill overall to take place of a person with more skill but a little less known.

    1) Would create more tensions and less gain than there already is.
    2) Based upon what credentials, if it's based on their skill level you may as well just have an interview, if it's based on something else that would be incoherent with being staff. it's like voting to have Pewdiepie accepted for a position at NASA.
    3) ^^^

    So no, your social status should have no position above your actual personality, dedication and competences in being staff and nothing to do with having access to the Trainee position. What you are proposing sounds like an elitist community for the popular kids with OP perms, not a staff team - Being staff and having OP perms are two very different things.
    Posted May 16, 2022
    Toki, Emiliee and officer401 like this.
  5. For the most part, a lot of my views are shared by the majority of replies to this thread. I will keep this short.

    People applying to be Trainee will most likely not be known by a majority of the Community. Many people have different forms of being active, such as in game, forums or Discord. If your idea was implemented, Mineplex would recieve a severe fraction of the already low qualified applicants. I see new staff members all the time I've never heard of, sometimes they were administrators, does this mean they do not deserve their position?

    I understand staff having good community relations is a plus, but should not be the only determining factor. Sometimes staff are busy handling reports, answering tickets, reviewing submissions.

    Imo, it would just invite toxicity to do this.

    You are absolutely contradicting yourself.

    I was specific, I recommend re-reading my replies and others who share the same view. If you do not see how much toxicity, pressure, intensity could build from staff always having to be liked, interactive, and always positive, lest they be demoted... I suggest you re-examine your idea's potential results.

    I'm sure recruiters take into account community interaction, but the community does not (and should not) decide who should be staff.

    I just completely disagree, your idea is just completely wrong with so many flaws. I do not fault you for wanting more improvement & stronger community feedback, but this is not the way to go.

    You should word it better than, what else is someone suppose to think when you say administrators had not done anything positive?

    I feel your way of going about this is also flawed, why not just post your evidence or some form of it that backs your claims, not just one testimony. If you are going to make such claims, do not just say "to keep it short".


    The owners can pocket my money if it means keeping Mineplex alive. They are doing their role of just paying the checks & rent. The admins & leaders are the ones working directly on Mineplex with a passion. I will happily contribute to keep them here. I enjoy Mineplex, which is why I support it and believe it can make a comeback.

    Let us assume what happens if we go with your pessimistic view on why we should not donate:
    The owners do not care much to give more effort to fix it, even if donations go down then they will just shut it down and continue happily with their coffee shop businesses.

    Let us assume what happens if we go with my optimistic approach to why we should donate:
    The owners get their passive income, and Mineplex stays up. Occasional updates, fixes, and more potential to grow.

    I do not know about you, but I much rather Mineplex stays alive and kicking.
    Posted May 16, 2022
  6. What would be sufficient evidence? I was staff 2017-2019 and this person was staff more recently. But this is not the focus of this post. The main focus was not to say that it’s toxic and that needs to change. The point was that the current process allows for people who may fit the criteria on paper to get staff when they have weak or even negative relationships with the community. If some staff aren’t focused on ensuring players have the best experience possible, what are they focusing on? Some are focused on getting the most sub team badges.

    I never said this was true. I have no comment on it.

    It’s not only a bonus, but its NECESSARY if we want to restore Mineplex to its former glory. Applicants will take into account that they must be liked by the community to get staff and will therefore put more attention to building those relationships.

    I didn’t say there aren’t players that haven’t built relationships with the community, get staff, and then build relationships after they get staff. What DMC does is make sure these people who are able to build these relationships do so before they get staff so that those with weak or negative relationships with the community don’t get accepted.

    I’ve seen it too. And these types of situations are one-off, they don’t last forever, and they are rooted in distrust with the staff team after. A community with a positive relationship with the staff will not have these witch hunts. And even then, that should not prevent Mineplex from being revived to its former glory.

    If the community doesn’t like me for breaking trust with people 5 years ago and therefore thinks I shouldn’t have staff, then I shouldn’t have staff. If I were to get staff then I would have negative relationships with these community members and would be unable to ensure that players have the best experience possible. We must bring populism to Mineplex to restore Mineplex to its former glory.

    This wasn’t my point. My point was that the current process allows for people with weak or poor relationships with the community to be accepted, and DMC solves this problem. For those who love Mineplex and want to see a restoration to its former glory, we must support Democracy with Mineplex Characteristics and we must bring populism to Mineplex. There are other things that have to be done as well, and I will provide details in future posts about that. Stay tuned.

    No, they were staff recently.

    You’re misunderstanding what DMC is. The purpose of voting is not for the community to decide who’s worthy of staff and who isn’t. It’s to ensure that only applicants who have positive relationships with the community will be accepted.

    I don’t doubt you are personally doing your job effectively. What I’m saying is that the process allows for people who have weak or negative relationships with the community to be accepted. DMC ensures that only people with strong, positive relationships get accepted.

    If people the community know aren’t applying then applicants aren’t doing a good enough job with building relationships. If they aren’t suitable then the interview will weed them out.

    It means you need to build strong, positive relationships with the community rooted in mutual respect and trust in order to ensure players have the best experience possible.

    You would have known that you have to build strong, positive relationships with the community in order to be accepted and you would have adapted to that. Befriending the entire community (as you're saying) is something extremely positive that staff members can do to ensure that players have the best experience possible.

    This change is just one that's necessary to restore Mineplex to its former glory. And more people will be motivated to apply, more players will join, and more applicants will be accepted. And this is not "the" source, this is one of many sources that I will get into in future posts.

    There are 2 big fallacious points you made here. I will point both of them out. First, this is not a contradiction. It can both be true that the staff team is toxic and a “toxic popularity contest” exists too. The main focus of this post was to point out how the current process does not allow for staff to ensure players have the best experience possible because applicants with poor and/or weak relationships with community members can be accepted. DMC ensures that only applicants with strong, positive relationships with the community are accepted. Therefore, these applicants are able to ensure players have the best experience as possible. Second, you added the “aka a toxic popularity contest” line to try and bridge the gap to say I'm in "contradiction", but there’s nothing inherently toxic about this. If applicants love Mineplex and the community, they would understand that they need to work on building a real relationship with the community. Only the toxic ones would be the ones who want mod for reasons other than to ensure players have the best experience possible.

    Presenting a fair system for joining subteams was not the focus of my post. I have no comment one way or another.

    No, it’s the other way around. I want Trainees to be voted on by the community only after they are accepted in the interview process. Hopefully this clarifies things. I’d want to continue discussing this if you still have issues with DMC.

    Yes and that’s why staff don’t have strong, positive relationships with the community. DMC builds these relationships. These relationships help to ensure that players have the best experience possible.

    I sort of answer this in Part 2 of How to Restore Mineplex to its Former Glory. Stay tuned for that.

    I’m not saying it’s the only determining factor. The vote is in addition to the written application and interview stages.

    Why? I see absolutely no toxicity that would come from this except from people who have goals different from ensuring that players have the best experience possible.

    I don’t see how much supposed toxicity will come from this. Can you provide details? And can you please be specific in how there is a contradiction? If you feel uncomfortable with building relationships with the community, then you probably aren’t fit to be staff.

    Can you list the flaws out? I want to have a discussion with you about this.
    OP OP
    OP OP Posted May 16, 2022,
    Last edited by a Moderator May 17, 2022
  7. Someone being disliked by others doesn't mean they will be a bad staff member. You never know why two people may have a disagreement, it could be about something that has nothing to do with Mineplex. Recruiters look at applicants with an unbiased perspective, and community members probably wouldn't. Someone that is very well-liked by the community might not make a great staff member at all. Being well known in the community and being a good staff member aren't correlated at all. Maybe someone is shy and just doesn't want to maintain relationships with community members, yet has a great grasp of the rules and is super eager to help. Does that mean they can't be staff, since they probably wouldn't get any votes? It's very unfair.

    I, for one, am honestly not close with any community members at the moment. I chat with everyone in lobbies and still help everyone I can, but I just don't have time to maintain friendships while also doing staff duties. Does this make me a bad staff member?
    Posted May 17, 2022
  8. Yes, but my point is that Trainees or staff should never be voted by the community at all. Being a trainee and mod is a volunteering position and comes out of authenthic desire to help a community. The entire fundamental aspect of Mineplex staff is that it is accessible to anyone willing to apply without fearing about having to go through a popularity filter later on.

    I can approve that Trainees and Staff must respect and embrace the Mineplex community and be part of it - that's what being staff is all about. However, to propose that the trainees who have already proven to be fit for the position have to go through another stage which is completely up to how known they are is completely unfair and skewed for so many candidates. There are just so many things that could go wrong when you make a group of people decide things like this, two heads are not always better than one.

    Have you also considered the effect of this on former staff who return to Mineplex? Imagine you left Mineplex for 2 years because of IRL matters and returned, yet no one would remember you while you really want to apply for staff again: Well, you would not be able to re-apply because people don't recognise you anymore. Moreover people wouldn't even be able to change their IGN (I went from Alqssio to ThomasAAndeerson so many don't know my 2016 identity) as people would not recognise it at first. Point is simple: This is completely against reapplication terms.

    I also want to remind you that what you are proposing imposes even more selective pressure on any potential candidate, making it much harder for new staff members to emerge. The depopulation of people who punish rule-breakers is self-evident: It leads to a snowball effect of more rule-breakers, more people leaving because of the rule-breakers and the inexorable outcome that Mineplex actually dies more than it gets revived.

    Futhermore, as I explained merely making people vote without criteria leads to absolutely absurd outcomes, if you introduce voting criteria then we circle around the fact the criteria are already there and that there is a team specialized in making sure the candidates match these criteria after an interview. The populist voting process here becomes completely irrelevant and unneccesary because "voting with criteria" is already done by people familiar with thge criteria. Getting this out to EVERYONE on the server would only create unecessary telephone games.

    Last but not least, you already have control and power over staff members you think are unfit for the position by contacting their mentor and other means. The fact we cannot choose Trainees is the same train of thought that we employees cannot choose who gets hired at our company, stop and think for a second what a company like that would be...
    Posted May 17, 2022,
    Last edited May 17, 2022
    Toki, 1dragoneye and officer401 like this.
  9. Okay but what was the credibility of this testimonial? Is this someone who has been rejected numerous times and isn't disclosing any behavioural or activity issues that is contributing to their rejections? One testimonial isn't really sufficient when you're using it to paint a pretty inflammatory picture of what it's like being a staff member when the general consensus seems to be that that's not what it's necessarily like. I get it's not the main point in your idea but it's still a pretty hefty claim I don't expect everyone to simply sweep under the rug.

    Some people are a lot more introverted, less sociable and less known in the community as a result, but they can still produce amazing work that can benefit community members in a more indirect way. There is a lot of behind the scenes work that takes place to ensure players are having the best experience possible, this doesn't necessarily require them to be an outgoing, popular member in the eyes of the community.

    I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree on this one. I think it's okay to have a weak relationship or one that is nonexistent because it is possible to build one and even then, I don't think that the odd staff member who is accepted that maybe a little bit quieter and not popular is really hindering Mineplex from being revived.

    They're not as one-off as you may think. I'm not saying every applicant is perfect, believe me, I've seen a lot of imperfect in my 4 years as a mentor, but there are a lot of staff members who take a lot of abuse and torment from community members. If they treat everyone this way because of mistrust they have from issues with somebody else, that's a them problem.

    This right here is why I think this whole idea is flawed. If somebody is going to be holding a grudge over something that was probably negligible after 5 years, they have work to do on themselves before they can worry about who is becoming staff on Mineplex... I'm also surprised you would be okay with being rejected from the staff team because of something you may have done in the past that someone didn't like.

    I really don't see how this is going to motivate more people to apply, personally I see it as an extra unnecessary obstacle that will act as a deterrent more than anything. If I'm a prospective applicant, I'm a little more quiet, on the reserved side but I know I'm a hard worker with a lot of other skills, then I see in order to be accepted I need to be popular in the community, I don't say "wow what a great place to work", I see this as an organization who is too hung up on popularity and not one that will embrace me for who I am and one that can recognize what I can bring to the table and how it can benefit the organization.

    My question to you now becomes how exactly do you measure if someone is building bonds? And as a prospective applicant, how would I determine that I am liked enough to be accepted? Is there a quota for the amount of people you know? This part could use a lot more clarification on your part. I think how well someone is liked and how someone is a good fit is also super subjective.
    Posted May 17, 2022
  10. I refer you to my previous replies & others as I feel I have clearly stated my counter arguments.

    You are in a logical fallacy if you belive that me disagreeing with your idea means I am uncomfortable with building strong community relationships. I am all for staff having good strong bonds, but during the recruitment process, it should only be up to recruiters & higher-ups deciding who is qualified for staff, not the community.

    - You create a popularity contest which invites toxicity.
    - You discourage otherwise qualified applicants from applying because they are not known.
    - You pit others against one another. (More toxicity)
    - You create an environment of forced positivity (yes, toxic)
    - You make the recruitment process harder than it should be.
    - You limit staff overall, which limits community growth, which leads to Mineplex falling drastically.
    - You allow only popular people to have a chance at being staff.
    - More bias as populism will increase favoritism.
    - People will only vote based on popularity rather than merit.

    You can re-read other replies for more reasons, but I think this sums it up. I love that you are trying to change Mineplex from good intentions, but this idea is pretty far out from doing good. I suggest you concede this idea, as it will not be implemented anytime soon, nor should it be.
    Posted May 17, 2022
  11. It means that they have a poor relationship with the community. Popular staff are needed to restore Mineplex to its former glory. We need more trust and more strong, positive relationships to ensure players have the best experience possible. We need to bring populism to Mineplex through Democracy with Mineplex Characteristics.

    Community members look at applicants from their unique perspective. This is a good thing because applicants will have to build genuine, positive relationships with the community to be accepted. And these positive relationships help to ensure that players have the best experience possible.

    And that’s why they must be accepted by recruiters in the interview stage before moving forward to being voted on by the community. Only applicants who recruiters think will be great staff members can be voted on by the community. This is the essence of what DMC is.

    Being liked by the community means you have strong, positive relationships with members in the community. I think the confusion comes from not thoroughly understanding that DMC doesn’t replace the current application process, it builds off of it in order to ensure players have the best experience possible.

    With DMC, it means they are unfit to be staff. Having strong, positive relationships with the community will help to ensure players have the best experience possible. Not being fit to be staff yet doesn’t mean it’s unfair. For example, if someone is eager to help but doesn’t have a good grasp of the rules yet, they are unfit to be staff. But this is clearly not unfair. Only applicants who are fit to be staff should be accepted.

    It doesn’t necessarily make you a bad staff member. But with strong, positive relationships with the community, you could be doing even more. I will talk more about current staff members in part 2 of HTRM.

    It should come from an authentic desire to help the community and Democracy with Mineplex Characteristics helps to ensure that. It sounds like you should be in favor of DMC!

    What about this is fundamental? Does it even exist at all? If someone fears DMC, then they should reflect on their relationships with the community and what can be done to improve them.

    What about this is unfair? It ensures that applicants have strong, positive relationships with the community. And you said yourself that it should “come out of authentic desire to help the community”. There’s nothing unfair about it the same way that there’s nothing unfair about having a requirement where staff must know the rules to be accepted.

    People still recognize me after 2 years. But even then, nothing is stopping you from building these relationships again.

    Having strong, positive relationships with the community is very important to restore Mineplex to its former glory as it will invite new players to join. It will meet the wants of players and help to ensure they have the best experience possible. However, DMC alone will not restore Mineplex. There are other things that must be done as well that I will focus on in future posts.

    The current process does not do enough when it comes to ensuring staff have a strong, positive relationships with the community. Observations ingame happen occasionally, but with DMC, these observations would be happening all the time. Members of the community know whether they have positive relationships with staff, and their vote will reflect that.

    You can have weak, negative relationships with the community without technically breaking any rules. Plenty of staff do this (although I will not call them out to respect their privacy). I'm not saying you cannot report staff, what I'm saying here is that we need to bring populism to Mineplex to ensure players have the best experience possible.

    There are types of businesses called cooperatives which run this way.

    This was just an average staff member sharing their perspective.

    I’m not saying that they can’t produce good work, I’m saying that they should spend time building strong, positive relationships with the community. This post is about how to restore Mineplex to its former glory, and these strong positive relationships between staff and community are required.

    Strong, positive relationships with the community will not restore Mineplex to its former glory alone, but it is one step that must be taken (More will be detailed in future posts). Now more than ever, staff must have a strong, positive relationship with the community if we want to ensure players have the best experience possible and revive Mineplex.

    You cannot just dismiss it as a “them problem”. If community members distrust staff, that is a problem that must be addressed. We need to bring populism to Mineplex to ensure players have the best experience possible

    The problem is that you’re placing the blame on the community for not forgiving when you should be placing the blame on the staff for breaking the trust. If I don’t trust you after you broke trust with me 5 years ago, it’s not my fault that you broke that trust. It's your responsibility to rebuild it.

    I genuinely don’t know what you’re referring to but I am curious. You should DM me. But regardless, if I am unable to become staff because the community doesn’t like me, then that is a sacrifice I have to deal with. It’s more important that players have the best experience possible than it is for me to be staff.

    If you view DMC to be “too hung up on popularity” then you don’t understand the purpose of DMC. It’s not an unnecessary step out to get people who are quiet. It’s a necessary step to ensure staff have strong, positive relationships with the community, to ensure players have the best experience possible. DMC doesn’t embrace people with weak relationships with the community the same way the current process doesn’t embrace people who don’t know the rules. It’s a requirement to ensure players have the best experience possible and these skills can be built.

    This is a great question. It shows that the current process is unable to measure these bonds. They can only be measured by community members individually. DMC solves this gap that the process is unable to figure out.

    The community does a better job because they are looking at applicants 24/7 instead of the occasional observations. And as @Look_Dan asked, how exactly are recruiters supposed to measure if someone is building bonds? The community is able to judge these bonds better than recruiters because they are the ones that the bonds have (or haven't) been created with.

    I’ll address each of these points one at a time.
    1. The problem with the idea that DMC will bring toxicity is that if staff become toxic, the community will be able to see it. Relationships must be genuine because it’s the people who are making these decisions.
    2. The idea that people with weak, negative relationships with the community are somehow qualified is false. Having strong, positive relationships with the community is something essential to ensure players have the best experience possible.
    3. See point 1.
    4. See point 1.
    5. The recruitment process would be “harder than it should be” the same way that having an interview makes it “harder than it should be”. The interview helps fill in the gaps, and Democracy with Mineplex Characteristics fills in the gaps that the interview does not solve.
    6. Actually, it will bring more staff over time. If people like the staff team, they will be more willing to join it.
    7. See point 2.
    8. See point 2.
    9. It’s not the community’s job to vote based on merit. It’s the recruiters job to find only qualified applicants for the community to vote on.
    OP OP
    OP OP Posted May 17, 2022,
    Last edited by a Moderator May 17, 2022
    GRGoodGame likes this.
  12. So on the topic of distrust with staff then, you're basically insinuating that onus is on each and every applicant to try and rebuild trust with the community over things they themselves aren't even responsible for, before even becoming a staff member... to me that seems like a highly unrealistic expectation for a new staff member to have to fulfill. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for new staff members having strong relationships with the community but this just isn't the right way to go about it.

    To me it just seems weird that after 5 years, I have to suck up to everyone who may have not liked something I did if I want to have enough votes to get onto the staff team... this doesn't take into account that after 5 years, I've probably matured a lot, Recruitment believes I am a great fit for the team but I am not going to be accepted because of something I did half a decade ago. I'm not trying to dismiss the fact that the a community member was wronged but at some point they're gonna have to get over it and let the others get on with their life...

    I am referring to the fact that I find it shocking that you would be okay with not having enough votes because of something that you did 5 years ago, and that something probably negligible after 5 years, in the context of a block game, would be holding you back now.

    If the DMC entails that I won't be accepted onto the staff team after I successfully passed through the application, interview and observation stage of the recruitment process, which is incredibly thorough by the way, because not enough community members like me, how would I not look at it like it's a popularity contest?

    So basically an applicant has no way of knowing how they can appease to the community? I am asking you this question, how would someone go about getting a vote from you?

    Logistically, there are quite a few things that aren't making sense to me which hopefully you can clarify:

    1. If one batch has 6 possible acceptances, all 6 have over 25 votes, why would you only take the top 3? Isn't your idea supposed to bring on more people?
    2. Lets say the following week, there are 4 applicants but none have the required votes, doesn't it seem unfair to you that this week, those 3 rejected previously would have made it on this week?
    3. How long do people have to vote on these applicants?

    If you are going to say all these factors are subject to change based on a given situation, then I find it's way too inconsistent and not conducive to a fair, consistent recruitment process.
    Posted May 17, 2022
    Toki and officer401 like this.
  13. That's exactly ther problem with your entire proposal in a sentence: The kind of relationships you are encouraging are everything but positive and authenthic - they are merely means to an end to get a chance at having a staff rank. These are not relationships even, they are simply and inexorably self-promotion with no real sentiment involved. You get real and authenthic relationships when you are friends with someone for its own sake, noit for the sake of Populism...

    Just because someone does not approve with your idea of running things doesn't mean they have poor relationships with the community.

    You do know a LOT of people are naturally prone to disliking staff just because they are well... staff, right? That doesn't mean they should be demoted even if their relationships with the community are at odds.

    You simply cannot place social status as a substitute or above actual skill, your idea simply does not work because it doesn't take into account what relationship is or what the role of a staff member is. Part of the role of a staff member is to enforce rules without bias of relationship or status: Do you really think all cops are liked by the community? That doesn't mean they should not be cops.
    Posted May 17, 2022
  14. Unpopular opinion, but most of the things Staff do are largely irrelevant for the Server's success.
    Other than keeping the server somewhat clean of hackers, there is nothing Staff can do that makes the server more attractive.
    Frankly, no one will choose to stay on a server because of their interaction with Staff. (They may choose to leave if Staff is egregious, but we assume decent enough behaviour).

    So, even if Staff was chosen to be the most popular people - and even if this way of selecting people guaranteed the only amazing people make Staff - this would still hardly improve the server's overall situation.
    Posted May 17, 2022
  15. Any approach to "reviving" mineplex that does not involve at a minimum semi-frequent gameplay content updates and actual marketing is without merit. Whether that is actually feasible with the current state of finances and ownership attitudes is a different question, but anything short of that misses how to attract and keep players. I agree with @Nyan0 above that staff interaction is mostly irrelevant to the success of the server. Gameplay is the chief factor on if we can keep players: whether hackers or sweats are plowing every game, is the game buggy or laggy, has it gotten stale, or is the actual gameplay loop genuinely fun or not, these are the things that need to be prioritized and addressed for any potential revival. All other changes are going to be slight QoL at best, with minimal impact on player experience.
    Posted May 17, 2022
  16. The process allows for people who have weaker bonds with the community to become staff because having positive bonds with the community is not a necessity to become a staff member. I can speak first hand about this, because there are PLENTY of people in this server that dislike me, and there are plenty of other staff members that are the same. Does that mean we are poor staff members? No. We do our jobs, and we do them to the best of our ability. That is what is required of us, and having the community having an opinion on if we do our jobs or not is completely irrelevant.
    A LOT of a staff members job is completely behind-the-scenes. As an ex-staff member you should recognize this. You know that there are a lot of things that we can't release to the public because they are not qualified for that information, or because releasing that information to the public literally has no effect on how the server is run. The recruitment process is the same way. I'm all for having the server be more transparent. I believe that having completely open communication with community and staff would be a great thing.
    However, a lot of the processes and way that we do things are ruled that they are private, it is that way for good reasons. Neo explained that very well in her post.
    Back to the original post, having strong positive bonds with the community just isn't necessary to bring Mineplex back to where it once was. There is simply no correlation that matters where this would help restore the server.

    Again, because it's not necessary for new applicants to have strong bonds with the community. That is something that comes with time, if at all. There are plenty of staff members who don't have great relations with community members. I have my own little group that I like, and there's a large mass of people I simply tolerate. Community service is one of the core values of Mineplex. Community service, however, is completely irrelevant to having strong, positive relationships with the community in the way that you suggest. Plus, how would you observe staff members all the time as you put? The community is on the server to play games, not to stare at the staff and make sure they're doing their job. Leave that to the higher ups.

    Lets say you go to Starbucks, alright? The barista is super nice, and has excellent customer server. 5 stars. Does that mean she has a strong or positive relationship with you? No. That's simply her job, to be nice and make you your drink or whatever you ordered. You know nothing about this barista. You have zero relationship with her other than "she made your drink."
    The same goes for the Mineplex staff. You have no relationship with us for the most part. We are volunteering to catch the hackers, enforce the rules, and answer questions. We handle your reports, appeals and applications so that you can have the chance to do that exact same thing. There is really no reason for us to have a strong and positive relationship with the community because there is simply no need. We can do our jobs and give you the best possible experience without you knowing anything about us or how our application process went.

    So, in your words, I am not fit to be staff. When I applied, only a small community even knew who I was. And in complete honesty, half of that community highly disliked me, and probably still does to this day. Also, when I applied, I clearly stated in my application that I did not have the best grasp of the rules, or how the server worked at all, but I wanted to learn.
    The entire point of having our trainee process is to TRAIN our applicants. Nobody is going to apply for staff and have every single trait of being a fantastic staff member maxed out immediately. The point of the trainee process is to teach them and help them grow those traits so that they can become a fantastic staff member.
    Every single time I applied for a subteam I was incredibly clear that I did not feel that I had a fit understanding of the whatever rules I was applying for, whether that be the forums or discord (which I failed to apply for in time) and for the server itself. I was joining the subteams in part because I wanted to join the subteams and do the work that was submitted to me, but also in part because it would give me a chance to better understand the rules and the inner workings of the staff team. Now that I am FMA and RP it forced me to learn the rules so I didn't make mistakes when it came to moderation. I can confidently say that I am a well versed staff member with good knowledge of the rules now. But, when I applied, that was not the case. Does this mean I am unfit as a staff member because of where I started?

    You have to also understand that this community is incredibly bias and toxic to begin with. Some people literally only dislike staff members because they are staff. The staff members themselves may have done nothing wrong, no big conspiracy, nothing. And yet they are disliked anyway. Some people hold grudges, and I know because I am one of those people.
    Sometimes I'll have a grudge against someone and forget why I even disliked them in the first place. that's my responsibility, not the person I dislike. They have no obligation to rebuild my trust. That is completely a me thing to work on.
    Now, lets say this person was applying for trainee, and through your system pass the interview and application process. Now we are voting. I do not have a good relationship with this person, and I completely dislike them. Am I going to let that effect how I vote about them? In all honesty, looking at it from an outside point of view, yes, probably it will. I myself would try to look at it from an objective "just because I don't like them, does that mean they wouldnt be a great trainee?" No. Just because of personal beef that I have, doesn't mean that this person would make a terrible staff member.
    With your system, you are eliminating possibly fantastic staff members just because they are disliked by the community. If this were to be the process when I was applying there would have been no chance of me becoming a staff member.

    Another point is that some people would judge you now based on how you were like 5 years ago, like @Look_Dan brought up. A lot can change in 5 years. People mature. But again, people also hold grudges. Me 5 years ago is no wehre near the me that we see today. And yet some people still see the Arrow 5 years ago. Hell, Arrow 5 years ago was a girl! How can you be sure that people would be fair in their judgement? I may not get votes simply because I am transgender. How would you conduct a fair broadcast of information, that people would be completely unbias about and only vote on the qualities of a staff member?

    I addressed this above.

    Overall this idea really has nothing to do with actually restoring Mineplex to how it was. There is simply no relevant correlation between a staff member having good relations with the community and the work that they do for the staff team. Plus, what about introverts? What if you simply don't like making relationships or arent very good at it? You would be robbing perfectly capable staff members of chances at being staff and therefore preventing the staff team from improving themselves JUST because some applicants aren't known by the community.

    Edit: I suck at spelling :(
    Posted May 17, 2022,
    Last edited May 17, 2022
  17. I want to preface this by saying I’m coming from a Bedrock perspective. I understand you said your post is exclusively about Java, but if this system were introduced for the Java trainees, I see no reason why it wouldn’t be instated for the Bedrock trainees. I want to wait to see some of your other posts before coming to a definitive stance on this topic, but currently I’m leaning towards disagreement. Still, for now I have some questions and other things to point out.

    The first question I have is what exactly do you mean when you say ‘Mineplex’s former glory’? The term is very vague to me, and I cannot seem to find anywhere that you’ve elaborated the term.

    - Does this mean a higher player count? I don’t see how a system like this would increase player count, since the majority of new players are not involved in the community.

    - Does it mean more frequent updates? If so, that is a developer issue, and has very little to do with staff, much less their relationships with the community.

    - Does this mean more staff? If so, it seems this system would only reduce staff. Even if friendlier relations with staff encouraged more people to apply, there is no guarantee these people will be qualified, and even if they are, only the top 50% will be instated as staff, per your system. It seems we only get 2-4 trainees added at a time; taking only the the top 50% would reduce that to 1-2 at worst, or likely stay at the current 2-4 at best. Regardless of whether or not applications increase, it seems there will either less or the same amount of staff added.

    Those are the main three things I envision when I hear about ‘Restoring Mineplex to its former glory’, but I am led to believe that you must have a different definition, as none of these things would appear to be improved by adding this step to the process of becoming a Trainee. It also doesn’t hurt to point out that - to my knowledge - Mineplex has never had a voting system like this for trainees, including in its rise to its ‘Glory Days’, meaning Mineplex became a popular, well-loved server without this voting system, and indicates that it has the ability to improve again without this system. I do understand you have future posts coming though, which may suggest improvements for the issues mentioned above.

    Another point I would like to make is your use of the word ‘Populism’. Oxford Languages defines this term as ‘A political approach that strives to appeal to ordinary people who feel that their concerns are disregarded by established elite groups.’ Wikipedia (which I acknowledge is an open-sourced site, and composed by volunteers who may provide outdated or slightly inaccurate information) defines populism as this: ‘Populism refers to a range of political stances that emphasize the idea of the people and often juxtapose this group against the elite.’

    In this situation, one would have to assume the staff is the ‘elite’ and the players are ‘the people’. This suggests that you are saying we should pit the players against the staff, which would not be conducive of ‘strong, positive connections’ between staff and players. The ideology does not seem to have anything to do with popularity, nor the voting system you wish to introduce, though I do acknowledge you may be referring to the fact that many players feel their suggestions are unseen (I have not found this to be true; in the posts I’ve seen, staff will consider the idea, offer critiques, and explain why it would or wouldn’t work. Far from disregarding these concerns.) I do not believe you intend to imply this separation between staff and players, as this would contradict your whole point of staff having positive relations with the community - if this is not what you intend, I suggest you re-evaluate your use of the term. I understand this may seem nitpicky, but it is important to have a strong grasp of the terms you are using and the ideologies you present, especially if it is part of your argument’s foundation. If you do mean to use the term populism by its definition, I am curious as to why you seem to feel so strongly that it needs to be instated to Mineplex.

    I look forward to seeing your future posts, and other changes you wish to add to Mineplex. This seems to have sparked some interesting conversation.
    Posted May 17, 2022
  18. Not necessarily. People don’t trust individuals for specific reasons. People don’t staff as a whole for other reasons. DMC solves the problem of the former immediately and the latter over time (with other changes).

    To view it as you “sucking up to everyone” is the wrong attitude and means you probably aren’t fit to ensure players have the best experience possible. If you don’t want to build relationships with the community, then you will view it as “sucking up”.

    Yes. And if the majority of the community really cares about whatever you did 5 years ago, then you need to spend time rebuilding these relationships if you want to be staff.

    To be “too hung up” on something means to unnecessarily care about it. Your point wasn’t that it’s a popularity contest, your point was that you’d view recruiters to be “too hung up on popularity” when these types of relationships are important. It’s like if I said recruiters are “too hung up on making sure you know the rules”.

    Build strong, positive relationships with people. That’s how you get them to like you.

    1. Why does 25 matter? We’d take the top 3 because they are the ones who received the most votes.
    2. If none of them have built up these relationships with the community then they don’t get staff.
    3. It depends on the given situation. How about a week?
    I’m not saying these change week to week. I’m saying that I should not be the sole decider of how things run and how they do not. I personally would prefer having a set number of votes required, and then going back every 2 months and deciding whether the votes required to be accepted should be raised, lowered, or stay the same. But again, I am not a dictator. I want to hear other people’s opinions and ideas and discuss them.

    You are incorrect. People are not dumb and can see right through fakeness. If you are not building real relationships with people, they can tell.

    And there are reasons for this. It’s not “disliking staff for disliking staff’s sake”. Maybe because staff in the past have poor relationships with people? Maybe because updates are far and few between? And just because a few people don’t like all staff doesn’t mean that DMC shouldn’t be implemented.

    This isn’t what I’m suggesting. What DMC does is not only ensure that only skilled applicants can be accepted, but ALSO that they have strong, positive relationships with the community. Strong, positive relationships can and must be built in order to get staff, and the overall job of staff is to ensure that players have the best experience possible. DMC helps to ensure this even better than the current process does.

    This is just Part 1 of how to restore Mineplex to its former glory. I wanted to open with this one before getting to my more hard-hitting posts. All of my posts on this build off of each other. Stay tuned.

    This is just the first part on what must be done in order to restore Mineplex to its former glory. In future parts, I will get into more of the meat and potatoes. All of my posts are connected with and build off one another. Stay tuned.
    OP OP
    OP OP Posted May 19, 2022,
    Last edited by a Moderator May 19, 2022
    GRGoodGame and Nyan0 like this.
  19. This is just false, especially online. Why do you think we have entire groups of people dedicated to fighting online fraud and other nasty things?

    It is a sufficient condition to say your idea does not work and leads to potentially undesirable biased outcomes, which is a slippery slope for saying it should not be implemented.

    Reasons which may be everything but objective and not even close to being an actual reason that staff should not be staff. Man the problem with people coming up with crazy ideological theories is that they should exit their ivory towers more often and look at real life. Just spend a day in lobby-1 and you'll see how crazy it would be to get these people to decide staff. I think it is just mental to even consider implementing your idea when it is built upon so many arbitrary axioms and partial data where you just assume "nah bro players are good, rational and mature enough to make this work"

    The thing is that even if your axiom were true, if indeed most or all players were rational and wise you would still need to prove how making them vote is fair for people who have more selective relationships but still all the necessary skill to be a staff member. As I and others said before, the implementation of your idea would inexorably lead to many good applicants not being selected, you still have not illustrated a counterargument for all these points...

    ...Which brings me to a question I just now asked myself: How would you get people to vote? What if they are not interested, what if they troll the voting system? If only 5% of players vote it isn't "democratic" and it also isn't democratic if you force them to vote. You got yourself tied up in a knot here.

    Once again, Being staff is also being impartial and independent of relationships with anyone. While staff Members can have a relationship with the playerbase, they must act accordingly on said playerbase, whether they have good relationships with it or not. Do you really think all cops are liked by the community? That doesn't mean they should not be cops.
    Posted May 19, 2022
  20. That is how the current process is defined, but if want to restore Mineplex to its former glory, having strong, positive relationships between the staff and community is a must.

    Yes and this shouldn’t stop staff from building relationships with people. Even Toki viewed this post and interacts personally with the community!

    What DMC does is ensure that players have the best experience possible. This alone will not restore Mineplex to its former glory: It is just one of many things that must be done. I will detail other things in future posts, but just know that these ideas are all connected with one another.

    You can build bonds before you get staff. DMC ensures this.

    It is completely relevant because having strong, positive relationships ensures that players have the best experience possible.

    All interactions staff have with members of the community is an observation from that person. DMC doesn’t make the community decide who’s doing their job and who isn’t. The community will have interactions with applicants and form opinions based on how these interactions went.

    If DMC were around when you applied, you would have reacted differently.

    I didn’t say this. What I said was that applicants should have built strong, positive relationships with the community the same way they should know the rules.

    I had this response to someone else but I’ll copy/paste it here so you won’t miss it. There are reasons for this. It’s not “disliking staff for disliking staff’s sake”. Maybe because staff in the past have poor relationships with people? Maybe because updates are far and few between? And just because a few people don’t like all staff doesn’t mean that DMC shouldn’t be implemented.

    It is up to them to restore whatever they did to make you have that grudge.

    Yes and rightfully so. If they didn’t repair their relationship with you then why would you trust them as a staff member with power over you? It’s also important to know that most people don’t hate staff for no reason. If someone didn’t like me, it was because of something I did for the most part.

    If you think that people won’t like you because you’re trans then you don’t have to tell people you’re trans. It’s up to you to make that decision.
    OP OP
    OP OP Posted May 19, 2022
    GRGoodGame likes this.

Share This Page