as a mod, I don't think thats a decision I can make.

I know you don't want to vote against your own staff but, don't you think it would be fair for members to choose and vote on who should moderate their own forums and for members be able to kick those from mod position?.

Don't you think members should have more say on what goes on in the forums?

It goes a but further than that, but what I can say is that I was put on the TW team to help mod TW forums. Now that it's dead so is my purpose of bieng a mod. To be completly honest people will just pick favorites. Im not thats what cit wants or is what he's aiming torwards. All of our mods were picked becuase of forum activity and how well the meld with the community for the most part. Joc, you know I love you bro but im gonna have to say negetive. I see more con's then pro's happening if that was to be allowed. At the end of the day...who's hosting the site?

What i CAN agree with is maybe have a poll on who everyone think SHOULD be mod and for whatever reasons. If those reason are good enough to the staff then i don't see why that couldnt work, but I can't agree with stripping all staff and replacing them.

Thank you for you value opinion.

will i get an infraction if i vote yes? D:

The one who have the most thoughts. are the quiet and the ones that act like they don't care.. such as myself o_o

Probably, since I've been infracted for reporting a post but because it was a mods post I was infracted

GG

Just because you have problems with specific mods, shouldn't mean that you complain about all moderators in general. I get that you have been PMing Cit and he doesn't reply, but the actuality of it all is that DBO has shut down, and Cit doesn't seem to be as active anymore, just as most users aren't. The majority of the moderators are still looking over the site the best we can. Perhaps we could use a few more moderators to help maintain the site, and users' opinions on who to pick could certainly help, in my opinion, but the remainder of the moderator staff should not simply be removed, as we were all picked for our uses, assistance and activity.

All in all, not much should be changed about our current staff, but perhaps we should attempt to loose up on some rules, such as off-topic posting, now that the site is in the state that it is. I also think that we should listen to users' more frequently, and provide them an outlet to supply their input, this is a community after all.

Also, Jocer, thank you for the creation of this thread as it has allowed us to view your opinion, as well as the opinions of other members of the community, as what you all have to say does matter to us. I would also like to add that any member who feels the need to further voice their opinion, on any matter, please contact Citrinate or another member of our staff, and we will attempt to aid you in whatever way we currently can.

It's nice to see not I'm the only one who thinks there are "corrupt mods" but still, whatever you do, whatever you say, as Tempest said he was defended, that's same for other mods, they're defended becuse of their rank = nothing gonna change, especially since DBO will close, the website will be more dead, so WHY WOULD anything change

In the end of the day it is Citrinate's site he has control over who moderates the forum or not. He has changed a lot for the sites members. He made the infractions system so that people would actually be given a reason why the got a warning or an infraction, before it was just delete the post without any major reasons.

The members shouldn't vote on who becomes moderator or not in my opinion because it would just be based on who is popular or not.

For example, Mr X ran to be a moderator vs me. I know Mr X is more well known than me in DBO/DBOCOM at this moment in time because he still is playing DBO and is very active on the forums, whereas I am not(lurking in the shadows). Mr X would win the election due to his FRIENDS voting for him, not on who is the more capable at the job or not.

The capability criteria when I had been picked by Citrinate nearly 2 years ago was based on:
Has the person ever been banned, has the person flamed/broken the rules several times before, even after being notified about the forum rules. Does the person report posts that conflict with the forum rules or not.

So how can a normal member who does not see the moderator forum assess if Mr X is viable to become a moderator or not?? Despite Mr X having a bad reputation in breaking the rules. How would a normal member of this

Ok now to the next part.
If the current moderators are capable or not. I can say some of them are and some of them used to be. Some are just busy with real life things(me). Also we don't need anymore moderators as the workload isn't even much compared to when we had only 2-3 moderators who frequently were online and who moderated the site during DBO's peak activity.