Proposed moderator assessment plan

This post was last edited by lyhh9024 on 2010-4-12 23:04. How to increase the popularity of this forum? 1. Revive the “One Question per Day” activity (the key lies in the quality of the topic posts). 2. Increase the scoring for technical topic posts, whether they are requests for help or discussions. 3. Determining the scoring scale: each moderator has their own criteria (but avoid giving too high scores to administrators, technical experts, and those with higher seniority; treat everyone equally). What are your thoughts on the current level of activity in various forums? The safety zone has seen a sharp decline in popularity; it is mainly new members who are keeping it going. Moderators and experts, including me, post very little, and thus fail to set a good example for the new members. Therefore, it is recommended that moderators, when managing content, promote posts with high discussion value and technical depth for members to engage in discussions. What are your thoughts on the current moderator evaluation system? Reduce the weight of deletion operations, increase the weight of editing operations, and add categorization tasks as assessment criteria. Do you have a better scheme for evaluating moderators? It is recommended that the number of management actions per day (excluding upgrades, highlighting, and rating) be no less than 2 times per hour (based on daily online time), as a criterion to determine whether a moderator is qualified (to avoid inaction). The above are my immature personal opinions, for reference only!

Thank you to moderator lyhh9024 for their consistent hard work. I basically agree with your opinion. The Daily Question activity can be resumed in those sections where the conditions permit. For the Safe Zone, you can discuss implementation details with eleg; for the Environmental Protection Zone, you can provide guidance directly. As for the other zones, I will talk to the primary moderator first. I will take your plan into consideration during this month’s assessment.

Regarding the implementation of the daily question activity, if there is a lack of materials, consideration can be given to conducting training on relevant laws and regulations. For example: The safety zone can generate quiz questions based on the contents of Order No. 8 issued by the General Administration; for instance, under what circumstances will a construction project fail the acceptance inspection? What are the mandatory tests? Wait. Environmental protection zones can create questions based on the Environmental Protection Law, the Energy Conservation Law, and the documents related to environmental impact assessments for construction projects, thereby helping members improve their knowledge. Other districts, depending on the circumstances, carry out activities to provide ordinary members with knowledge of laws, regulations, standards, and norms.

This post was last edited by lyhh9024 on 2010-4-18 at 12:37. 4# siena2008’s basic ideas are consistent with the earlier version. The main purpose of carrying out the “One Question per Day” activity is to boost everyone’s enthusiasm for participation, and also to enable them to gain some knowledge from it. As for the depth, I believe that initially there is no need for too much professionalism; it should start with an introduction to laws and regulations, and then progress gradually. By the way, is the plan for the “One Question per Day” activity being carried out according to the plan established for the Meteor Super Edition? http://bbs.hcbbs.com/viewthread.php?tid=358272&page=1#pid1871011

I agree with resuming the “One Question per Day” activity. When it comes to timing, one should be cautious and consider whether a delay is feasible. Since there is already a user (Firefly) suggesting that the “One Question per Day” activity be stopped immediately (http://bbs.hcbbs.com/viewthread.php?tid=651925&page=1#pid3747989), if we resume this activity at such a sensitive time, even with thorough preparations in place, it is likely to lead to discordant opinions and even affect unity – a result that no one wants to see.

5# lyhh9024: Each region should carry out its activities according to its own actual circumstances; the specific details are to be decided by each region. If there are any problems, I will help resolve them. The opinions from the previous super edition should be taken into consideration, but there is no need to stick strictly to the format. Decide the score based on the difficulty of the question; the key at present is to motivate both new and existing members to participate. As for the scoring criteria, other moderators can make their own decisions based on your criteria; I believe we are all fair.

6# oatobnus: Our district is different from the other districts; your districts are more technology-oriented, while in safety-focused districts, laws and regulations are of greater importance. The suggestions for the Firefly upgraded version are excellent, but they apply to areas and moderators who do not follow the rules. The moderators in our public works area are all very responsible, so such situations will not occur; therefore, we can proceed with it without hesitation. Your district has been doing well in this regard; you can adjust it according to your own circumstances – it’s not necessary to do one question per day. Considering the moderators’ time constraints, it’s okay to carry out these activities intermittently. It’s good if it can boost the enthusiasm of both new and existing members.

This post was last edited by siena2008 on 2010-4-20 at 11:10. I just received notification from the site administrator that the “One Question per Day” activity is suspended; it seems that the moderator oatobnus was foresighted. ^_^ Following the site manager’s suggestion, it can be changed to a weekly topic discussion event^_^

Starting this month, the focus of the evaluation has been adjusted: the score for editing has been increased from 0.1 to 0.2, while the scores for deletion and closing have been reduced from 1.5 to 0.1. The scoring value has been appropriately adjusted from 0.01 to 0.03 to encourage moderators from reviewing posts. The number of posts in each section varies, so evaluations are likely to be one-sided; please feel free to provide your valuable suggestions and opinions at any time.

Moderators are not scoring tools; assessments have been increasing the weight of scores given by moderators, with the intention of guiding them to assign scores. However, after two months of observation, it has been found that currently moderators mainly focus on scoring, while other aspects of management have decreased significantly. Their primary responsibilities should be to encourage members to score each other and to organize activities to keep the community atmosphere lively. Moderators’ online time should also be evaluated. Under the current situation, it is possible that some moderators score repeatedly right after logging in and then log off without carrying out any actual management tasks; one moderator even scored 70–90 times in a single day.