Circulating updates on reform discussions—with participation of zone leaders
Thread Content
This post was last edited by zhangqi1234 on 2016-4-7 at 19:43. Thank you to all the regional managers for taking the time to participate in this discussion. The circular reports issued by the inspection team mainly outline the shortcomings, strengths, and recommendations for each region for that month. Current structure of the regular updates: Shortcomings include moderator attendance rates, unqualified moderators, mistakes in daily management practices, and other problematic issues ； Positive aspects: outstanding individuals in the region (excellent moderators), good practices, events and activities worth promoting ； Tour suggestions: Recommendations put forward by the tour team members based on their observations regarding the region. After observing over the past few months, it has been found that the regular feedback reports are not effective; there are mainly the following issues: 1. The same problems persist for months on end. 2. The strengths of those outstanding moderators are only apparent on the surface; there must be many good practices in various regions, but it’s unclear how to identify them. 3. Content distortion; this is an internal issue with the touring team’s version control. 4. It happens every month – without any incentives or penalties, I’ve become indifferent. . Consider implementing the following reforms in an attempt to change the current situation (the original structure remains unchanged): 1. If the overall popularity of a region in a given month (measured by the number of posts) increases compared to the previous month, a target will be set, and rewards in Haichuan coins will be given for meeting this target (as determined through statistics from the site’s tracking section). 2. If significant improvements are made in a region during a month as a result of addressing the shortcomings from the previous month (including a reduction in unqualified moderators and an increase in the number of moderators and technicians), a target will be set, and rewards in Haichuan coins will be given for meeting this target (by comparing with the data reported from the previous month). 3. For good practices within a region that deserve to be promoted across the forum, rewards in Haichuan coins will be given (submitted by the region or identified by the inspection team); initially, only rewards will be given, with no penalties. The Haichuan coins awarded will belong to the region, and once received, their usage rights will lie with the current regional leader. If appropriate targets are established for these Haichuan coin rewards, they will be distributed monthly to the regions. We welcome all regional leaders to share their thoughts. . . . .
This reform of the inspection team demonstrates determination and commitment; as a window to Haichuan, the fair and impartial oversight provided by this team plays a crucial role. However, uniform evaluations undermine the purpose of monitoring and promoting progress in the regions; they may even lead to resentment and negative effects. Mention it when it exists, otherwise refrain from mentioning it; assisting, encouraging, and helping the regions to develop and improve is also something the inspection teams should pay attention to – sharing both honors and setbacks. The key is to provide appropriate encouragement in those less active sections in order to help them grow. Secondly, the persons in charge of each area with weaknesses are evaluated, while those with strengths can be rewarded; this ensures that there are evaluations as well as rewards and penalties.
Agree to the reform suggestions, focusing on rewards to boost popularity.
If those outstanding moderators perform well every month, it’s not a problem if they are the same ones each time. I think we should base things on the actual situation; trying to achieve balance deliberately can create an atmosphere of equality that’s not necessary.
Agree with the reform suggestions; it is recommended to focus on rewards and to impose assessments for repeated violations
Having never held a regional leadership role, I’ll speak up bravely: In my opinion, the presence of consistently excellent moderators can affect those who are slightly less competent; alternative forms of recognition should be provided to them. Furthermore, it is recommended that regional managers keep their promises and participate regularly in forum management, especially during events. If they fail to respond to, supervise, and guide the moderators involved in management in a timely manner, the results will not be as satisfactory. There are some things that it’s difficult to move forward with relying solely on the enthusiasm of a few moderators.
It truly feels like the forum still lacks an atmosphere of diverse opinions; there are only a few active moderators, and those who are active remain active while those who are inactive stay that way. Some lose interest after being active for a while, become bored, and even withdraw. Reforms to the circuit supervision mechanism should be effective. As for other suggestions, could a rotating system for moderators, deputy superusers, and team leaders be established? Only by moving does it gain vitality.