ENT Gaming

These are my personal ideas on the list and how i would like to go in with it in the future.

1. How do you get on the list?
-General a mix between elo at the end of season and % of games played. For example i got 1050 elo this season out of a 15 games played , which does not qualify my performance as above average, same would be if its 10-15. Its simply 2 little games played to make a reasonable call on the elo. I find a nr of games between 70-100 games played to be reasonable in 1 season to make a call on it and make it count.
-Moderators vote to put you on the list, be it from feedback, own game experience or some random game we observed.Also moderators can veto certain players put on the list from their own gaming experience ( recent games not memory) to save us time.No friend benefits will be granted ofc.

2. How do you get off the list?
-Community vetos your name. For example, it turned out Krocis and elektro- did perform fine, no harm done. Would we have installed a certain nr of vetos from community we could have saved us the time to observe them.This is tricky since i dont want anyone to go around and pressure friends in vetoing for a list place , we would decide a nr of vetos in staff privately that we believe is enough to get off it, and the community needs to send us those vetos in private aswell.I expect everybody to be mature enough to not pressure anyone, nor to veto for people you like but know perform bad.

3.How do we rate players we put on the list but are inactive/ play very little nr of games?
- In general if you care enough to stay in lihl you should proove it and by playing.There are reasons ofc everybody can understand that lower the general playtime, family holidays job etc.Simply msg us hey i cant play a lot in the foreseeable future, we could take you into hold and start rating you once you perform back on a reasonable basis.
-It is the players responsibilty to proof their place in lihl, since they werent put on that list without reason.If you do not play enough nr of games we as moderation need to make a call on your performance, ( can be like 10-20 games only if the case is rly obvious, otherwise could be needed more) we will count that season as inactive. The general rule 2 inactive seasons= unvouch will be done then and you can reapply for trial once you care enough or have more time available.

Those are my personal ideas and opinions, and i would like to get constructive criticism and input on it please, also additional ideas are very welcome.After all, we make this to improve the overall gaming experience, hence enjoyment for the community.
[url]We will not discuss if such a list is necessary anymore, since we have decided we will keep working with this kind of handling and try to improve it.[/url]
Shoutout to @Ace_of_spades for giving me some ideas and helping me out with this.

I think choosing people by elo at end season is a pretty random criteria at best, less accurate even than subjective moderator opinions, unless ofc, you think elo is a good measure of skill.

Well, still no idea how one gets on that list and how not to be honest That is imo way too intransparent and the biggest problem as we have seen with the last list, which I think differed huge from what a community list would look like. Just to make sure, I don't want votes, this will just end in a popularity contest. But I think all Mods together are simply not playing enough to make a representative list. I think there needs to be a way for more community input OR to let us know more what lead you to a decision to put someone on the list. This was also completely unclear. I have for example not a feeling at all how much feedback you get from players etc. DO you get a lot? On a regular basis? I dunno, I never sent feedback to Mods, do others do that regularly? I assume so, but I dunno if this means you get 1 pm a month or twice per day.

Concerning vetos: I wouldn't put a certain number for someone to be vetoed. This will turn out to be a popularity contest again. But I think for Krocis there was so much positive feedback for him, that without counting vetoes you (as Mods) could from that easily deduce that he is good enough. For elektro I think the case is different. Wasn't much positive feedback for him and he was imo almost digging his own grave with his posts, ofc in such a case you have to look into more deeply as in Krocis case imo.

So tldr: I don't see how your post improves transparency about the list and I don't see what a difference that will make compared to before.

Meshtar wrote:I think choosing people by elo at end season is a pretty random criteria at best, less accurate even than subjective moderator opinions, unless ofc, you think elo is a good measure of skill.

Well elo is the only thing that is not subjective we have, be it as flawed a system as it is. Thats why i thought also looking at the overall games played and % of w/l is important aswell.

@Jamo hit me up in pm on german, i think i can explain better in native language. If others have problems understanding or i voiced smth unclear, ill gladly edit or give more info on my thought process. These are just ideas still, so theres nn to do anything at all, we can also just go on like we did before. My general intention is 2 make it less dependent from moderators call since i agree we simply do not play enough considering we are 5 people. I guess im the biggest problem in that way, thats why i rarely comment unless necessary in staff on the recent game experience side.
Ill come back to playing next month hopefully, but to tell you the truth i dont have a huge passion to play at the moment at all, i rather use my hours to moderate and try to lead lihl in the direction we as mods believe is benefitial and necessary. I guess if i wouldnt be a mod i would take a break from legion at all, but i see need to keep moderation on the highest level possible from my side in such a rather inactive time.

Jamo wrote:Well, still no idea how one gets on that list and how not to be honest That is imo way too intransparent and the biggest problem as we have seen with the last list, which I think differed huge from what a community list would look like. Just to make sure, I don't want votes, this will just end in a popularity contest. But I think all Mods together are simply not playing enough to make a representative list. I think there needs to be a way for more community input OR to let us know more what lead you to a decision to put someone on the list. This was also completely unclear. I have for example not a feeling at all how much feedback you get from players etc. DO you get a lot? On a regular basis? I dunno, I never sent feedback to Mods, do others do that regularly? I assume so, but I dunno if this means you get 1 pm a month or twice per day.

Concerning vetos: I wouldn't put a certain number for someone to be vetoed. This will turn out to be a popularity contest again. But I think for Krocis there was so much positive feedback for him, that without counting vetoes you (as Mods) could from that easily deduce that he is good enough. For elektro I think the case is different. Wasn't much positive feedback for him and he was imo almost digging his own grave with his posts, ofc in such a case you have to look into more deeply as in Krocis case imo.

So tldr: I don't see how your post improves transparency about the list and I don't see what a difference that will make compared to before.

I would also like to hear about feedback from players. Do they get much, how they regard it etc. I myself have sent 5-6 replays at least through pm's to Tom mostly and some to Crey since they were active at the time and I didn't get any reply about it, so I don't know if they just ignored it, reviewed it, took it into consideration or w/e. So yeah, 0 feedback about feedback. Tk activity and not much cohesion among you is the thing that troubles lihl moderation still, so I'd start from there if I were you

Meshtar wrote:

Jamo wrote:Well, still no idea how one gets on that list and how not to be honest That is imo way too intransparent and the biggest problem as we have seen with the last list, which I think differed huge from what a community list would look like. Just to make sure, I don't want votes, this will just end in a popularity contest. But I think all Mods together are simply not playing enough to make a representative list. I think there needs to be a way for more community input OR to let us know more what lead you to a decision to put someone on the list. This was also completely unclear. I have for example not a feeling at all how much feedback you get from players etc. DO you get a lot? On a regular basis? I dunno, I never sent feedback to Mods, do others do that regularly? I assume so, but I dunno if this means you get 1 pm a month or twice per day.

Concerning vetos: I wouldn't put a certain number for someone to be vetoed. This will turn out to be a popularity contest again. But I think for Krocis there was so much positive feedback for him, that without counting vetoes you (as Mods) could from that easily deduce that he is good enough. For elektro I think the case is different. Wasn't much positive feedback for him and he was imo almost digging his own grave with his posts, ofc in such a case you have to look into more deeply as in Krocis case imo.

So tldr: I don't see how your post improves transparency about the list and I don't see what a difference that will make compared to before.

I would also like to hear about feedback from players. Do they get much, how they regard it etc. I myself have sent 5-6 replays at least through pm's to Tom mostly and some to Crey since they were active at the time and I didn't get any reply about it, so I don't know if they just ignored it, reviewed it, took it into consideration or w/e. So yeah, 0 feedback about feedback. Tk activity and not much cohesion among you is the thing that troubles lihl moderation still, so I'd start from there if I were you

I gave Tom some feedback on discord a while ago and received a reply a day later with his thoughts on it, same thing with Crey on a different matter. So from my experience they do value feedback from the community and take it seriously.

7years wrote:

Meshtar wrote:

Jamo wrote:Well, still no idea how one gets on that list and how not to be honest That is imo way too intransparent and the biggest problem as we have seen with the last list, which I think differed huge from what a community list would look like. Just to make sure, I don't want votes, this will just end in a popularity contest. But I think all Mods together are simply not playing enough to make a representative list. I think there needs to be a way for more community input OR to let us know more what lead you to a decision to put someone on the list. This was also completely unclear. I have for example not a feeling at all how much feedback you get from players etc. DO you get a lot? On a regular basis? I dunno, I never sent feedback to Mods, do others do that regularly? I assume so, but I dunno if this means you get 1 pm a month or twice per day.

Concerning vetos: I wouldn't put a certain number for someone to be vetoed. This will turn out to be a popularity contest again. But I think for Krocis there was so much positive feedback for him, that without counting vetoes you (as Mods) could from that easily deduce that he is good enough. For elektro I think the case is different. Wasn't much positive feedback for him and he was imo almost digging his own grave with his posts, ofc in such a case you have to look into more deeply as in Krocis case imo.

So tldr: I don't see how your post improves transparency about the list and I don't see what a difference that will make compared to before.

I would also like to hear about feedback from players. Do they get much, how they regard it etc. I myself have sent 5-6 replays at least through pm's to Tom mostly and some to Crey since they were active at the time and I didn't get any reply about it, so I don't know if they just ignored it, reviewed it, took it into consideration or w/e. So yeah, 0 feedback about feedback. Tk activity and not much cohesion among you is the thing that troubles lihl moderation still, so I'd start from there if I were you

I gave Tom some feedback on discord a while ago and received a reply a day later with his thoughts on it, same thing with Crey on a different matter. So from my experience they do value feedback from the community and take it seriously.

Cool, good to know its just me they seem to ignore then.

I also get responses to my feedback.. but maybe with many people pming them so much stuff and so much time they need to review it, they forget to reply to everything

Nah, its not that, they just don't wanna bother with annoying persistent guys like me.

You guys wanna make a personal drama out of everything, huh?
You don't even know the reasons, but you wanna be the "bad" guy that gets ignored on purpose...
What about we appreciate for once, that others use their spare time to try and make a community better, that most of the time doesn't even deserve it (judging by all the drama and hate towards mods).
People need to get a thicker skin while being on the internet and not feel personally attacked everytime something doesn't go the way they feel like it should.

That's my two cents!

Have a good one <3

Meshtar wrote:Nah, its not that, they just don't wanna bother with annoying persistent guys like me.

I think it's cause ur listed and kicked soon!

Mesh pray for a sarcasm sign for christmas, seems u need it here xD
Back 2 topic pls

These ideas all seem good to me !support

Additional: Every player that moderation puts on the list will get a short personal feedback on what precisely we see lacking and what he should improve on. For us to do this, players need to personally message us and ask for it, cause i dont feel like wasting time when somebody doesnt even care if he stays vouched a lot or is simply 2 inactive to play anyway.