Moderators must post

[Shawn Gossman]

How do you feel about forum owners that force their moderators to post?

Some feel that moderators on a forum should also be tasked with helping to keep the forum active. This means they need to create new topics and reply frequently.

Do you think this is a good strategy? Why or why not?

 

[Heatman]

As a moderator in a forum, you're not supposed to wait and be forced to posts around the forum whenever you're online in the forum. If a staff don't post, why would ordinary members be expected to post? It doesn't matter if the moderator is paid or not, he/she is supposed to contribute in content creation.

 

[Shawn Gossman]

I agree, personally.

If the moderators are not more active than the members, there is no example being set.

It's why I have trouble deciding to actually add moderators to my forums. Aside from a few, many just go silent afterwards.

 

[Heatman]

It's very unfortunate that some people don't really know what commitment is all about especially even those that are paid to do the job. I've seen where a forum owner had to call out someone that was his paid staff for not contributing actively in the community. In the end, he had to terminate the contract.

 

[Shawn Gossman]

Yeah. I won't pay anyone unless I truly like and trust them

 

[Ashley]

I never force my staff to post, but if they have free time and it looks like activity might be down, I definitely encourage it. That doesn't mean try to do a hundred posts by Saturday, just a little bit here and a little bit there is something I'm more than happy to accept

 

[Heatman]

Yeah. I won't pay anyone unless I truly like and trust them

Exactly! Trust can take years to build and will take only moments to break. It shifts easily based on people’s actions, words and misunderstandings. It's why whenever I have someone's trust, I'll never do anything to put doubts in their mind.

 

[Heatman]

I never force my staff to post, but if they have free time and it looks like activity might be down, I definitely encourage it. That doesn't mean try to do a hundred posts by Saturday, just a little bit here and a little bit there is something I'm more than happy to accept

If you have a staff on payment structure, would you not have a particular demand on how you expect them to be active in your forum which includes posting too?

 

[Ashley]

If you have a staff on payment structure, would you not have a particular demand on how you expect them to be active in your forum which includes posting too?

Staffing always has been and always will be strictly volunteer work. I'm on social security so even if I wanted to pay my staff, I wouldn't be able to

 

[Shawn Gossman]

Staffing always has been and always will be strictly volunteer work. I'm on social security so even if I wanted to pay my staff, I wouldn't be able to

In most cases, forum staff is expected to be volunteer. I mean that is how it has always been traditionally. But if I was making enough money on a forum to profit (after bills), I'd consider paying staff members.

 

[Mike30]

Staff members are staff for a reason. And it's to represent the forum's best interest and been alert if a user needs help or a question answered.
There is no specific post amount to be set, just using common sense should be enough. Otherwise, you don't need staff members.

I require around a minimum of 30 posts/month, and if inactive for 3 month , the account is terminated. (unless the user have a reason. example, taking a break, or any other thing going on, etc...) It's ok if the user lost interest, I just don't like to work on a ghost town. I like to be around with people truly interested/invested. Uninterested/lurkers --- I don't need them there.

So, in general, staff members should never get close to the Uninterested/lurkers type. They should be committed and active.

 

[Ashley]

Staff members are staff for a reason. And it's to represent the forum's best interest and been alert if a user needs help or a question answered.
There is no specific post amount to be set, just using common sense should be enough. Otherwise, you don't need staff members.

I require around a minimum of 30 posts/month, and if inactive for 3 month , the account is terminated. (unless the user have a reason. example, taking a break, or any other thing going on, etc...) It's ok if the user lost interest, I just don't like to work on a ghost town. I like to be around with people truly interested/invested. Uninterested/lurkers --- I don't need them there.

So, in general, staff members should never get close to the Uninterested/lurkers type. They should be committed and active.

The part I put in bold was what I was trying to say