Pokefarm Mentors; Discussion 'Ideas'

It would probably depend what the lock is/was for, if it was something like double posting, it shouldn't matter, but for other things it would

Whatever the reason of the lock, isn't it still a sign that a rule was broken, either because of not knowing of it, or not caring about it? Either way, I'm with Crazy here, there should be a cooldown either way. If the rule was broken because the user didn't want to obey they definitely shouldn't be mentoring anyone, and if it was broken because of limited knowledge of the rules, how could that person then mentor someone else?

But what about when they are already mentoring somone? Would they mentee suddenly get a new mentore? Espacialy when they mentore had a pm lock, what would happen to the mentee during that time? (I think mentore and mentee are comunating with pm's right now ^^'. That means that the mentor can't help the mentee if they have a pm lock.) It also depends on the offense I think. If it is for dubbel posting, I don't think you should remove theme frome a mentore position. But if it is for somthing much bigger like being rude or unrespctfull, shouldn't it be considered if they can still be mentors? I think it would be difficult to draw the line somwhere though. What do you consider as a big enough offense to remove theme frome the mentoor programe? You have to consider though, if they gave the mentee suddenly to somone els to mentor wouldn't that be weird? I think in some cases neccesary, but then the mentee should be informed with what happend with the other mentore.

The difficulty of drawing the line is another reason to arrange the cooldown no matter the reason of the lock. When everyone is treated the same, no on can be said to have priviledges or such. And besides, there has been much talk about some sort of quiz or other type of test to qualify the mentors. Couldn't we think that if one passed the test, they'd have to have enough understanding of the site rules to not get locked by accident? Say, double-posting? If one doesn't know that's not allowed, they really shouldn't be mentors in the first place. And as for the mentor disappearing, there could be a rule set to place, that if the mentor, without a warning, disappears for more than, let's say, three days, the mentoree should contact the clan again. And for when they should be removed from the mentor position for good? I don't think we should say "you can never be a mentor again" to anyone. People change and make mistakes. I again agree with Crazy's earlier post, that during the cooldown the mentor should be followed to see if they'll break the rules again. If not, good, welcome back to the clan. If they do, kick them out, but if they someday decide to apply again, give them a chance.

Regarding the age debate/dicussion, perhaps the sign up form, for both Mentors and Mentorees, could have a 'is there an age group you'd prefer your mentor/mentoree' section to it. As it's a offical PFQ clan it shouldn't be too much of a problem as I think staff members have access to the userbase ages, or at the very least I think Niet, Garthic, Eltafez & Sei do. Now I know there's gonna be kinks to work out with it but it's almost best of both worlds...kinda. As for users who have had their accounts locked ect, I think at first everyone should be given a fair chance at becoming a mentor. If it's really that servere then they would've been kicked off PFQ surely? I do think that if a user has broken a rule then the cooldown period would come into affect and, if they have a mentoree at the time then they'll be contacted and re-assigned. The mentor should then be allowed to mentor again as they should have learned their lesson but if they break a rule again then they should no longer be allowed to mentor. Again a few things to work out e.g. the cooldown period time frame.

I think that would be a wonderful idea to settle that discussion Luna :O As for the past locks thing, idk Looking through the comments by you 4/5 I think that it wouldnt really.... matter? Idk In my mind, I imagine someone that was talked to and potentially locked about autoclickers for example, what if they found a loophole in the rule and shared that with their mentee? That couldnt be a positive outcome, or any outcome at all seeing as its not positive on any level, that we would want happening. I guess it could depend on the offense, but at the same time, everyone deserves a chance.

Probably a moot point by now? But account locks and stuff. I just wanted to point out that the idea of ‘if the lock was only for double posting then it [paraphrasing] doesn’t matter’ is, in my view, stupid and not exactly a good exception to the rules that shouldn’t be broken. Not to mention, I’m pretty sure a lock for double posting requires many offences, or the user being belligerant about it. Staff aren’t going to lock your account because you accidentally hit ‘post’ twice. However, breaking the ‘no double posting’ varies between users. For example, I have reported a handful of posts where the user either blatantly said ‘I know it’s against the rules but bump’ or ‘I’m not sure if this is against the rules but bump’ It’s not hard - the rules are linked on every page D: These people showed either blatent disregard for the rules, or didn’t bother to check them when they were uncertain - and the site rules question thread exists for a reason. Newbies shouldn’t be mentored by people like this. A person who accidentally hits ‘post’a second time, whether it be misclick or slow connection is a less serious offender than the above mentioned. Plus the user is warned by staff that they have broken a rule. This in mind, ideally an offense should only happen once. But that’s irrelevant if a cooldown system is in play. I [hopefully correctly] assume that staff would look at a users history as well as an application. A form is not the greatest idea in my view. Anyone can easily look up the information needed, but not actually know it. How many times did you regurgitate information in school? I think an interview would work better than a form. Think like a job interview, I suppose? An interview, in a roleplay-like situation would allow the assessor to get a better feel of the potential mentor, especially personality-wise. For example, the wiki has a lot of information to digest. If I were a newbie, I certainly wouldn’t want someone slapping a wiki link in my face :0 The wiki makes sense to a lot of people, but some of us sit there scratching our heads going ‘wat’. A roleplay interview situation would of course give an idea of suitability as a mentor. It shows you who is patient, who is friendly, and so on. But still, any ‘one off’ thing can be faked, which is where check-ins take effect. A three way conversation allowing for private discussion :0

Anyone can use the mature hidebox to test another user's age, tho you don't get the specific age that way just whether they're above or below 18. I can't say I care about the other user's age unless they're being a total brat, and adults can be brats so it's not just kids being problematic. Some of the problem you're bringing up can be easily solved by simply requiring the account of a mentor to be over a certain age. And I mean the account's age, not the user's. I don't think the "hiring" process needs to be that complicated. I think one of the mods said somewhere that all applications would be sent to staff, so having a back-and-forth is eating the time of someone who might not have that much. Not sure how busy staff actually gets since I'm on the outside looking in tho.

I think someone said this earlier? Or similar? Idk But I mean Why not just have some forms that would have a section with like, preferences you have in regards to the other user A form for mentee or mentor This could be filled out with things like, same gender, near age, intel in _____ subject, person in same time zone Those are just examples and more could be said but it would help with a lot of the problems being brought up regarding people not wanting to deal with users that are/act certain ways....

No to "person in same state." My exact location shouldn't matter to anyone.