Something that's being overlooked here is the fact that lying and falsifying yourself for the gain of the server is not ethical. To put a real life perspective on this, look at undercover police work. The difference between police work and banning a hacker on a Minecraft server is that one is necessary, and the other is already handled well and doesn't need people lurking in the shadows to aid them, since building undercover personas aren't the only way to accomplish banning a hacker effectively. Moving on, there's a lot of things the original idea overlooks as well. To list them: As mentioned earlier, the name of the moderator is in the ban message to help the appeal process. This can't be removed as it complicates that process, and it can't be covered up by a public mods name as that only leaves the public ones with more unnecessary work that they may not be familiar with, which could be troublesome if an appeal is made or the ban is incorrect. This means that the cover of the undercover mods is blown when they ban a user. Teamspeak permissions are linked to groups IIRC, meaning the best that can be done if this were applicable to all parts of MV is make a new role with all the mod perms, but that only comes off as suspicious to the uninformed eye, making it difficult to keep your cover hidden. Since report archives are public, this means undercover staff are unable to deal with reports without having their cover blown either. While this could be beneficial in cases where a punishment is immediate, this isn't all moderators do. In situations that require prior warning before applying punishments, those words to those spectating and especially those the warning is directed to, can be seen as minimodding. The general perception of minimodding is that it's annoying, and many of those presented with it will persist on their offenses, which only makes the job more stressful. When undercover mods are promoted, how are the public staff going to know about the undercover whereabouts and when they get the role? Sure they can get access to the staff chats, but that still doesn't help out much for the whereabouts of them without having to constantly report and there will still be initial confusion about the promotions. These undercover staff will not get any requests or assistance from regular users to do some mod-exclusive work, meaning these staff are on their own, putting them at a disadvantage in comparison to the public staff. To put it simply, these staff will inevitably have their cover blown and ultimately be handicapped, lesser mods. Is anybody really willing to do that over being a public mod? Is it necessary to have these users when we already have a functioning and competent staff team? TL;DR: From a moral and logical perspective, undercover mods are unethical and arguably unnecessary since they're inevitably going to be discovered and have to work handicapped in comparison to the rest of the staff. No support
Neutral. Rather than this, maybe allow certain mods to have alts with the access to the moderator group, but without a title. Secondly, give mods the ability to stop appearing in TAB, remove mods from /list and disable ordi[TAB autocomplete].
I personally think this is very un-necessary. Mods could just get on alts, and be like a normal player.
Glad that it won't. The situation right now isn't good, and if this happens, it never will turn around.
can people please stop with the 'support, great idea!' And actually read the thread's contents? The owners already said it's not going to happen. This is just a place to get some posts now…
@Sparky You wanna be 007? Just gotta change your accent a bit. You could be our new superduperawesome undercover spy secret agent moderator.
