I believe that players should have some form of say in who becomes staff. I have no problem with the current staff team, and this is not at all why I am making this post, but I believe us, as players, should get some form of say in who becomes staff - even if a staff member"s opinion overrides this, it"d be a nice addition and give the staff team an idea of what the community think of the person. I mean, it"d just be nice for players to be able to get their opinions across on who could possibly become a Staff member. Who knows the players better than the players?
Ehh. I somewhat disagree. Say the player has had a few disputes with multiple players. The other player is now hated by the other party. Plus, the players could be bias against (or for) the perennial applying.
Ehh. I somewhat disagree. Say the player has had a few disputes with multiple players. The other player is now hated by the other party. Plus, the players could be bias against (or for) the perennial applying.[/quote]
Note that Staff decision will override any majority from the players. (I think that’s what Blood’s saying, anyway.)
I may or may not get around to writing a longer response. (Sorry.)
Also disagreeing. I trust the staff to choose people that are able and ready to look over their duties as a staff member. Also, they do look over history and overall status, so they make their decisions quite carefully. Also, what if some people vote in a player that doesn’t want to become a staff member? That might cause some controversy in itself. And finally, popularity votes are just a bad decision in itself.
No. Honest votes would count. I"m 90% sure, if someone has had a “few disputes with multiple players”, depending on how recent these were, they could still be a good staff. Everybody has disputes, depending on opinions. And you cannot help that. Somebody will disagree with another person"s views.
The voting would be based on people who have sent applications. You cannot nominate somebody to become a staff member. They have to write their own application. Now then, about the “popularity votes” - nobody is popular enough on PMU to have //popular votes//. I"m pretty sure, popularity votes wouldn"t even come into context. Why would people vote for somebody who is “popular” to become a staff member? Surely, they"d want the best possible staff so would vote accordingly to this?
As much as this is a neat idea for the community… Applying for the staff team is not a popularity contest, and we don’t want it to be anything even close to it… When looking for moderators, we aren’t looking at how much an applicant is known/liked around the community, what is important is how said person works given a specific job, and what previous experiences said person has in community management as well as working with a team. How they are viewed and act around the community still takes an effect on the application process, but it is at best a minor thing…
This is how the application process has always been done ever since we began to force it more than before… It has never “specifically” failed over the last three - four years, so there isn’t much reason to change it in the first place. I can understand that the players would want a say in who gets considered for a moderator position… But again, at best it is just going to turn into an over-glorified popularity contest, and would eventually get overshadowed anyways (since again, the administrators have the final say in who we hire for the given position).
It isn’t a bad idea, and I’m not going to say it well never happen… But I am not in support of community voting for potential staff members. Feels waaay too political for my liking… And besides, it just invites potential arguments between the community…