|
|
Post by Minecraft Electric on Aug 7, 2011 20:00:31 GMT
Here's my idea:
Owner: General Veers [Admin]
Assistants to the Owner: Qwerty, VIROS [Admin]
Head Global Moderator: Foxtrot [Global Mod]
Assistants to the HGM: Rock, MF [Global Mod]
Head Moderator: Codnchips [Mod]
Assistants to the HM: Nmagane, Owned by Glove [Mod]
Hiring Authorization Team: Sparkpowder, CENOGA, mdog95 [Not a staff rank, only power is to approve mods, HGM, Assistants to the HGM, and Assistants to the Owner authorizations are deferred to the Trirumvrate]
|
|
|
|
Post by nmagain on Aug 7, 2011 20:05:03 GMT
No, this is just another attempt to kiss our arses.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rock on Aug 7, 2011 21:14:45 GMT
This is ridiculous, nothing is changing. There aren't even regular moderators anymore.
|
|
|
|
Post by Clockwork on Aug 8, 2011 1:34:57 GMT
Shouldn't we change the name to moderator. I mean c'mon. Nothin special about global mod now that we lack moderators.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fringe Pioneer on Aug 8, 2011 4:42:22 GMT
Well, "Moderator" implies control over a select board, whereas "Global Moderator" implies control over the forum. "Administrator" technically implies control over the technical aspects of the website, but is used here to imply an administration that heads all moderators and works with the simpler behind-the-scene mechanics.
Anyhow, I must agree with Nmagane and Rock: this seems to be an attempt to get a staff position from which Sparkpowder is already disqualified...
|
|
|
|
Post by Qwerty on Aug 8, 2011 5:02:05 GMT
Anope. Besides, the triumvirate are equal.
Global mods keep their name to keep the moderator position open. It's a standard entry-level position for all staff and if we eliminate it we'd have to hire directly to global, which isn't a good idea.
|
|
|
|
Post by Minecraft Electric on Aug 8, 2011 13:14:09 GMT
Exactly why an HAT is not considered staff, and can be impeached or have a decision invalidated
by higher-ups.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rock on Aug 8, 2011 15:15:19 GMT
There is absolutely no point. The staff decides who gets hired, not a handful of membes decided by you.
|
|
|
|
Post by Qwerty on Aug 8, 2011 21:14:58 GMT
Did you really say that assistants to the owner are deferred to the triumvirate? You do realize that Veers, VIROS and I ARE the triumvirate?
|
|
|
|
Post by mdog95 on Aug 8, 2011 22:04:17 GMT
I think he's just thinking of making the "government" here more of a democracy instead of a communism. If the admins and mods were terrible, which they aren't, making the switch would be a good idea, but we have a great staff here. No need to switch or even think of switching.
|
|
|
|
Post by kuraikiba on Aug 8, 2011 22:22:11 GMT
Spark, when I got you barred from becoming staff, I intended it to be completely permanent. No reason is given as to why it shouldn't be.
|
|
|
|
Post by Qwerty on Aug 9, 2011 0:28:13 GMT
Nah, this is an oligarchy, not a communism. Not all are equal here.
|
|
|
|
Post by xShadowLordx on Aug 9, 2011 21:12:20 GMT
For the record, communism =/= a political system. Aside from that, there's really no way the staff here could become "terrible", no matter how big the forum may get. We have absolutely nothing to gain here, and oppressing the people would simply kill the community and leave us with no one to oppress anymore.  |
|
|
|
Post by kuraikiba on Aug 9, 2011 21:13:43 GMT
If staff couldn't be terrible, would you have had demotions?
|
|
|
|
Post by xShadowLordx on Aug 9, 2011 21:16:46 GMT
What do you mean?
|
|
|
|
Post by kuraikiba on Aug 9, 2011 22:06:59 GMT
Both me and MF disintegrated into "horrible" mods, and got demoted. Both of us twice, I think...
|
|
|
|
Post by Qwerty on Aug 9, 2011 22:24:55 GMT
Nah, MF actually resigned once.
|
|
|
|
Post by GGoodie on Aug 9, 2011 23:13:20 GMT
I support having 2 admins and 3 mods. The 3 mods would essentially be global mods and all staff would have access to a single staff board. If there was ever a stalemate between the two Admins the 3 mods would break it. 1 of the mods can be the Element Keeper if they want.
The 2 Admins would be Qwerty and GV, obviously, and the 3 mods would be VIROS, TSL, and Fox.
|
|
|
|
Post by Qwerty on Aug 9, 2011 23:18:17 GMT
Two admins wouldn't work. The reason there's a triumvirate is that ties are impossible. We do need an admin board, though. Sometimes we need to judge staff members or do things that involve staff members without them knowing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fringe Pioneer on Aug 10, 2011 0:03:01 GMT
Having Global Moderators serve as tie breakers isn't a bad idea, come to think of it, although I still prefer the idea of a Triumvirate - that way, only one person is necessary to break the dispute, and his opinion would be indisputable, coming from someone of equal rank as the two in dispute. Also, in the event that another revolution becomes necessary, it would be better to have two admins break from a soon-to-be-rogue third rather than have a dictator come out of a revolution after a biumvirate. Hopefully, this hypothetical consideration will remain moot, but nevertheless...
As for a High Staff Board, I don't see where it was argued the board shouldn't exist, but I have to agree that we were all glad to have it at the times we felt we needed it, and I really don't want to rid of it...
|
|
|
|
Post by Anonymousperson5 on Aug 10, 2011 0:20:20 GMT
I think the GMs should serve as tiebreakers if an admin is not present, ergo on a trip or having to take a break...
|
|
|
|
Post by xShadowLordx on Aug 10, 2011 1:56:58 GMT
I think the GMs should serve as tiebreakers if an admin is not present, ergo on a trip or having to take a break... That's not a bad idea. We could have a triumvirate, yet allow mods a say if need be. Maybe if one Admin is absent, two Global Mods in agreement could equal the opinion of one Admin? |
|
|
|
Post by Clockwork on Aug 10, 2011 2:03:33 GMT
The community as a whole gives the staff power. It's an Ogliarchy where a staff has more of an opinion than a normal member. But all the normal members together. A force to reckon with.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fringe Pioneer on Aug 10, 2011 2:20:54 GMT
You type as if the staff is an evil force that the members must unite to overthrow, but we're not an evil force - at least, I should hope we're not getting to that point. Some opinions are given more weight coming from staff than from users in some cases, yes, but that doesn't mean that we don't have your interests in mind.
Anyhow, in the case a triumvir is absent, would it be two Global Moderators, or a majority of the Global Moderators, or a plurality of the Global Moderators that will equal the voice of a triumvir?
|
|
|
|
Post by Qwerty on Aug 10, 2011 5:09:05 GMT
I'm assuming that global mods as a whole would count as a triumvir in one's absence. Obviously if they mostly disagree it'd be a "no".
|
|
|
|
Post by Artifact123 on Aug 10, 2011 15:09:23 GMT
*facepalm*
Spark, stop being such an idiot, we don´t want you as a Mod so you´re not gonna be one.
All you do is annoy us, if you don´t believe me check your Karma and tell me if you think people see you as a nice Member.
Like Nmagane said, stop kissing our asses.
|
|
|
|
Post by D_M-01 on Aug 10, 2011 19:12:50 GMT
I do not see any occurring problem going on with the staff's handling of matters or the disorganization of the hierarchy. If it is not a problem with the majority of regular users, then the current system should remain established.
I would recommend that SparkPowder should get opinions from large parts of the community before he comes to a conclusion, as well as other users.
|
|
|
|
Post by xShadowLordx on Aug 12, 2011 1:47:56 GMT
Anyhow, in the case a triumvir is absent, would it be two Global Moderators, or a majority of the Global Moderators, or a plurality of the Global Moderators that will equal the voice of a triumvir? The reason I said 2 Global Mods was because I was assuming the current system of 3 Admins and 3 Global Mods, meaning 2 would be a majority. So basically, no matter how many GMs there are, a majority should equal one Admin. |
|
[M:977802]
