Let normal users vote on Moderator applications prior to staff voting

[Superfluous]

In the moderator application process thread, I want to add this clause:

• Post a thread in Moderator Applications with a title using the format above.
  • If you're a returning staff member, you may only apply up to the highest position you've held. Otherwise, you may only apply for a sectional position.
    
  • Threads posted in this section are moderated. Only upper staff are able to view them.
• Respond to the questions and scenarios listed below to the best of your ability.
  • You can include a resume or CV with your application (optional).
• Your application will be selected for review. You may be contacted by a staff member for additional questioning.
• After this review is completed, your application will remain public for X days. During this time, other Sythe members may vote "Support," "Neutral," or "No support" in a poll created on your application. Other Sythe members may not post on your application during this time. This feedback is solicited to help upper staff members gauge community sentiment towards you as an applicant.
• After this X day period, your application will be moved to the Upper Staff Lounge and voted on for the next 7 days, requiring a 2/3rds majority in order for it to pass.
• After voting has concluded, you will be informed of the outcome via Conversation. If the poll passes, you will be offered a forum moderator position in a particular section.
• You will be allowed to reapply for a forum moderator position in 3 months if your application is ultimately denied.

My feeling is that, since moderators ultimately moderate other Sythe users, they should have some way to voice their thoughts about potential new staff members. These "sentiment polls" will likely influence the upper staff vote, which is arguably beneficial given that more information is generally a good thing. Definitely open to hearing others' opinions though.

 

[Tyler]

No support. This is makes it open to mass personal bias and trolling.

 

[Superfluous]

No support. This is makes it open to mass personal bias and trolling.

fair point. i think it's valuable to collect people's opinions though. is there a way we can do that while minimizing chances of trolling being a major factor? and re: personal bias, if enough people are "biased" against (read: do not like) a user, i think that's valuable information for staff to be aware of

 

No support. This is makes it open to mass personal bias and trolling.

How would it cause mass personal bias/trolling if people can only vote on a poll, but can't post on the thread?

I support this, sounds like valuable information staff can use to sway their votes.

 

[Tyler]

fair point. i think it's valuable to collect people's opinions though. is there a way we can do that while minimizing chances of trolling being a major factor? and re: personal bias, if enough people are "biased" against (read: do not like) a user, i think that's valuable information for staff to be aware of

I'm not disagreeing about collecting opinions, there is lots staff miss or just dont know about everybody.

Additionally people will vote no on somebody based on something that is an non issue in regards to the opinion of them becoming staff.

How would it cause mass personal bias/trolling if people can only vote on a poll

15 Polls Hijacked by the Internet

But on a smaller scale.

 

@Tyler Maybe people can post on the thread instead and justify their vote? That way staff can take things they don't know into consideration?

 

[Tyler]

@Tyler Maybe people can post on the thread instead and justify their vote? That way staff can take things they don't know into consideration?

This would be a good idea if the posts could be hidden.

 

[Frank]

I don't think it should be put up to a vote, because it's hard to extrapolate what the percentages could mean. However, I think (if someone is being considered for a staff position) a thread should be created for the public to post any and all objections. An "Objections thread", if you will. Here, if there is anything vital that current staff have missed, it can discussed and reviewed. Because I do agree that the collection of staff opinions may not cover everything about a new potential staff member.

 

This would be a good idea if the posts could be hidden.

This makes the most sense to me.

I'll support public threads if the public can vote yes/no with a reason why so staff can use the information.

 

[Admires]

No support. This would just be a popularity contest which doesn't equate to moderator skill.

Seriously, just make better decisions when appointing users to mod and don't promote someone who has been inactive for four years. It's not that hard.

 

I'm always a fan of having people voice their thoughts behind the "supports" and "no supports". Cuts out a lot of the BS voting, and from there it's easy to see who is trolling and who is trying to give their honest opinion.

 

I simply don't trust more than half of our userbase with such a task

 

I simply don't trust more than half of our userbase with such a task

The point of this suggestion would simply to gather opinions for staff to consider, their votes wouldn't actually count. Similar to the OMM Lounge voting on OMM polls.

 

[Felix]

Support, this would just be community input, right?

 

If there was a simple yes/no vote, then no. However, the thing I HIGHLY support is the community giving legitimate reasons as to WHY X person does or does not deserve a promotion. It gives the staff another way of looking at whom they consider for a promotion.

The point of this suggestion would simply to gather opinions for staff to consider, their votes wouldn't actually count. Similar to the OMM Lounge voting on OMM polls.

And exactly this.

 

[I Bleed Duke Blue]

Well in this case just mod @John and @TalonsGP now.

 

I want to support, but people wont be able to take it seriously. 70% of the active community are trolls

 

[Myshirtisoff]

Yes, I would love to see this if it is required to give sound reasoning as to why the person voted yes or no in order to vote.

 

[DaltyF]

If it weren't a serious deciding factor in the ultimate decision, sure. Only if it was just a little extra information to take into consideration. As stated above, I feel like it would be a popularity contest or personal grudges would automatically result in a negative result.

 

[Silent192]

I think it would be a good idea for the staff to pick whom they would promote and than put the polls up just to see will the community provide any good reason NOT to pick that user for a moderator.