OMM and Conflict of Interest

Not to be this ass again:

Is this not exactly the conflict of interest that was brought up by the other user that didn't actually exist but does now?

 

Upper staff don't really see/hear what's going on in the middleman section unless they're actively MM'ing themselves. Often when I was MM'ing I'd be told "oh I tried to use X and this happened" or I'd see them being rude or dismissive when I asked if they'd take a middleman I couldn't take at that time.

All the discussion would do is give upper-staff additional points to consider. I don't expect it to change the USL vote too much if at all - but the current middlemen know the other middlemen most. The OMM section isn't used and most OMM's are inactive - it would provide some sort of chance for the sections and users to become active and contribute.

And besides, everyone has a chance to chip in by pm'ing a member of the upper-staff when they see an application go to pending.

 

No its fine I'm all for discussion/dont mind explaining the reasoning behind it.

The reason we think this is a great idea is based off of a few reasons-

The biggest reason is one that most middlemen fully understand. When we middleman, we usually get users who message us saying "hey, are you busy? Roary can't help us with this type of trade" or "roary isn't really helping us out and being a bit of an ass so we don't want to use him anymore" or even "hey our usual awesome mm roary isn't online so we were wondering if you could help us?"

This is something that I saw quite often when I used to MM more frequently and this kind of stuff actually is important when it comes to OMMs because a lot of staff members won'tsee this kind of feedback about guys who MM, however other middlemen do. So it ideally is an attempt to create something similar to the lower lounge discussion for promotions that leads to polls in USL for new staff members. This way, we get some extra discussion and feedback and users input from people who might have a better viewpoint on the way you conduct yourself as a middleman.

Also, the upper team is only commonly 6-8 people, why not toss on 5 more active opinions from people who know exactly what it means to be an Official Middleman.

I'm fully open for discussion on this, though I see nothing wrong with the idea. Conflict of interest could be used to say that lower level staff members have a bias when talking about new staff members. Its just discussion & extra input, not the real vote.

 

Also I apologize if my post is jumbled, typing from my phone as I drive..

Badass, I know.

Damn you Roary beating me to the post

 

The lower staff only started participating when the upper staff ran out of ideas.

I think it's great that you want more input but why not just go one step further and get input from the users that are actually using them? No one ever leaves negative reviews. Setup an anonymous system to allow for that.

 

Paragraph 2 sums it up entirely.....