Let normal users vote on Moderator applications prior to staff voting

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

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.

 

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

 

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.

 

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.

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?

 

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

 

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 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.

 

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

 

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.

 

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.

And exactly this.

 

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

 

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.

 

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.

 

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.