Let normal users vote on Moderator applications prior to staff voting

Based on what SuF said, I kind of am thinking the same; hence why I'm questioning the staff feel the need to have community input.

A few reasons why I assume;

So they can claim they are taking community input without doing so.
So the blame can change onto community if promotions don't go to plan.
Just for input/ Just to keep people happy.
Because they made a bad choice in activity for a recent promotion of an ex-staff member.

Also they don't let sectionals have input atm but want community input.

I'm unsure of support or no support atm; just want more clarification from why staff feel they want our input/feedback for votes on mod apps.

 

I'll pull a SuF. Notice how he conveniently decided to ignore you once you pointed out how ridiculous what he was saying was? The staff refuses to acknowledge any fault in anything they do. It's ridiculous and like they care more about their egos than the best of the site.

 

this concept makes zero sense to me

 

No support for overall community input. If community input becomes a thing, I do not think voting should play any part; rather, the ability to comment on an app with responses only viewable to moderators + the individuals ability to comment being limited in some manner (i.e. 1,000+ posts).

I would support sectional staff being able to comment, but not vote on apps. This due to the individual then becoming part of the staff team which sectionals have to work with.

I hadn't been staff since December of 2012 and my application ended up being accepted.

Can we name names because I'm not really refer to what staff we're referring to. I myself had been sporadically active and increased my activity significantly in the month prior to promotion alongside constant lurking in off-topic before that (purely applied for off-topic).

Promotions are not always purely based on moderating ability. There are plenty of people on this site who could constantly handle reports, but have other negative elements that staff may wish to deal with.

I know I would sacrifice some efficiency of an individual if they were pleasurable to work with.

OMMs are voted on by OMMs

 

I don't think that's true but if it is that needs to change ...

 

our votes do not matter, however we also give our input and then its sent to USL

 

Yeah that's how it used to be, and how it should be.

 

Nope, possibly the worst idea that has ever been suggested in the history of Sythe.org

Community mod selection - serves no purpose, and the cons are greater than the pros

 

I can't say if I can support this or not. Unfortunately, there are a lot of pro/cons to this particular situation. There are a couple possible scenarios so we can get the community more involved;

1. Allow "veterans" (2010 and before) to have permission to view a certain section where they can help orchestrate a conversation regarding applicants. With this, you would get a majority of members who understand the moderation process and can really incorporate their knowledge into the process. This would be just conversation, not voting involved.
   • Pros - you would get a more advance knowledge of how moderators should act throughout the community, and they can share their input on the applicant.
   • Cons - you would only get a selective amount of members participating on this conversation, therefore limiting your amount of input.
2. Have threads with members moderator application posted, allowing members to freely post their decision, but have the posts moderated and hidden so only staff can view this. This would disallow folks to degrade and cause conflict with one another throughout the thread, allowing intelligent opinions only.
   • Pros - you would get input from anyone who is willing to participate in helping give opinions on applicants
   • Cons - Having applicants application public to view, may turn off new members seeing applications, and possibility of bias (even though it's just discussion prior to staff voting)
3. Allow sectionals to have input into moderation decisions, as it seems they were "left in the dark" on recent promotions. This will allow for a trusted opinion throughout the decisions, as they are valuable members and the upper staff's teammates.
   • Pros - you would get a trusted opinion towards decision making, and they can add valuable input
   • Cons - there isn't any, I don't see why this one isn't implemented yet (on the possibility of having another added)

A lot of this has been brought up due to recent promotions, and really, I agree. There needs to be some sort of requirement activity wise to reduce on the flaming and trolling (regardless if it's in the spam forum). It looks really bad having people (I can take some blame) constantly bashing and joking around on new promotions, rather than suggesting other ways that we can improve this. Obviously the moderator application process is flawed and this is a very good time to get it right. There's a lot of problems that have been going on with this site and unfortunately this is a good place to start.

 

Yeah so people have to ass kiss to the community instead of just the staff team?

I'll throw up if I see PA and IHQ have to actually be nice to me so I don't no support their staff application.

Just the thought of the mod tryhards trying to kiss my ass makes me ill frankly.

No Thanks.

No support.

 

yeah but i don't think the community input will ever have a really big influence on the USL voting, its just nice to see what the community thinks about who should be staff and who shouldn't

 

It's nice to have more of an open input rather than the usual same people thinking the same thing. Having some members with fresh minds who can bring up somethings that could be key contributing factors.

 

Nobody who says what they actually think will ever promoted, its bad enough as is that staff hold the monopoly on new staff voting.

This would just give the staff hunters & ass kissers + staff team complete control.

Frankly I'd rather have staff alone have the power to choose staff over letting the ass kissers into play.

Mod applications are going to turn into an ass kissing fest where every butt buddy and his friend comments on mod applications they don't like.

Then staff are going to vote down the controversial ones regardless, so its just going to cause more fights among the community, going to turn into a pissing contest.


Ur going to see all the power players who want staff at each others throats over whos commenting on what, Going to be terrible.

 

do you think we should at least give sectional mods rights to vote?

 

Mod applications are going to turn into an ass kissing fest where every butt buddy and his friend comments on mod applications they don't like.

Then staff are going to vote down the controversial ones regardless, so its just going to cause more fights among the community, going to turn into a pissing contest.

Ur going to see all the power players who want staff at each others throats over whos commenting on what, Going to be terrible.

^edited that in if u didn't see last comment


Regarding ur question, Considering the USL is beyond biased(staff are human) and every ass kisser and their mother sucks up to staff right before posting their mod app or during it, I don't see what adding sectionals into that mix is going to harm.

Might provide some diversity in the voting and 1 or 2 actually unbiased votes.

Then it's just the entire staff team getting blown instead of globals+, going to truly require effort to suck that much dick during a mod application process so why not?

I wouldn't mind letting sectionals vote.

 

I've wrote stuff and backspaced it a few times now. Just going to leave it as this:

- If you're able to make decisions without community input on something then community input probably won't help you anyway. In most cases it's just going to give obvious results where you already knew something would be controversial.
- Sectionals have to work with the people you promote so I don't see why they shouldn't have an input when it comes down to the final step for candidates?
- Sectionals are typically the newest staff members and likely don't have a warped view from spending so much time on the staff team. Their input should be valued for that alone if nothing else.

 

I always find it funny hearing people say "x deserves it more". If this was a sectional being promoted to global or global to admin you could make that argument because you have mod logs or mod score and experience to back up the claim. But for someone who isn't currently a moderator, activity doesn't necessarily mean they would make a good moderator.

I would suggest that the problem with the promotion that I'm sure caused all this uproar wasn't that you didn't ask what the public thought about the mod in question, rather you didn't do a good enough job to ensure that they would be active.

 

No support, this should be decided by the upper staff and the upper staff only (perhaps sectionals could be included on some polls, depending what the circumstances are or if there's a reason for it).

There's no need or point for the community to be able to see it. If there's a reason that someone shouldn't be a staff member, then that reason will definitely make itself public.

 

Democracy, I like it.

 

so my feeling after reading all of the posts in the past day is that option #1 (your old #2) would be best in this case to address my original suggestion. #2 should happen, but that's a separate thing.

do others have thoughts?