Giving us normal users more power

You're not disputing my claims that this idea would encourage groupthink?

Basically the idea is unrealistic. In the staff lounge, we're trying to make decisions based on evidence, not user based thoughts. The users in the spam forum all may love their former spamfags, but this doesn't excuse their actions. If anyone has information/evidence, we are always open to accept it via PM.

Yes, you're right that staff say things in the lounge they'd like kept private. The reason being they don't want to have to worry about the social consequences, the drama, and the loss of efriends. We want to make decisions(and staff do) without personal influence. Actually often times, staff abstain from voting if they are friends with the person in question.

 

So basically what I gather is that your saying that the staff are a bunch of two-faced rats?

 

Wanting to keep a decision or opinion on a matter private doesn't make them "a two-faced rat". You're implying that staff are lobbying for one position publicly while voting differently- which isn't true. Let's say that some popular and adored member of the community is banned. Everyone loves him, he's a popular and easy trader, great personality, whatever. Specific staff members don't want to be, and don't deserve to be, in the gun sights of the community for banning someone the community loves.

Once again you're avoiding answering my question...

 

You know you're a damn two faced rat. I meanlolwut?
Scammers need to be banned no matter who they are.


Revenge banning is really lame, and public sentiment can be a bitch to work against. The mods do their best, stop attacking them.

 

I have a question myself. Why can't a staff member be strong enough to defend what he believes is right. Finn is an example of someone who does this, and while he's hated by a minority, the majority respect him and his decision.

 

I wouldn't mind all of my personal staff lounge posts to be made public. Unfortunately this isn't possible as people wouldn't be able to understand the context of my posts without releasing others. I firmly respect the right to privacy other staff members exercise.

Now you're not making much sense. Staff do defend what they personally believe is right. That's the whole point of the staff lounge- let us discuss what we believe is right. I can attest that Finn does defend what he believes wholeheartedly. Though this does not excuse a person of crimes they have committed. When presented with evidence, staff have the ability to overcome personal feelings for the good of the community. If they feel as if they're unable to overcome the feelings, they abstain from voting.

Your continued refusal to address my questions leads me to assume you're accepting the claims. I've been fair and given you time and the ability to respond publicly.

 

I fully support, I hate when mods say it doesn't matter, your opinion doesn't count its my decision, we support this ad through clicks dammnit!!

You can all find holes in his plan but just consider the basic idea not all the specifics, the staff has many intelligent people that could easily implement this. It's not a bad idea at all.

 

I've given you 20 minutes to reply without any response. Again I think I've been fair to you in this debate. You're free to PM me(as is anyone else) if you disagree as long as you support your comments.

Regardless the idea, as stated by the OP, basically making the staff lounge public won't happen. As Sythe said, you are not automatically entitled to an explanation of everything the sythe.org staff do. And if you believe that you are, you can kindly leave.

Staff members deserve a certain level of privacy. I'll leave this open for a bit longer to gather public opinions.

 

I don't know if this would be good. We can appeal bans, and can give feedback.

 

no support, the reason why u donate/try to become omm/mod or whatever is because you got more powers than. so there are more people who need to do their best for the site and than get these powers.

 

It's just an idea. Finn said he'd support something close to this concept.

 

I'd support something similar but I do not agree on allowing users to be able to appeal bans when they don't think somones being treated farely. Only because somone could A. pay off a bunch of people to say they didn't do it. or B. could do something redic.

 

I'll admit when I made this suggestion I knew it would be denied. I just hoped others had a better, more plausable idea.