Pardons

[SuF]

OP:

There are like no staff anymore but they still need 5 supports. That means they are now harder to get to the voting (aka important) round. Maybe reduce supports to 3 or 4?

From what I've noticed, Pardons have been posted on generally more than they have before.

Of all the pardons I've seen, they're denied due to a lot of no supports, or a single no support, either way the chances they were going to get pardoned were slim to none.

Also, all the ones that usually garner supports, get through till 5 supports or get denied because they read a majority of no supports.

I've seen maybe one pardon that I can remember get denied with only 4 supports, and I left it with a bump for an extra day or two for any remaining staff who didn't see it before it was denied.

You could always just change it so that you need at least one no support or something like that. I think that has been discussed before and it isn't the best idea but I think that with the severe lack of staff members at the moment, and absolutely no insentive to post on pardons something has to be done. I've never cared how many pardons get past the first stage because who cares? It just gives the globals something to do.

Denied. No need for change, the system works just fine.

Did you forget you aren't an admin?

 

[Quatakai]

OP:

There are like no staff anymore but they still need 5 supports. That means they are now harder to get to the voting (aka important) round. Maybe reduce supports to 3 or 4?



You could always just change it so that you need at least one no support or something like that. I think that has been discussed before and it isn't the best idea but I think that with the severe lack of staff members at the moment, and absolutely no insentive to post on pardons something has to be done. I've never cared how many pardons get past the first stage because who cares? It just gives the globals something to do.



Did you forget you aren't an admin?

@What I bolded. I've always been a firm believer in this as well, does it really matter if we get a few more pardons going into the USL? I'd support a reduced amount of supports in the first stage of voting to allow more people to rejoin this community. I can't speak for everyone, but throughout my two tenures on staff there would be times I would neglect the dispute forum, opting to solely handle spam/scam reports. In doing this, perhaps there were people who missed out on rejoining sythe.org in what would have been a more appropriate ban length (ie, 6 months as opposed to 12, 18, and so on)

 

[SuF]

@What I bolded. I've always been a firm believer in this as well, does it really matter if we get a few more pardons going into the USL? I'd support a reduced amount of supports in the first stage of voting to allow more people to rejoin this community. I can't speak for everyone, but throughout my two tenures on staff there would be times I would neglect the dispute forum, opting to solely handle spam/scam reports. In doing this, perhaps there were people who missed out on rejoining sythe.org in what would have been a more appropriate ban length (ie, 6 months as opposed to 12, 18, and so on)

I would neglect the shit out of it because I would forget about it and wouldn't have time to read through a shit ton of pardons. I'd try to read through the pardons in the USL though. Still didn't always. There isn't any incentive to actually do it anymore but that's a whole other issue entirely.

But the actual power comes from the globals / admins. The first round is really just to weed out the really bad ones.

 

[Quatakai]

I would neglect the shit out of it because I would forget about it and wouldn't have time to read through a shit ton of pardons. I'd try to read through the pardons in the USL though. Still didn't always. There isn't any incentive to actually do it anymore but that's a whole other issue entirely.

But the actual power comes from the globals / admins. The first round is really just to weed out the really bad ones.

Agreed 100x times over, the only real incentive to post on disputes is free post count.

I'd support any rule amendment that would reduce the amount of supports in the first round.

 

[SuF]

Agreed 100x times over, the only real incentive to post on disputes is free post count.

I'd support any rule amendment that would reduce the amount of supports in the first round.

You still get post count from the dispute forum? Lol.

The only incentive is to wait for the pardons to be over a week old so you can lock them and get that precious mod log.

 

[SuF]

Bump.

 

I think shifting it down to 4 supports is reasonable.

 

[SuF]

I think shifting it down to 4 supports is reasonable.

Why don't we solve the issue for good and tie the number of supports to the number of mods? If there are less than x number of globals and sectionals, the amount of supports needed drops, etc.

It does not have to be exact but more of just written down somewhere and when someone notices it gets changed. Just so that we don't have to do this over again if the number of mods increases or what.

 

[FireZ]

Anyone who even comes close to deserving a 2nd look gets 5 supports real fast as they always have. Some people just don't seem to get that 97% deserve to be denied anyways.

More people have been pardoned lately then usual (3 months roughly) anyways so don't fix what isn't broke.

 

[SuF]

Anyone who even comes close to deserving a 2nd look gets 5 supports real fast as they always have. Some people just don't seem to get that 97% deserve to be denied anyways.

More people have been pardoned lately then usual (3 months roughly) anyways so don't fix what isn't broke.

Perhaps that's just because more people have been banned for bullshit recently. Plenty of people are missed since they are no bodies that hardly did anything wrong. These people are going to fall through much easier with less mods.

 

[SuF]

http://www.sythe.org/dispute-forum-...a2013-requesting-pardon-late-transaction.html

This is exactly what I am talking about.

 

[Dave]

I too was extremely annoyed about the pardon above, I really wanted to see that one go to voting and that's precisely why I left it open and didn't close it after 7 days. I don't know if the system needs a full on change though, maybe we could make this a momentary thing until there's more staff?

Edit: Although I REALLY don't think this is necessary. However if you're super adamant about it then I'll say lower it to four until the next round of promotions.

 

[Josh0is0here]

I too was extremely annoyed about the pardon above, I really wanted to see that one go to voting and that's precisely why I left it open and didn't close it after 7 days. I don't know if the system needs a full on change though, maybe we could make this a momentary thing until there's more staff?

Edit: Although I REALLY don't think this is necessary. However if you're super adamant about it then I'll say lower it to four until the next round of promotions.

I have been trying to post in all pardon requests, but someone times I miss some. I agree that the user above would have my support but if staff really feel like a user should be unbanned they can remind the other staff to "respond" in the thread. Just my opinion on way I think the current set up is fine.

 

http://www.sythe.org/dispute-forum-...a2013-requesting-pardon-late-transaction.html

This is exactly what I am talking about.

Rare instances like this will happen regardless of number.

 

[SuF]

Rare instances like this will happen regardless of number.

It's hardly rare and lower numbers will make them more rare. That's just basic math.

 

An algorithm would complicate things a bit, but really the only ones that need to understand the current number would be the staff. Sure, if someone can think of a good way to do it I'd be fine with that. People shouldn't miss out on the chance to be pardoned just because there are less staff than usual.

 

[SuF]

An algorithm would complicate things a bit, but really the only ones that need to understand the current number would be the staff. Sure, if someone can think of a good way to do it I'd be fine with that. People shouldn't miss out on the chance to be pardoned just because there are less staff than usual.

It's not even an algorithm. Its just a list so it can change without a big fuss.

 

[S]

Sounds like a sound idea until more Staff are promoted. I support.

 

[Dave]

In light of recent promos, this isn't really necessary. At least I don't think so. If you still see it as a remaining issue, please let me know and I'll make a topic in the SL about a possible change.