OMM System

[Stickly]

This is sort of a continuation from the problem SuF was addressing, with other factors being addressed.

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.

If this is the case, the community should be voting, thus it won't be as bias with staff and OMMs voting. This bring up the popularity contest though, but you will actually get real feedback and what the community, in which this rank/title/position affects, thinks.

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.

As I stated above, the community would be more heads, and you can really skip to see what negative feedback there is. (As that is what really matters)

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.

Them being able to provide their two cents is to change the upper-staffs minds, or make them more set in stone on the idea. Also if they are using their middle-manning as a service, this will add competition and that's where bias will also come in.

To put it simply, you are giving them power, even without giving them a "real vote".

Also, to the staff;

I'm fully open for discussion on this

Don't close it, have a real discussion, if someone asks something, explain it. Go into detail.

I'll address more into OP soon enough.

 

It will be bias either way...

 

[Zeus22]

This is fucking pointless. The system is already fine as it is.

 

[Stickly]

It will be bias either way...

It's bias no matter how they do it, yeah. But there's better ways, and to use other OMMs as a part of it is ridiculous.

This is fucking pointless. The system is already fine as it is.

Adding OMM's into the picking process is fine? Oh, alright. I didn't seem to get that.

 

[Sephiroth]

I agree that no OMM should have an opinion that weighs in on the decision. THeres more to giving OMM to someone though than this, but I believe that if the Admins/Mods are going to be left to decide, that another OMM should NOT have their opinion counted towards swaying a Mod/Admin.

 

It's bias no matter how they do it, yeah. But there's better ways, and to use other OMMs as a part of it is ridiculous.



Adding OMM's into the picking process is fine? Oh, alright. I didn't seem to get that.

By making it a popularity contest?

 

[Sephiroth]

This is fucking pointless. The system is already fine as it is.

ALso, sorry to double post, but Zeus there is no need for profanity in this. The OMM"s should NOT have a voice in who else joins their ranks. THAT is what makes the system biased

 

ALso, sorry to double post, but Zeus there is no need for profanity in this. The OMM"s should NOT have a voice in who else joins their ranks. THAT is what makes the system biased

Every structural system in this damn world is bias. Get with the program.

 

[Stickly]

By making it a popularity contest?

I'm not for the community voting, but it's still a better choice than using OMMs.
Also, feedback would be anonymous, and really, negative feedback is what they're looking for/at. So popularity contest wouldn't be as bad as you'd think.

 

[Sephiroth]

Every structural system in this damn world is bias. Get with the program.

I am aware of that. but we're not talking about every other "structural system". To make the OMM Voting system less biased the OMM's should be left out

 

[Superfluous]

As I understand it, the point of staff getting the current OMMs' opinions was to provide them, staff, with better information with which to decide on new OMM applicants. I don't think this is effective though; personally, I've traded with only two OMMs before and probably 125 other Sythe users. I think these people should have a voice. However, I don't think that other OMMs who I've never traded with should have a voice while no one else does; I don't see how they're any more educated about the decision than the rest of staff who originally sought their advice in the first place.

My suggestion is to create a public feedback thread where messages are hidden upon posting. They can be reviewed by those who make the decision, but it should be the case that anyone who has a legitimate opinion on the person in question has a place to voice that opinion. I'm not saying there should be a vote, but if you're looking to get the opinions of people actually dealing with the person in question, a public (albeit anonymous and hidden) space is a better option than restricting the decision to people who are uneducated about the decision they're influencing.

And as for popularity contests/bias issues: I'd rather they be public popularity contests than private ones where several of the people with a voice on the matter are uneducated about it. Everyone's biased towards some opinion, but if the rank is in place to benefit the community, you should ask the community's opinion on people being considered for said rank. Everyone should have easy access to a place to voice their opinions (I get the idea that "anyone can pm admins with opinions on people being considered for promotions," but really, does anyone do this?)

I don't see the harm in undertaking this process with the full community's opinion.

---

I agree that no OMM should have an opinion that weighs in on the decision. THeres more to giving OMM to someone though than this, but I believe that if the Admins/Mods are going to be left to decide, that another OMM should NOT have their opinion counted towards swaying a Mod/Admin.

I actually disagree with this. I'm fine with anyone who has dealt with the new applicant voicing their opinion. I'm just against letting people who haven't voice theirs while no one else has a chance to do so.

 

I'm not for the community voting, but it's still a better choice than using OMMs.
Also, feedback would be anonymous, and really, negative feedback is what they're looking for/at. So popularity contest wouldn't be as bad as you'd think.

Nitpicking for faults isn't hard, I could do that with anyone. Anonymous feedback is a bad idea. In this world of structural pattern, the higher ups/ranks will have a say over anyone else beneath them. Sythe should follow suit. What is the problem with the system anyways? It should not be easy to get OMM, neither is it necessary for more to be given.

Everyone needs to get a grip

 

[Sephiroth]

Nitpicking for faults isn't hard, I could do that with anyone. Anonymous feedback is a bad idea. In this world of structural pattern, the higher ups/ranks will have a say over anyone else beneath them. Sythe should follow suit. What is the problem with the system anyways? It should not be easy to get OMM, neither is it necessary for more to be given.

Everyone needs to get a grip

Anonymous feedback would not affect you, so why do you care?? It is a better option than asking the OMM's who naturally would not want any more competition. Thats how I see it.

 

[Stickly]

Nitpicking for faults isn't hard, I could do that with anyone. Anonymous feedback is a bad idea. In this world of structural pattern, the higher ups/ranks will have a say over anyone else beneath them. Sythe should follow suit. What is the problem with the system anyways? It should not be easy to get OMM, neither is it necessary for more to be given.

Everyone needs to get a grip

You don't seem to get what I'm saying here.

The problem with the system is that they're letting OMMs throw in their opinions.

I agree it should not be easy to get OMM, though it doesn't concern me much. Having competitors throw in on your chance though, is ridiculous. I think it should have stayed just higher staff picking. Their judgement is what matters. Having some OMM just say shit in hopes there isn't more competition for them is the problem. I think you should be able to get what I'm getting at.

Edit: Super also makes a good point.

 

If you need to be anonymous to give feedback, you shouldn't be giving feedback at all. It's important for the applicant to know how others feel, this will give them a better chance at improving those faults if it's specifically aimed at someone(s). Critical feedback doesn't need to be given behind a cloak, man up.

 

[Superfluous]

I don't think competition is a big deal in this scenario; OMMing isn't a highly lucrative and competitive business. I'm just saying that all people should have a place to easily voice their opinions.

And yeah, I don't really care about the feedback being anonymous. That's not the big issue here.

 

[Stickly]

If you need to be anonymous to give feedback, you shouldn't be giving feedback at all. It's important for the applicant to know how others feel, this will give them a better chance at improving those faults if it's specifically aimed at someone(s). Critical feedback doesn't need to be given behind a cloak, man up.

Anon feedback is just so people will man the fuck up. I agree people should just man the fuck up, either way.

 

Why was this brought up in the first place (Before suf)? I don't really see an issue with the denied applications vs approved ones.

 

[Sephiroth]

its not completely ANON feedback. vbulletin can make it where you caqn post in the forum and certain user groups can see what you said, but it can block regular users from seeing the posts.

SO that way only Admins/Mods can see who posted what, etc.

 

[Stickly]

Why was this brought up in the first place (Before suf)? I don't really see an issue with the denied applications vs approved ones.

I'm not sure, I wasn't paying attention previous of the "Whyyyyy.." thread. I saw that they changed it as such though, and it's just stupid.