Vote To Demote Staff

[Kaska]

Not sure if this was suggested before, but if it was it should be looked into again

With the increase in corruption of staff members the community should be allowed to stand up for themselves and their peers to bring down power hungry, corrupt, and tyrannical staff members. That is why I've made the following suggestion

Members of the Sythe community should be able to create a petition to have a member of staff demoted. Obviously X amount of signs should be required and minimum requirements should be added to sign the petition (Requirement suggestion below)

• 6+Month join date
• 100+ Posts (outside of market)

(Open to more suggestions for requirements)

All petitions should have a legitimate reason as to why said staff member should be demoted, if the petition fails in the signing phase there should be a 1 month cooldown to open another petition on said staff member. If it fails in the following stage a 3 months wait for the petition to be opened again should be added.

Fairly simple, all petitions should be considered and once X amount of votes are received it would be reviewed by the owner of the site himself (or appointed staff member to do this, though the owner of the site should really be doing this, only real way to prevent corruption) and no one else to make the final judgement on whether or not they are demoted.

Some possible downsides of this are if the staff member in question sees the petition and sees that it is going to pass or might pass they could attempt to scam or do something else of that nature.

The only one real solution I can think of for something like this would be to temporarily remove their staff rank until the petition is over and they are either cleared/demoted

This is just my take on how this should be handled, if you think the general idea is good but the system has flaws I would like to see your take on how this should be implemented I just thought of all of this as I went so really open to other ideas.

If you think this is a bad idea, I'd love to know why as well.

 

No support because it would just cause more bitching, moaning, and insecure teen drama

The only system that would work and be a lot more professional and fairer would x pieces of evidence from one, or more users.

If a mod is truly corrupt, then it will be evident in their infraction reason

 

[Pain]

You'd have the community and staff at each others throats.

Every single community member would make a petition when their feelings get hurt just to spite staff.

No.

 

I support believe it or not,
I would actually like to see more community put on staff,
even though I really don't see this passing all the way through the sl

 

[Kaska]

No support because it would just cause more bitching, moaning, and insecure teen drama

Not a legitimate arguement

The only system that would work and be a lot more professional and fairer would x pieces of evidence from one, or more users.

Like I said open to ideas don't even think you fully read the post, owner of the site would have the final word, it's not like once the petition is filled and done they will be instantly demoted lol.

Also I did say there would have to be a reason in my OP for that to happen.

If a mod is truly corrupt, then it will be evident in their infraction reason

Okay? If a mod is corrupt then the vote will show that they are corrupt


You seem like a good kid, wish you actually read the whole OP before you gave this nonsensical no support.

 

Support. Some staff members are still staff because no one on the staff team dares to speak up and the owner doesn't really care unless someone speaks up. With a wider range of peers (our community) we'll be able to weed out these leeching staff members and get them demoted.

 

[Kaska]

You'd have the community and staff at each others throats.

Every single community member would make a petition when their feelings get hurt just to spite staff.

No.

Yes that is right, you would have the community at the throats of power hungry abusive staff, just this rule being in effect itself would also make staff stop and think before bending the rules for their friends for example.

 

[b1b]

You'd have the community and staff at each others throats.

Every single community member would make a petition when their feelings get hurt just to spite staff.

No.

It's ironic when people like this post things like this because they have their own personal army among the staff and right now, the only people that can get them (the people on the mod team that have a boner for bus369/divine) removed from power are themselves and Sythe. You're scared and can't come up with a rational argument supporting yourself because you argue based on emotions.

I support it. There's absolutely nothing wrong with a veto system.

 

I don't see anything wrong with the idea, the only way people would get demoted is if a vast majority of members don't see them as staff, in which case why would they be staff anyway?

 

[Sunny Cx]

most likely wont happen but i like the idea n support it

corrupt n shit mods need to go asap !!!!

 

[mumble]

I don't support this.

If a group of people really didn't like one person they could just witchhunt to get the person demoted. It's difficult to become a staff member and extremely easy to lose it. If you really don't like a staff member leave it on their feedback thread, message a higher staff member about it. If it's abusive then make it known far and wide. Don't get me wrong, staff members abusing shouldn't be staff members.

However, a more active staff member is more likely to give out infractions for breaking the rules, this would decentivize staff members to enforce the rules over fear of a thread getting started to demote them.

I don't think this would add anything positive to the Sythe community, so that's why I don't support it.

 

[Kaska]

I don't support this.
If a group of people really didn't like one person they could just witchhunt to get the person demoted. It's difficult to become a staff member and extremely easy to lose it.

Again, very disappointed that people are not completely reading this post before giving their opinions. The final word would be from the owner of the site himself. Furthermore, if a small select group of people do not like a staff member for whatever reason they would still need a legitimate reason to open the petition. You can't just say "Oh, I was infracted i'm going to open a petition to get them demoted"

if the president makes one small mistake is he taken out of office? No.

If you really don't like a staff member leave it on their feedback thread, message a higher staff member about it.

You, I, and everyone else knows feedback threads are a complete joke.

If it's abusive then make it known far and wide. Don't get me wrong, staff members abusing shouldn't be staff members.

Would this not be a way to make it known and get the community speaking on a subject?

However, a more active staff member is more likely to give out infractions for breaking the rules, this would decentivize staff members to enforce the rules over fear of a thread getting started to demote them.

Your only slightly legitimate argument to this point, but it also provides benefits for everyone really. Currently infractions are handed out willy nilly by some staff members. If this truly would be an issue, it would just make them take more time to think before handing out an infraction.

 

Huge support for this kaska think your reasoning for the suggestion is fair and considerate. The staff bubble needs to burst, their behaviour is upsetting and is causing members to leave.

 

I like the idea of this, but I don't not support it nor support it. I think if something like this were to be set in place I think it should be done very carefully and make sure everything is covered before it's something that people can do.

 

I'd support this. Richard has stated before, in times when tensions between the community and staff had been high, that he thought the staff needed slimming down. I've always been in favor of a more transparent process for staff promotions/demotions. Seems that its just a continuous cycle of drama and incompetence with the occasional intervention by Richard to settle things down. Maybe a voting system could provide some sort of checks and balances

 

[Kaska]

I like the idea of this, but I don't not support it nor support it. I think if something like this were to be set in place I think it should be done very carefully and make sure everything is covered before it's something that people can do.

I agree i didn't go into complete detail as to how this should work definitely would need more fleshing out.

 

[mumble]

Again, very disappointed that people are not completely reading this post before giving their opinions. The final word would be from the owner of the site himself. Furthermore, if a small select group of people do not like a staff member for whatever reason they would still need a legitimate reason to open the petition. You can't just say "Oh, I was infracted i'm going to open a petition to get them demoted"

if the president makes one small mistake is he taken out of office? No.




You, I, and everyone else knows feedback threads are a complete joke.


Would this not be a way to make it known and get the community speaking on a subject?


Your only slightly legitimate argument to this point, but it also provides benefits for everyone really. Currently infractions are handed out willy nilly by some staff members. If this truly would be an issue, it would just make them take more time to think before handing out an infraction.

The only issue I really have with staff is some staff waiting till the last day of the month to hand out infractions. People can and do get hit with multiple in a day and subsequently get temp banned.

People don't learn from their mistakes if they immediately get temp banned for repeating the same thing without receiving an infraction and being able to ask about it in the first place. Dishing out multiple infractions to the same person at once for the same thing makes the entire infractions system worthless. As far as I'm aware, it's supposed to help users learn the rules without being banned for making a small mistake.

If you don't like the way feedback threads are used make a suggestion for it. Hence the suggestion section.

If a staff member is truly out of line or acting poorly make a thread for it in the respective section and then if the community is in agreement about it rich will have no choice but to have a response for it. But making a specific section for it will only lead to petty threads about it more often.

More often than not staff that are "power hungry, corrupt, and tyrannical" are taken care of before any large problems arise.

 

[Veni]

As you've said some fine tuning needs to be done, but my only concern would be that these petitions would be public and could (falsely) influence others.

However, the community should be able to have a voice with these matters too. I do support the general idea, just not 100%.

 

[Lorenzo]

Why not just pm Richard reasoning with legit facts of why you don't think someone should be in that position instead of making it into a site drama? @Kaska

 

[Kaska]

The only issue I really have with staff is some staff waiting till the last day of the month to hand out infractions. People can and do get hit with multiple in a day and subsequently get temp banned.

People don't learn from their mistakes if they immediately get temp banned for repeating the same thing without receiving an infraction and being able to ask about it in the first place. Dishing out multiple infractions to the same person at once for the same thing makes the entire infractions system worthless. As far as I'm aware, it's supposed to help users learn the rules without being banned for making a small mistake.

Not sure what you're arguing here.

If you don't like the way feedback threads are used make a suggestion for it. Hence the suggestion section.

Why do you think I made this suggestion?

If a staff member is truly out of line or acting poorly make a thread for it in the respective section and then if the community is in agreement about it rich will have no choice but to have a response for it. But making a specific section for it will only lead to petty threads about it more often.

So you are just explaining my suggestion... but it shouldn't have its own section...?

More often than not staff that are "power hungry, corrupt, and tyrannical" are taken care of before any large problems arise.

More often than not huh