Staff election? (Community)

[Ƥoison]

GrƷƷd just made a really good point, he said this.

Lol yeah. He is extremely active and definitely deserves it. I would've recommended him and put in a good word for him if I was still a moderator.

He is talking about the user: Cannibal

Wouldn't it be quite cool if we chose the elections? As some moderator(s) say, if you want someone referred as a moderator, or take it into consideration, to private message them, it really doesn't work..

As the award posts, wouldn't it be quite nice for a nice touch to the site by doing something like this?

User Profile:
Reason:
Rate: /10

Just a little rough thing, so the rate could be out of the community, it could be public and in a open post, in my opinion, it'd work out unless people were paying in some sort of way for getting refer's.

 

[Sanctuary]

Umm, if Moderators were chosen through elections, we would probably have the shittiest moderators.
The reason why I think that is because anyone can make friends on FK, and if Mods were chosen through elections, you could just get your friends to vote for you and etc., etc.
People would get Mod because they're popular, not because they deserve it.

On a side-note, I honestly like and respect Cannibal.

 

[Greed]

This is a decent idea but Philly chooses all the staff and mods.

 

[People]

Only philly can choose mods and he wont ever looks at this thread..

 

[Justice]

In my opinion it would be best if Philly picked as he would know what's best for the forum.
And like Sanctuary said, people would most likely get Moderator because their popular.

 

[ginga]

I'm not sure, there would be too much discussion about moderators and most of the users would be trying for the election if you will in everything they do. I like how they are picked on the down low.

 

[Toker]

Having a democracy do the elections for moderators would be nice (for the members whom are getting elected), but it's basically a popularity contest. As I brought up when suggesting member of the month - when voting or nominating, you're essentially posting who you think does the most for the site, most posts, and most reputable. Now, ideally, when you're trying to elect new moderators, you want to have an exceeding "overall score". What I mean by overall score, is that you want them to have a decent amount of knowledge, posts, vouches/reputation, you want them to be liked by the community, and finally, you want them to be able to abide from the rules.

Now, generally speaking from past experience, a lot of reputation is built on trolling and spamming, rather than being able to follow the rules, and such.

I don't know if this is making much sense to some of you, but my initial reason why I wouldn't support this is because if there was a vote, we could be letting someone who isn't fit become a moderator. Letting the current staff choose who they think is fit for the position is better because they're experienced in the role.

Plausible exceptions: I think incorporating ex-staff's vote into who could become moderator is important and could become ideal because they're also experienced (using ex-staff loosely, I mean those who resigned rather than were demoted (if applicable)). That's just what I think could/should happen, if anything.

 

[Greed]

I agree with the users above that it would be a popularity contest which is why in this thread I argued that the staff members should vote. http://www.forumkorner.org/thread-70725.html

 

[Cann!bal]

I do like the idea of a democratic vote, but it would be better if we just let Philly decide for now.

 

[Mxlitary]

Honestly, I think this is a bad idea. Members shouldn't be able to vote for users because of a few simple reasons. One, it would end up being a simple popularity contest. The members with the most rep will be elected even though they may have 10+ warnings and multiple bans. That leads me to my second point. Only the current staff can know how much a member contributes to the site from a moderation perspective. They are the ones that sticky their topics, go through their warnings, and they know for sure if the user has been banned or has ever had a scam report on them. A member may not pay attention like that, and they don't have the ability to check that stuff in a second. The staff know what truly goes one with a member, therefore members can't vote with all the knowledge on a user.

 

[Greed]

Honestly, I think this is a bad idea. Members shouldn't be able to vote for users because of a few simple reasons. One, it would end up being a simple popularity contest. The members with the most rep will be elected even though they may have 10+ warnings and multiple bans. That leads me to my second point. Only the current staff can know how much a member contributes to the site from a moderation perspective. They are the ones that sticky their topics, go through their warnings, and they know for sure if the user has been banned or has ever had a scam report on them. A member may not pay attention like that, and they don't have the ability to check that stuff in a second. The staff know what truly goes one with a member, therefore members can't vote with all the knowledge on a user.

Great reason that I 100% agree with! And also why I believe that the staff members should vote on who becomes the next moderator/staff member.

 

[Mxlitary]

Great reason that I 100% agree with! And also why I believe that the staff members should vote on who becomes the next moderator/staff member.

Yeah, if anyone should vote, it should be the staff.

 

[Paranormal]

Yeah, if anyone should vote, it should be the staff.

Yea or at least vote for a member to be moderator for the least bit.

Good idea.

 

[Shadow]

This is a bad idea because then users will bribe other users to help get staff. Staff is not a easy thing to handle, 99% of the people who would think it's a easy job wouldn't know how to work the mod CP let alone properly move threads. All because you can be voted on doesn't mean you should be staff. This just makes it a popularity contest. If anyone should be voting on anyone, it should be what Gr33d said in his original thread... Staff should vote on who becomes staff.

 

[Ƥoison]

This is a bad idea because then users will bribe other users to help get staff. Staff is not a easy thing to handle, 99% of the people who would think it's a easy job wouldn't know how to work the mod CP let alone properly move threads. All because you can be voted on doesn't mean you should be staff. This just makes it a popularity contest. If anyone should be voting on anyone, it should be what Gr33d said in his original thread... Staff should vote on who becomes staff.

Yeah, I just over-came that, it'd be quite a bad idea, such as bribing as you mentioned, it wouldn't work out!.

 

[Shadow]

Yeah, I just over-came that, it'd be quite a bad idea, such as bribing as you mentioned, it wouldn't work out!.

"OH D00D NOMINAT3 M3 S0 I C4N G3T ST4FF, I'LL L1K3 G1VE Y0U A 1600 MSP CODE IF YOU D0!". It just wouldn't work. There are many deserving members who are applicable for staff. They will just have to wait until it's their time. Only time will tell when staff will no longer need to be picked.

 

[Ƥoison]

"OH D00D NOMINAT3 M3 S0 I C4N G3T ST4FF, I'LL L1K3 G1VE Y0U A 1600 MSP CODE IF YOU D0!". It just wouldn't work. There are many deserving members who are applicable for staff. They will just have to wait until it's their time. Only time will tell when staff will no longer need to be picked.

Yeah, that's true; most people agreed on my time zone thread as well, Jimmy is an amazing moderator, his time zone is located in India, and he cover(s) for people when they're not about, when Jimmy isn't about I heard Ocean is about, I respect every and each moderator.

As for election(s) or whatever, it wouldn't depend on rep, but decency, imagine someone like Kev getting promoted? That would be plain havoc, the admin's, etc choose it wisely, someone they trust and someone which has been the community for a long ass time, respect.

 

[Aviate]

Nope because they can be HQ as hell to someone but yet have a corrupt side to them.

 

[Shadow]

Yeah, that's true; most people agreed on my time zone thread as well, Jimmy is an amazing moderator, his time zone is located in India, and he cover(s) for people when they're not about, when Jimmy isn't about I heard Ocean is about, I respect every and each moderator.

As for election(s) or whatever, it wouldn't depend on rep, but decency, imagine someone like Kev getting promoted? That would be plain havoc, the admin's, etc choose it wisely, someone they trust and someone which has been the community for a long ass time, respect.

It wouldn't be havoc for kev, it would be for his haters. There is nothing wrong with Kev once you get to know him. He just dislikes LQ people and points them out, hands them a red pixel. That's why people dislike him. They can't handle neg rep.

 

[Ƥoison]

It wouldn't be havoc for kev, it would be for his haters. There is nothing wrong with Kev once you get to know him. He just dislikes LQ people and points them out, hands them a red pixel. That's why people dislike him. They can't handle neg rep.

Yeah, that's true.

Kev got me banned on my main account (Murder) and shortly after, I reacted and threatened him stupidly, ever since then his had a eye look-out for me.

I respect him, he has two opinions, and old one could be chosen, his a nice guy and keeps the site clean, respect for him if he can see this.