zeseryu
Veteran Member
Admin Officer
ops rights activist
Posts: 1,181
|
Post by zeseryu on Jun 29, 2020 23:53:55 GMT
There's a glaring problem in the way we handle senior voting. Currently each senior voting applicant gets 3-8 votes on the respective person, to me, this is an issue. We have over 30+ seniors right now, and to get not even 20% participation is really bad.
Here is my thoughts on a couple solutions.
1. Remove Senior voting all together
Why do we need Senior voting? For the sake of tradition? To me it seems like a really archaic policy & keeps the senior admin rank a "gentleman's" club.
2. Force Seniors to vote during Senior voting
Of course, the Senior could always reply neutral as they have no opinions on the applicant, but even that gives more information than simply not posting at all. If seniors were REQUIRED to vote, we would move back into Senior rounds that would happen every 3 months, like our executive approval polls. Moving back into rounds makes it a little harder to achieve senior, and gives 3+ months notice to our Seniors ask they would always know when senior voting occurs.
I would love any input or discussion, but its clear Senior voting can not stay the same.
|
|
|
|
Post by Polaris Seltzeris on Jun 29, 2020 23:58:17 GMT
I feel like senior admin is hardly a position that needs to exist anymore, admins don't get suspended anymore by senior admins because senior admins simply don't manage admins anymore, and if we remove senior voting and remove the "gentleman's club" then there's just no reason to keep the rank in existence. I've always thought that this server should go in a direction where we just have a simple moderator/admin rank which has access to telnet, console, and all that but we elect the admin officer/Internal Affairs people that keep the protocols in place as we already do, we just don't need the "3 ranks" hierarchy in place anymore especially since we've already gotten rid of Telnet Clan, charter/emeritus admin, and are moving towards making senior admin more unimportant.
|
|
fionn
Club 4000 Member
Admin Officer
elmon sucks
Posts: 6,157
| Likes: 4,775
|
Post by fionn on Jun 29, 2020 23:59:31 GMT
vouch for no. 2
i see senior voting to be a way of seniors giving a final input. it's the highest traditionally obtainable rank and should have some extra thought put into it. if we were to go with number one, it'd essentially be the same as telnet voting but with a 5 percent threshold increase
|
|
zeseryu
Veteran Member
Admin Officer
ops rights activist
Posts: 1,181
|
Post by zeseryu on Jun 30, 2020 0:02:57 GMT
I feel like senior admin is hardly a position that needs to exist anymore, admins don't get suspended anymore by senior admins because senior admins simply don't manage admins anymore, and if we remove senior voting and remove the "gentleman's club" then there's just no reason to keep the rank in existence. I've always thought that this server should go in a direction where we just have a simple moderator/admin rank which has access to telnet, console, and all that but we elect the admin officer/Internal Affairs people that keep the protocols in place as we already do, we just don't need the "3 ranks" hierarchy in place anymore especially since we've already gotten rid of Telnet Clan, charter/emeritus admin, and are moving towards making senior admin more unimportant. I've always thought we should have just [Mod] and [Admin] Mod would get the ability to smite, mute, tempban Admins would get AMP / dayban I think that's just easier and simpler, but it would be a tremendous change and it would not be supported at all. I think its set in our "roots" to have the hierarchy system, as much as i disagree with it, i do not believe we'll ever have enough support to change it. |
|
|
|
Post by Polaris Seltzeris on Jun 30, 2020 0:10:16 GMT
I feel like senior admin is hardly a position that needs to exist anymore, admins don't get suspended anymore by senior admins because senior admins simply don't manage admins anymore, and if we remove senior voting and remove the "gentleman's club" then there's just no reason to keep the rank in existence. I've always thought that this server should go in a direction where we just have a simple moderator/admin rank which has access to telnet, console, and all that but we elect the admin officer/Internal Affairs people that keep the protocols in place as we already do, we just don't need the "3 ranks" hierarchy in place anymore especially since we've already gotten rid of Telnet Clan, charter/emeritus admin, and are moving towards making senior admin more unimportant. I've always thought we should have just [Mod] and [Admin] Mod would get the ability to smite, mute, tempban Admins would get AMP / dayban I think that's just easier and simpler, but it would be a tremendous change and it would not be supported at all. I think its set in our "roots" to have the hierarchy system, as much as i disagree with it, i do not believe we'll ever have enough support to change it. We could start off by removing senior voting and the suspension process for seniors, then remove telnet by just giving that power to regular super admins, and move on from there. It would have to be an incremental process but one that's beneficial in the long run. |
|
zeseryu
Veteran Member
Admin Officer
ops rights activist
Posts: 1,181
|
Post by zeseryu on Jun 30, 2020 0:14:07 GMT
I've always thought we should have just [Mod] and [Admin] Mod would get the ability to smite, mute, tempban Admins would get AMP / dayban I think that's just easier and simpler, but it would be a tremendous change and it would not be supported at all. I think its set in our "roots" to have the hierarchy system, as much as i disagree with it, i do not believe we'll ever have enough support to change it. We could start off by removing senior voting and the suspension process for seniors, then remove telnet by just giving that power to regular super admins, and move on from there. It would have to be an incremental process but one that's beneficial in the long run. That would be another poll we'd have to post (: |
|
|
|
Post by DragonSlayer2189 on Jun 30, 2020 0:21:05 GMT
i may not be a senior however I feel as if either of these works. however, number 1 is prob the best option, I have never ever seen a reason for senior voting to exist, as the voting has always been done through the applications themselves, and it doesn't make sense to have 2 sets of voting
|
|
tozzit
Veteran Member
Posts: 2,329
| Likes: 1,709
|
Post by tozzit on Jun 30, 2020 13:53:26 GMT
fuck seniors me and my homies hate seniors
vote for me in 2024 if you also are seniorphobic
|
|
Gommeh
Veteran Member
dammit ryan and rylie
Posts: 2,744
| Likes: 778
|
Post by Gommeh on Jun 30, 2020 14:05:24 GMT
Honestly I vouch for #2. However, in order to ensure that the voting process is also more fair to the applicant I think we also need to find a way to anonymously tell the applicant the reasons why people are vouching or objecting in case a senior admin gives a reason the applicant believes to be invalid or unreasonable. Either that, or we should abolish voting altogether; if we don't do what I previously suggested then and a senior wants to vote on the applicant, then they should do it on the original app and put it up for debate.
|
|
Wild1145
Club 4000 Member
Inactive Player & Inactive Senior Admin
Posts: 10,414
| Likes: 9,680
|
Post by Wild1145 on Jun 30, 2020 16:09:41 GMT
1. Remove Senior voting all together Why do we need Senior voting? For the sake of tradition? To me it seems like a really archaic policy & keeps the senior admin rank a "gentleman's" club. I'm not really sure what value that adds, I think historically it was a way to allow senior admins a 'Private Vote' as it were, but would generally be weighed against the applications. I don't see a problem with having a way to express a vote / opinion in private to the right person, I think how it's ended up being executed more recently has just changed. 2. Force Seniors to vote during Senior voting Of course, the Senior could always reply neutral as they have no opinions on the applicant, but even that gives more information than simply not posting at all. If seniors were REQUIRED to vote, we would move back into Senior rounds that would happen every 3 months, like our executive approval polls. Moving back into rounds makes it a little harder to achieve senior, and gives 3+ months notice to our Seniors ask they would always know when senior voting occurs. To be honest, I really dislike the idea of these approval polls anyway, they feel counter productive in so many ways. But I also think that forcing people to vote just further breaks our entire voting system. It's already pretty shit because we don't enforce any real standard and again, other than a recommendation, why should whoever is making these decisions care about how many people generally approve of someone, most of which have never seen the player / spoken to them / seen them administer... I think both of these solutions are a bit crap, and that we need to probably not just scope this as senior voting. There's a few things I've said on a few threads now on this and I'm reluctant to go to the effort of writing it all out again given people just hate on it / ignore it anyway, but there are better options as we've discussed before. |
|
Luke
Veteran Member
Go home to your family, Neo
Posts: 1,124
|
Post by Luke on Jun 30, 2020 19:48:16 GMT
Vouch for numero dos
|
|
|
|
Post by Polaris Seltzeris on Jun 30, 2020 19:49:00 GMT
1. Remove Senior voting all together Why do we need Senior voting? For the sake of tradition? To me it seems like a really archaic policy & keeps the senior admin rank a "gentleman's" club. I'm not really sure what value that adds, I think historically it was a way to allow senior admins a 'Private Vote' as it were, but would generally be weighed against the applications. I don't see a problem with having a way to express a vote / opinion in private to the right person, I think how it's ended up being executed more recently has just changed. 2. Force Seniors to vote during Senior voting Of course, the Senior could always reply neutral as they have no opinions on the applicant, but even that gives more information than simply not posting at all. If seniors were REQUIRED to vote, we would move back into Senior rounds that would happen every 3 months, like our executive approval polls. Moving back into rounds makes it a little harder to achieve senior, and gives 3+ months notice to our Seniors ask they would always know when senior voting occurs. To be honest, I really dislike the idea of these approval polls anyway, they feel counter productive in so many ways. But I also think that forcing people to vote just further breaks our entire voting system. It's already pretty shit because we don't enforce any real standard and again, other than a recommendation, why should whoever is making these decisions care about how many people generally approve of someone, most of which have never seen the player / spoken to them / seen them administer... I think both of these solutions are a bit crap, and that we need to probably not just scope this as senior voting. There's a few things I've said on a few threads now on this and I'm reluctant to go to the effort of writing it all out again given people just hate on it / ignore it anyway, but there are better options as we've discussed before. Do you think that it may be time to reconsider our admin hierarchy in terms of having telnet admin and senior admin as ranks then? |
|
Wild1145
Club 4000 Member
Inactive Player & Inactive Senior Admin
Posts: 10,414
| Likes: 9,680
|
Post by Wild1145 on Jun 30, 2020 20:15:58 GMT
I'm not really sure what value that adds, I think historically it was a way to allow senior admins a 'Private Vote' as it were, but would generally be weighed against the applications. I don't see a problem with having a way to express a vote / opinion in private to the right person, I think how it's ended up being executed more recently has just changed. To be honest, I really dislike the idea of these approval polls anyway, they feel counter productive in so many ways. But I also think that forcing people to vote just further breaks our entire voting system. It's already pretty shit because we don't enforce any real standard and again, other than a recommendation, why should whoever is making these decisions care about how many people generally approve of someone, most of which have never seen the player / spoken to them / seen them administer... I think both of these solutions are a bit crap, and that we need to probably not just scope this as senior voting. There's a few things I've said on a few threads now on this and I'm reluctant to go to the effort of writing it all out again given people just hate on it / ignore it anyway, but there are better options as we've discussed before. Do you think that it may be time to reconsider our admin hierarchy in terms of having telnet admin and senior admin as ranks then? Absolutely, but that's probably out of scope of this thread. IMO we should merge Super & Telnet into one single rank. Senior admins I think have a place, but tbh if we can't trust an admin with telnet we probably can't trust them to administer in game... I'd like to keep senior admin as a higher trusted role, I'm hoping we might some day get a panel back that we can use and give seniors the ability to reset maps and such. I'm working on a project with ATLAS to create a brand new game panel that would enable that and a load of other cool stuff but there are other ways we could do it already I'd imagine. |
|
miwo
Veteran Member
Posts: 597
| Likes: 585
|
Post by miwo on Jun 30, 2020 21:19:39 GMT
I feel like senior admin is hardly a position that needs to exist anymore, admins don't get suspended anymore by senior admins because senior admins simply don't manage admins anymore, and if we remove senior voting and remove the "gentleman's club" then there's just no reason to keep the rank in existence. I've always thought that this server should go in a direction where we just have a simple moderator/admin rank which has access to telnet, console, and all that but we elect the admin officer/Internal Affairs people that keep the protocols in place as we already do, we just don't need the "3 ranks" hierarchy in place anymore especially since we've already gotten rid of Telnet Clan, charter/emeritus admin, and are moving towards making senior admin more unimportant. Executive is basically what senior was and was envisioned to be. |
|
|
|
Post by Polaris Seltzeris on Jun 30, 2020 21:35:58 GMT
I feel like senior admin is hardly a position that needs to exist anymore, admins don't get suspended anymore by senior admins because senior admins simply don't manage admins anymore, and if we remove senior voting and remove the "gentleman's club" then there's just no reason to keep the rank in existence. I've always thought that this server should go in a direction where we just have a simple moderator/admin rank which has access to telnet, console, and all that but we elect the admin officer/Internal Affairs people that keep the protocols in place as we already do, we just don't need the "3 ranks" hierarchy in place anymore especially since we've already gotten rid of Telnet Clan, charter/emeritus admin, and are moving towards making senior admin more unimportant. Executive is basically what senior was and was envisioned to be. Basically, and since we now additionally have Internal Affairs which can suspend admins, I don't think there needs to be an admin rank hierarchy anymore. |
|
[/spolier]
