Voting upon staff members.

[Herobrine]

Alright, I am going to start of by saying the community needs to be way more involved with the decisions of Mc-Market. Here is a suggestion of an extra way this can be incorporated.

Suggestion:
Have a voting system for choosing staff members.

Here's how it would work. Mick, or whoever chooses staff will pick around 5 who they think are worthy of the job. They would then put those 5 people, into a voting system where the community would vote for who they would want best. I think that then there wouldn't be so much controversy over newly picked staff members. Lately there was a large controversy over Coco being picked as moderator. I personally am fine with this decision, as Mick is saying he didn't choose it. Others are saying that she was only picked because of her and Mick. This would eliminate that, and we could have the staff members we can agree with.

Of course with all things, there are ways people can cheat through the system, here is a way to eliminate that. People could make a bunch of Alt accounts, and vote for the same person a bunch of times. A way to eliminate this, is by making it so only Premium people can vote. This way it will show that dedicated people are the ones voting for the staff members.

If you agree with this system, feel free to leave the "Agree" rating, or reply! If you don't reply with the reason.

 

[Dragonfly]

Then being staff turns into a popularity contest. Someone who's perfect for the job might be hated by everyone (I know this firsthand)

 

[Chearful]

Agreed.
Additionally, you should have to 'work through the ranks'. e.g start as Chat mod, then scam resolver and then mod.

 

[Herobrine]

Then being staff turns into a popularity contest. Someone who's perfect for the job might be hated by everyone (I know this firsthand)

It's just like voting for a president. If many people vote, then majority rules.

 

[Dragonfly]

Difference is, the "majority" are kids under 16 years old who are butthurt to certain members towards the point of harrassing them over a website, not educated individuals with a semblance of maturity.

 

[Herobrine]

The owner and admins will still pick a few staff, we will vote for the one who we think is best.

 

[Jleeto]

making it so only Premium people can vote. This way it will show that dedicated people are the ones voting for the staff members.

Just because you have a paid account doesn't make you "Dedicated"

 

[Aschorren]

Then being staff turns into a popularity contest. Someone who's perfect for the job might be hated by everyone (I know this firsthand)

I don't think that someone hated by everyone would be perfect for the job, nor do I see how you could know this first hand.

 

[Herobrine]

Just because you have a paid account doesn't make you "Dedicated"

It's not so much for the dedicated aspect, more about the alts.

 

[Aschorren]

Alright, I am going to start of by saying the community needs to be way more involved with the decisions of Mc-Market. Here is a suggestion of an extra way this can be incorporated.

Suggestion:
Have a voting system for choosing staff members.

Here's how it would work. Mick, or whoever chooses staff will pick around 5 who they think are worthy of the job. They would then put those 5 people, into a voting system where the community would vote for who they would want best. I think that then there wouldn't be so much controversy over newly picked staff members. Lately there was a large controversy over Coco being picked as moderator. I personally am fine with this decision, as Mick is saying he didn't choose it. Others are saying that she was only picked because of her and Mick. This would eliminate that, and we could have the staff members we can agree with.

Of course with all things, there are ways people can cheat through the system, here is a way to eliminate that. People could make a bunch of Alt accounts, and vote for the same person a bunch of times. A way to eliminate this, is by making it so only Premium people can vote. This way it will show that dedicated people are the ones voting for the staff members.

If you agree with this system, feel free to leave the "Agree" rating, or reply! If you don't reply with the reason.

I love this idea. It would make the staff process so much fun.

 

[Dragonfly]

Aschorren Once had a moderator on Tribal, he was great at what he did, helpful, was good at handling toxic members, could identify hackers with ease. Everyone hated him with a passion, but he was amazing at what he did. I agree, user input should be accepted, but the final decision shouldn't be member input.

 

[Aschorren]

Aschorren Once had a moderator on Tribal, he was great at what he did, helpful, was good at handling toxic members, could identify hackers with ease. Everyone hated him with a passion, but he was amazing at what he did. I agree, user input should be accepted, but the final decision shouldn't be member input.

Identify hackers with ease?

If everyone hated him with a passion, I don't see how he could be great at being a leader in the community. People don't just randomly begin passionately hating others without solid reasoning.

 

[Dragonfly]

Aschorren Have you noticed how much people hated on staff for doing their job? Jack was flamed for over three hours, nonstop in shoutbox for kicking a few people who were flooding SB with :: . They don't start randomly hating, they just start with shitty reasons.

 

[Aschorren]

Aschorren Have you noticed how much people hated on staff for doing their job? Jack was flamed for over three hours, nonstop in shoutbox for kicking a few people who were flooding SB with :: . They don't start randomly hating, they just start with shitty reasons.

The exact wording you used was "Everyone hated him with a passion", you did not say a select few who happened to be in shoutbox at the time and are in no way representative of the entire MC-Market community.

If everyone hated a user, as you put it, then they would not be abled to do a good job of leading a community.

 

[Dragonfly]

Aschorren The scam resolvers, the chat mods, the mods, they don't lead the community; if they do, they're terrible at it. They remove the people who need removal, you don't need good public opinion to do that.

 

[Aschorren]

Aschorren The scam resolvers, the chat mods, the mods, they don't lead the community; if they do, they're terrible at it. They remove the people who need removal, you don't need good public opinion to do that.

If they don't lead the community, then they're not doing their jobs correctly.

They're intended to be there as role models and as guidance and resources for the user base.

Part of leadership does include tossing the bad apples aside to ensure that the good apples have the nutrients they need to flourish within the community.

 

[kitcat]

I kind of agree, however my thoughts are more along the lines of this:

Then being staff turns into a popularity contest. Someone who's perfect for the job might be hated by everyone (I know this firsthand)

.

 

[Jack]

Sometimes "more community involvement" isn't always the best solution.
For example, the chatbox: Mick polled the community which chatbox software they would prefer. There was a clear winner which was implemented shortly thereafter. Then people raged about it and demanded that Mick involve the community more in future decisions.

As it has been said, involving the community in picking staff would make it a popularity contest (even if admins picked the candidates).
If we released a list of potential candidates, there would be so much competition and division in the community. Plus, whoever didn't win would probably feel bad and animosity towards whoever won.
I can attest that Coco was not chosen by Mick. Admins asked the current mods who they think would be a good potential mod (preferably a current chatmod).
Some suggestions were made (only 2 candidates as far as I recall) and Coco was promoted.

If it were up to the community, I believe I would be voted out in a heartbeat (just check my signature - I will be adding more to it once I have my loaner laptop on Monday).
I think one of the reasons why I'm even a mod is because I will kick/ban people, still knowing that most of them will flame, disrespect, and disagree with me (as mentioned by Dragonfly).