Advertisement
thedeadlymoose

ReplyDraft12022016

Dec 3rd, 2016
113
0
Never
Not a member of Pastebin yet? Sign Up, it unlocks many cool features!
text 2.29 KB | None | 0 0
  1. A few points:
  2.  
  3. I think it's necessary for Reserve & Inactive administrators to retain their fiat, for emergency purposes only. Emergencies are situations like "a troll is actively attacking the site and must be banned" or "something needs to be immediately fixed or changed on the site". AKA, times when you can't wait for a vote. However, Reserve & Inactive administrators should not be able to use their fiat to push through policy automatically.
  4.  
  5. I also think Reserve staff (but not Inactive staff) should be allowed to vote by default on all staff votes. Leaving votes 'closed' as default relies on people to remember to 'open' their threads, which is likely to be non-intuitive and rarely if ever occur.
  6.  
  7. Also judging from how things have worked for years, there are always some staff who are effectively "Reserve" who vote more and have more input to give than most "Active" staff... even though they //are// "Reserve", because they genuinely aren't really active in the day-to-day running of the site.
  8.  
  9. Also, when there are activity issues (and we always need more staff), if reserve staff can't vote on, say, bans, or issues of policy where it's hard to get anyone to weigh in on, then that just makes everything even harder to accomplish, in a situation where it's already hard. This might apply to both necessary changes, and basic functions.
  10.  
  11. The problems that barring Reserve Staff from most votes are supposed to solve:
  12. * __Clogging up the quorum.__ This is a potentially serious issue, but this proposal already solves it separately, and in a way I agree with.
  13. * __Staff votes being a better indicator of activity level.__ This is a good idea in theory, but in practice, those two are already divorced, because activity levels are being determined by actually carrying out staff activities on the SCP Wiki (such as carrying out bans, apps when applicable, running deletions, working on team goals). This also isn't a good enough benefit to outweigh giving Reserve staff less voice and ability to "sub in" on necessary votes when we don't have enough Active staff.
  14. * __Reserve staff won't feel obligated to weigh in on everything.__ This makes sense, but I'm not sure I'm convinced that such obligation is currently in effect, at least not to the degree that it wouldn't be fixed by saying "there is no such obligation."
Advertisement
Add Comment
Please, Sign In to add comment
Advertisement