|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Wed Jun 29, 2005 9:29 am
The current proposal for resolution shall be discussed here. Upon completion, the record of debate shall be copied over to the Guild Archives thread.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2005 6:26 am
Via Apocktreatr:
All guild members wishing for a position as a moderator shall submit their name to the stickied "mod application" thread.
Any current mod who sees the post shall put the applicants name at the bottom of the first post in the thread. (Herein, this list shall be the queue)
The applicants shall serve one week terms as moderators, 5 members at a time.(Herein, the terms shall be referred to as cycles.)
After the current cycle has ended, the five members whose names appear below the name of the last serving moderator shall be given the status of moderator, while those serving in the previous cycle shall have their status revoked.
when the last name in the queue is reached, return to the name at the top, and start over.
Members may ask for their names to be removed from the queue at any time by making a post stating such in the mod application thread.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2005 6:28 am
Apockreatr Not perfect, but I think we can start debate off with this... biggrin All guild members wishing for a position as a moderator shall submit their name to the stickied "mod application" thread. Can people be nominated by others? Apockreatr smile Any current mod who sees the post shall put the applicants name at the bottom of the first post in the thread. (Herein, this list shall be the queue) Do we want to be adding people to the queue without the consensus of the GULAG membership? Apockreatr redface The applicants shall serve one week terms as moderators, 5 members at a time.(Herein, the terms shall be referred to as cycles.) One week? I'd be more interested in seeing a month-long tenure, since we're not exactly a fast-moving organization, and constant changes like that are just going to busy up the guild for no particular reason. Apockreatr crying After the current cycle has ended, the five members whose names appear below the name of the last serving moderator shall be given the status of moderator, while those serving in the previous cycle shall have their status revoked. Do we want whole batches of inexperienced council members coming in at once? Maybe do one at a time, the most tenured mod getting phased out and replaced with the new? Apockreatr stare when the last name in the queue is reached, return to the name at the top, and start over. Looks good to me. Apockreatr xd Members may ask for their names to be removed from the queue at any time by making a post stating such in the mod application thread. Also good.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2005 10:53 am
aufheben Do we want to be adding people to the queue without the consensus of the GULAG membership? My opinion, if someone has a complaint about a nominee, let them vocalize it, and we''ll open a debate, otherwise, have the person pass through. I doubt there''ll be to many situations where this''ll be a problem anyway. aufheben Can people be nominated by others? I don''t see any reason for it. You''d need the persons consent to mod in order to fairly put them on the queue anyway. But if people want to put nominations in, go for it, so long as no one has the position forced on them. aufheben One week? I''d be more interested in seeing a month-long tenure, since we''re not exactly a fast-moving organization, and constant changes like that are just going to busy up the guild for no particular reason. I wrote this at about 1 A.M. I mostly cared that the word week could be typed faster then the word month. Whatever time other people want, I''m game for. aufheben Do we want whole batches of inexperienced council members coming in at once? Maybe do one at a time, the most tenured mod getting phased out and replaced with the new? This''ll prolly only be a problem when this is first implimented, but let''s tack something on to the proposal anyway. 3nodding No more then 3 nominees with no experience as a moderator of the GULAG may serve in a given cycle. Any in excess of three will have their term posponed one cycle, and the next experienced moderator shall take their place. That seem good? The wording seems harsh to me, but I think you can see the concept.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Sep 04, 2005 10:57 pm
Well, since no one has complained, lets start the counter, shall we?
__________________________________________________________________
heart All guild members wishing for a position as a moderator shall submit their name to the stickied "mod application" thread. Nominations may also be submitted to the thread, but the nominee shall not be placed in the queue until they themselves respond.
domokun Any current mod who sees the post shall put the applicants name at the bottom of the first post in the thread. (Herein, this list shall be the queue)
xp The applicants shall serve one month terms as moderators, 5 members at a time.(Herein, the terms shall be referred to as cycles.)
mrgreen After the current cycle has ended, the five members whose names appear below the name of the last serving moderator shall be given the status of moderator, while those serving in the previous cycle shall have their status revoked.
3nodding No more then 3 nominees with no experience as a moderator of the GULAG may serve in a given cycle. Any in excess of three will have their term posponed one cycle, and the next experienced moderator shall take their place.
arrow when the last name in the queue is reached, return to the name at the top, and start over.
pirate Members may ask for their names to be removed from the queue at any time by making a post stating such in the mod application thread.
Also, I figured this term would be a good idea. Tell me what you think.
ninja If someone currently serving as moderator wishes to, for any reason, step down before the end of the cycle, then te remainder of their term shall be handed of to the next expoerienced mod in the queue. The one who has the term handed off to them shall have the choice to serve in their normal cycle or not, in addition to the hand-off cycle. stepping dow from a term DOES NOT remove a name from the queue.
___________________________________________________________________
Finally, I think that, in addition to the one week rule we have, this proposal should be left up until we have at least one post from every mod. That way, nobody tries to sign in, to find that their modship has been suddenly revoked. Also, Fammicommie seemed like he might have some complaints with this, and since he's having comp problems now...
Edit- amazing how this...
4. If a majority of guild members have an issue with a particular council member, their modship will be revoked and a new person will be instituted in their place.
one sentence became the 8 part system we see above, ain't it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2005 7:23 am
The wonders of anarchism, eh?
I'm going to hold off on comments until I see what other folks think.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2005 9:16 am
It's just, when you think about iot, we haven't really made a replacement for the origanal system. What we tried to change had to do with majority rule on impeachment issues. With this model, we don't even address impeachment...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2005 4:53 pm
I have a better plan, just do what i do when i am op on an irc channel.... OP EVERYONE!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2005 5:15 pm
Tried that, or actually giving everyone access to a mod account (Called Anarchomod, If io remember correctly). This got abused, so we removed the accounts mod powers, though the guy who abused it still checks in from time to time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2005 5:24 pm
Heh, damn ******** like that ruin everything.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2005 12:30 pm
couple questions(maybe the were already answered I just skimmed).
1. is there any restraints on how quickly a new member can become a mod? e.g. can someone who just joined and never posted put their name into the queue. and if they can should they be allowed to before showing themselves to be an active and productive member of the guild?
2. who is going to actually watch the time people have been mods and switch them out?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2005 2:05 pm
Nether of those has been addressed. I have no problems with restrictions on how soon they can be a mod, though It will likely be quite a while once they join the guild, till they get into a mod position. Think about it, one month terms, 5 people each time, so prolly at least 10-15 people will sign up right away. And new members are entered at the bottom of the queue. so at least 2-3 months off the bat. But if we want to set up a restriction, I'm game.
As for the mod/unmod prosess, do you need an admin to do that? If so, It basiclly has to be you or eric, cause I think your the only ones wityh access to that account. If not, then we could prolly just run it off the honor system. have some people writ down when a month is up, and ask the mods to mod the next five, and have the new mods unmod the old.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2005 5:03 pm
mods can ban, but only admin can make people mods
and yes I would like for there to be some kind of necessary time limit for people before they can put themselves on the queue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2005 5:07 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2005 6:18 pm
I'm just saying, since they have to go at the end of the queue, they're already looking at two months or so before they get the position, even if we have only 10 mods. Since I think we'll have at least that many people sign up at the beginning, it's like there's already an automatic waiting period of a few months before you become a mod
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
