Okay. So the people have no deadlines to do the voting stuff and in certain cases they can't vote depending on their experience but have to take their time to read all the related stuff about the vote. Is there some sort of ticket system about those things? Like, Alley mentioned there is a lack of overview about those things. Is there a list the admins have that just needs someone to bring order into the chaos or do they have to look up each subforum for each request/report/sanction/discussion?
Or someone who takes a read into stuff and gives a TL;DR version for the others?
@Garret Jax The issue of your suggestion is that admins who are partially inactive wouldn't be able to contribute anything to the team anymore. Here's an addition to your suggestion: Make admins abstain from votes while they are inactive. For that time, less votes are necessary for the vote to succeed/fail. Admins are able to contribute to votes once they're active again. Result: Votes are processed faster.
My understanding of the issue is that the current admin team is essentially very wary about letting anyone new onboard do to a slew of (bad) past experiences. I think that's a real shame and is really hurting them, but I can definitely understand their perspective.
And, well, without fresh blood coming in the whole point made in the thread is moot.
(06-15-2017, 11:18 PM)Burning Wrote: @Garret Jax The issue of your suggestion is that admins who are partially inactive wouldn't be able to contribute anything to the team anymore. Here's an addition to your suggestion: Make admins abstain from votes while they are inactive. For that time, less votes are necessary for the vote to succeed/fail. Admins are able to contribute to votes once they're active again. Result: Votes are processed faster.
That doesn't help much, as some admins might be around but didn't get to look at the stuff yet. A clear deadline however would fix the issue, with a warning one week before the end of the deadline to remind everyone and their mother about how important their vote would be now. Like, the thread name turning red. I used to work like that back at STNE. That way we didn't have to look at "who is active" and who pretends to be active and who is actually inactive.
(06-15-2017, 11:25 PM)Durandal Wrote: My understanding of the issue is that the current admin team is essentially very wary about letting anyone new onboard do to a slew of (bad) past experiences. I think that's a real shame and is really hurting them, but I can definitely understand their perspective.
And, well, without fresh blood coming in the whole point made in the thread is moot.
Have set responsibilities for Admins, that rotate every week. For instance, one admin in charge of Reports/Sanctions. They would be in charge of doing the initial reading/viewing of the report, and ensuring that 2 more votes (Admin or Moderator) get added by weeks end. If it becomes a longer discussion, add it to the Admin vote.
That could be applied to Events, to Player Requests, etc. That way no one is stuck doing on job over and over, but it's a shared responsibility. Sure have specific admins more knowledgeable in areas, but essentially operating like a T. Broad understanding of all Admin duties, but very knowledgeable about one facet.
It would also (Theoretically) ensure requests are processed faster/within one weeks time. Obviously for SRP's that require Dev involvement, it would then have to go through them. But at least it would make part of the process faster.
Garret's suggestions are self-evidently good ones. I strongly urge the administration team to not only consider them, but also consider developing concrete guidelines for every feasible situation of significance (sanctions, faction perk requests, officialdom requests, permabans, adding new mods and admins, etc) and publish them publicly. Furthermore, this should serve as a springboard towards making every single aspect of server administration as transparent as possible.
This isn't to satisfy community curiosity or anything else equally inane, but rather would serve to assist the administration in listening to overwhelming community feedback. This should, of course, be coupled with an increased willingness to "be mean" and tell obvious whiners and attention whores whose opinions are constructed solely to incite drama to shut the f*ck up when it's necessary. A no bullshit attitude doesn't have to be coupled with intentional ignorance of public opinion.
Finally, @Hannibal and @Durandal -- the green team's difficulty in acquiring prospective new members is, from an outside perspective, a problem entirely of their own making. Whether their attitude is justified is irrelevant when it prevents them from doing the best they can for the community they volunteered to serve, the community we all love.
Changes to the style of operation and server management can be clearly traced back to every full rotation of a new team. New admins - new approaches to issues and how they are solved (or not).
While most of the suggestions voiced in this thread are valid, I urge you to consider for a moment that given these suggestions are very often offered to us, that if they were practically applicable in our situation, would it not have been that they would have been implemented by now?
From the spot of a bystander or even ex-staff, this might seem like a situation that could be easily solved. Surely the fix is so easy and straightforward, why aren't the staff doing it? Well, in most cases there are reasons that we cannot explain in detail to the non-staff members, that these fixes are not physically applicable.
You would, really, just have to trust us on that. It is not the case of being lazy or maliciously ignoring what seems like such an easy fix without any possible reprecussions, but you would need to see what we see to understand why it is not possible.
(06-16-2017, 02:44 AM)Petitioner Wrote: Finally, @Hannibal and @Durandal -- the green team's difficulty in acquiring prospective new members is, from an outside perspective, a problem entirely of their own making. Whether their attitude is justified is irrelevant when it prevents them from doing the best they can for the community they volunteered to serve, the community we all love.
I wanted to address this quote specifically. That sort of approach would conflict with the later part of your statement - our desire to provide the community with the best experience they can physically have. Talk about new staff members is an ongoing topic and we are keeping our eyes open for potentials, but it is a process that simply cannot be handled so easily.
A reminder, a wrongly-chosen candidate due to the access they are given may not only very easily destroy the community due to leaking information of its operation, but also may result in threat to the confidential information on our members.
--------------
PSA: If you have been having stutter/FPS lag on Disco where it does not run as smoothly as other games, please look at the fix here: https://discoverygc.com/forums/showthrea...pid2306502
----------
![[Image: drrobe.gif]](http://sig.grumpybumpers.com/host/drrobe.gif)
![[Image: gamer5000.gif]](https://sig.grumpybumpers.com/host/gamer5000.gif)
