Original Post
Senior Member
Democracy!
I'd prefer it if no staff of any kind post on this, for that could influence the opinion of non-staff players. I would like to hear the honest opinion of the community on whether or not they think it'd be a good idea for Toribash to become more of a Democracy.
i.e: After the staff team decides they think someone is fit to become a FULL GM (trial GM should be decided upon purely by the staff team in my opinion [sorta-not really like a closed primary]. THEN, the community votes on who the staff believe should become full), the community should then vote on whether or not they agree. Obviously, we would need some sort of "Absolute Threshold" where within maybe a weeks time at least 100 people needed to have voted for it to have influenced the outcome of the staff's decision.
i.e: After the staff team decides they think someone is fit to become a FULL GM (trial GM should be decided upon purely by the staff team in my opinion [sorta-not really like a closed primary]. THEN, the community votes on who the staff believe should become full), the community should then vote on whether or not they agree. Obviously, we would need some sort of "Absolute Threshold" where within maybe a weeks time at least 100 people needed to have voted for it to have influenced the outcome of the staff's decision.
Last edited by Raid; Jan 17, 2016 at 02:31 AM.
JollyRogers
Sparky is a 317 pound Hump-Back Whale
Sparky is a 317 pound Hump-Back Whale
So, here's my question: Have you see any (literally ANY) game or forum that works that way?
If you give the decisions of who should be a staff member, that means you have the decision on who should NOT be a staff member too. With that you can basically remove/ban the sole creator of the game/forum.
Now that doesn't sound so good, right? You wouldn't want to part with your sweat, hard work and achievements for something like this.
Also it's not like only staff decides who's going to be a leader of this community. Indirectly regular users give a lot of feedback for staff members to decide whether someone's worthy or not.
Just look at the in game events or forum stuff. I guarantee you that if the community doesn't like someone then the staff won't pick him as a leader.
Also, we're still talking about a game, not politics. Different things entirely.
If you give the decisions of who should be a staff member, that means you have the decision on who should NOT be a staff member too. With that you can basically remove/ban the sole creator of the game/forum.
Now that doesn't sound so good, right? You wouldn't want to part with your sweat, hard work and achievements for something like this.
Also it's not like only staff decides who's going to be a leader of this community. Indirectly regular users give a lot of feedback for staff members to decide whether someone's worthy or not.
Just look at the in game events or forum stuff. I guarantee you that if the community doesn't like someone then the staff won't pick him as a leader.
Also, we're still talking about a game, not politics. Different things entirely.
Vox sucks
[10:14]<siku> magnificent sparkling vampire
[10:14]<siku> i love you edward
Official minibash tester. Please email [email protected] if you have found a bug!
Personal opinion - another large reason not to have a democracy is the speed at which things get done. Democracy makes things take much much longer than oligarchy. Im not going to lie, things go too slowly as it is, making every little decision take thrice as long wouldnt help either.
I do agree to some extent that we should ask the opinions of users more in certain matters, but often in those cases the information disclosed can be sensitive so its difficult to find many users who can both be trusted not to leak any information and who will also give a good contribution to discussing the matter.
I hope all that makes sense - and to be clear this is my opinion not necessarily the opinion of the GM team / staff group - that I am part of.
I do agree to some extent that we should ask the opinions of users more in certain matters, but often in those cases the information disclosed can be sensitive so its difficult to find many users who can both be trusted not to leak any information and who will also give a good contribution to discussing the matter.
I hope all that makes sense - and to be clear this is my opinion not necessarily the opinion of the GM team / staff group - that I am part of.
Don't dm me pictures of bowls that you find attractive.
Originally Posted by SlipAnc
So, here's my question: Have you see any (literally ANY) game or forum that works that way?
Check here
The head staff finally realized that users were upset with some of the decisions being made, so he created a user group and selected the first 3 members of that group, and they were to select users from the community on a regular basis to participate in sharing / discussing their opinions and staff they they couldn't all originally do before.
Also it's not like only staff decides who's going to be a leader of this community. Indirectly regular users give a lot of feedback for staff members to decide whether someone's worthy or not.
Could you give me an example of the sorts of this truly being a thing, as from what I can tell all staff selection is held so much back doors that we couldn't even slip our opinions through.
just look at the in game events or forum stuff. I guarantee you that if the community doesn't like someone then the staff won't pick him as a leader.
Having us being more able to express our opinions / have a group that could show what we wanted would be better then us having to guess if the staff our actually watching what we said or not, and then half the time just putting it off / not responding back.
You opened the SpaghettiO's, now you gotta sniff them.
Hardkore
My personal opinion:
Things are fine the way things are, there are very few corrupt staff members these days, and the idea of letting people who know almost nothing about the requirements of staff positions choose who shapes the present and future of said game, is stupid.
Things are fine the way things are, there are very few corrupt staff members these days, and the idea of letting people who know almost nothing about the requirements of staff positions choose who shapes the present and future of said game, is stupid.
