Should We Hold A Staff Election!

[.s31t]

Alrighty...Now that I have been gone for almost three months it is time for me to find time in my life to bring SI back and put it back on track like a box of pumas. Well I have been sitting down and trying to figure out our staff problem as of late and I havent came up with any idea of who I should appoint or who is the better decision. So I am asking you guys if we should have a staff elections. I dont know how this will complete work out but every three months we can rehold an election to see who stays and who doesnt. It also will involve the Admins having some say in the voting because we need an Electoral College you know. Well anyways I am just pitching this idea out to the members of SI and you can vote. Our staff should be small since we're rebuilding so I am looking at something as of 4 admins (Me, Jarrod, BKS, BB) 2 Gmods, 3 Moderators. Just let me know. Maybe I can expand the staff if we can become larger you know.

 

[playmaker7]

Sounds like a good idea to me.

 

[.GR]

Yeah, but the admins should stay the same I think.

 

[.s31t]

Biggest thing admins also will have a huge say too because we dont want to give all the power to the members..You know...The US government hasnt given the people all the power.

 

[Yankees2772]

If you plan to run SI like the US government, I don't quite understand how this is a good thing.

 

[RipCity32]

I like the idea, it could make the site more active aswell, as people try to add rep for next elections. The only problem would be a surplus of guys wanting to be elected. Because I'm sure every person on this board is going to try to be elected. So we are going to need a like way to make it less men running for "office." Perhaps have the Admins cut it down to like 5 guys running for both of the 2 positions avalible. Or like 4 trying out for the 2 G-Mods and 5 trying out for the 3 Mods. Something like that I suppose.

 

[Giantmetfan07]

theres a reason why its called a Staff Election. It's to elect people to stay as admins, mods, etc.

I agree. I wouldn't mind running in a moderator position, although there are probably people more deserving.

 

[A.E]

Let's make a reality show out of it like everyone else does. :smile:

Seriously though I am all for it. I mean why not? The guys that have had these positions have proven that they can do it & have done a fantastic job. So why not make it interesting and shake things up a little. Let's see if there's some SI guys out there that can help bring SI to a new level?

I mean what's the worst that can happen, we have to fire people and go back to what we have now? So what.

 

[Grandy28]

I like the idea, it could make the site more active aswell, as people try to add rep for next elections. The only problem would be a surplus of guys wanting to be elected. Because I'm sure every person on this board is going to try to be elected. So we are going to need a like way to make it less men running for "office." Perhaps have the Admins cut it down to like 5 guys running for both of the 2 positions avalible. Or like 4 trying out for the 2 G-Mods and 5 trying out for the 3 Mods. Something like that I suppose.

Here's an idea. Have the admins nominate a member to be g-mod and a member to be mod. Can't be the same member and then vote on the members. Just an idea.

 

[RipCity32]

Here's an idea. Have the admins nominate a member to be g-mod and a member to be mod. Can't be the same member and then vote on the members. Just an idea.

Don't quite understand.

 

[Grandy28]

Don't quite understand.

Have Kraig,Bks,J, and BB nominate 1 member to be G-Mod and nominate another member to be mod. Then the other members will vote on who they think should recieve a staff spot.

 

[RipCity32]

Have Kraig,Bks,J, and BB nominate 1 member to be G-Mod and nominate another member to be mod. Then the other members will vote on who they think should recieve a staff spot.

Ah, for the remaing spots on the staff. That could work. That way not all the votes are biased.

 

[MR.ballin]

I'm not sure if this is going to work. :unsure:

 

[Giantmetfan07]

I say this. At a certain point this week or next weekend. A scheduled time will be set up for next weekend and peopel can come during a time period and nominate people for positions to run. 5 nominations per position.
You can nominate lets say
5 for Admin - top 2 or 3 or w/e get in office
3 for G-Mod 1
3 for G-Mod 2
4 nominations for NBA Mod
4 for NFL
4 for MLB

Also Administrators can deny nominations if they see absolutely no reason for that person to be able to run. Lets say members must have like 100 ^ posts or w/e to be eligable. Also members who are nominated by other members can deny nomination. Noone can nominate themselves.

That would be a good way. Then allow 1 week or 3 days or w/e for members to send votes in to a administrator on affiliated site (prevent cheating) and if they dont want to count the votes then a member here can be chosen by site vote to receive and count the votes via PM.

 

[Giantmetfan07]

BTW Someone must then second the nominations and when some1 feels the nominations for a spot is high enough they can motion to close, then some1 seconds. (I work for Volunteer Firehouse and we recently had elections. That's how they did nominations.)
Like here's an example of one of the positions I witnessed get nominated.

VP
Person 1: I nominate Pete ______
Person 2: I second the nomination
Person 3: Motion to close
Person 4: I second.

And then move on to next position to nominate for.

 

[Josh10_10]

I say this. At a certain point this week or next weekend. A scheduled time will be set up for next weekend and peopel can come during a time period and nominate people for positions to run. 5 nominations per position.
You can nominate lets say
5 for Admin - top 2 or 3 or w/e get in office
3 for G-Mod 1
3 for G-Mod 2
4 nominations for NBA Mod
4 for NFL
4 for MLB

Also Administrators can deny nominations if they see absolutely no reason for that person to be able to run. Lets say members must have like 100 ^ posts or w/e to be eligable. Also members who are nominated by other members can deny nomination. Noone can nominate themselves.

That would be a good way. Then allow 1 week or 3 days or w/e for members to send votes in to a administrator on affiliated site (prevent cheating) and if they dont want to count the votes then a member here can be chosen by site vote to receive and count the votes via PM.

The admins are and should stay the same, so cross that one off. And for the G-Mod thing, you don't have separate candidates for each position.. have like 5 or 6 nominated for the two positions. The mod ideas are good though. Also, we don't need to send PM's to admins on other sites.

 

[.s31t]

Well if we do hold the elections everyone who applys will have to convince us why you want to be on the ballot. So we can hand select our options so we dont get a n00b winning because of idiotic voting. Things will have to be in a controlled environment somewhat. We may select 3-4 Gmods for the ballot then the top 2 win the position. then for modding 5-6 and the top 3 wins the positions.

 

[A.E]

Well if we do hold the elections everyone who applys will have to convince us why you want to be on the ballot. So we can hand select our options so we dont get a n00b winning because of idiotic voting. Things will have to be in a controlled environment somewhat. We may select 3-4 Gmods for the ballot then the top 2 win the position. then for modding 5-6 and the top 3 wins the positions.

To prevent this from happening, you would allow members to nominate other members, rather than allow members to nominate themselves. We all know that most everyone would like to be a mod or admin, but just b/c they have the desire doesn't mean they have the skills. So every member should take note of who currently brings the best stuff to the SI table. Who is online more often than not. Who is always contributing to threads better than most. Those are the guys that get nominated.

If those guys see that they are nominated & they don't want the job, then they just say so & they can be taken off the ballot.

It's as simple as that.

 

[.s31t]

To prevent this from happening, you would allow members to nominate other members, rather than allow members to nominate themselves. We all know that most everyone would like to be a mod or admin, but just b/c they have the desire doesn't mean they have the skills. So every member should take note of who currently brings the best stuff to the SI table. Who is online more often than not. Who is always contributing to threads better than most. Those are the guys that get nominated.

If those guys see that they are nominated & they don't want the job, then they just say so & they can be taken off the ballot.

It's as simple as that.

Word. The admins will cut the lists down though. Itll work out.

 

[nba_balla]

Admins :
- Same + Me.