Dude, Geoffy for fucking president. He was the most entertaining seriously crazy person I have ever encountered on the internet. Well, him and Munchausen Dawn.

By the way, has anyone seen hide or hair of Only?

He sent me a message on Triond, after I asked him to visit the Bunker forum. Let's just say, he was less than impressed with the turn out there.

Oh, I don't doubt it. It was a little pitiful how few people engaged. Even the few that I thought would didn't show up.

I think a lot of it was to do with the functionality of the site itself. Depending on where and how people where signing up/logging in, there were a myriad of problems reported when simply trying to access the forum.

Yeah, it was a bummer. I just poked Leslie on facebook, so maybe he'll come around. I messaged 5GS on Triond too, but who knows if either of them will notice. Miss them both, though.

I'm totally derailing this thread.

Yes, yes you are. Even after my attempt to bring it back on track by nominating Geoffy. For shame, Smelly, for Shame. With that, I bid you good night.

Whatever. I can split the damn thread. I'm not going to, but I am going to stop derailing it now.

(April 30, 2012 at 4:16 pm)Paul the Human Wrote: I'm quite sure that such a policy is already in place... unofficially.

I'm pretty sure it is as well, but not explicitly, hence saying "so no change really".

(April 30, 2012 at 9:10 pm)Shell B Wrote: NoMoreFaith, there has never been a scenario such as you have described of which I am aware. However, you can rest assured that if a majority were to loathe a staff member for good reason and forum misconduct, it would be dealt with. I disagree that there should be popularity contests against staff members, though. If they are demonstrably abusing their position, then there is a problem that staff can deal with. Members do not oust staff based on irritation. There is a very good reason for that too. More often than not, people get pissed when they get warnings. Some people run in groups here. If someone gets a warning for a good reason, they may be able to oust a staff member for no reason. In short, fuck that. I would hate to see a member of the team go because of some pissy rule breaker.

I doubt there has been such a scenario. Did you miss me saying "so no change really".

Thing is, its not just members that run in packs, staff do too, and indeed are more LIKELY to, and conceivably, although it may not have occurred, a staff member is kept on through personal relationships regardless of their own behaviour.

Bearing in mind that votes tend to be weighted towards those inclined to vote, as any statistician knows, it certainly could not be a 51/49 majority to be binding.

Its just a suggestion, and I would like to confirm my earlier comments that I have been a member of many forums, and have been impressed with how well the staff have moderated these forums in what is a contentious atmosphere by default, since the theme of the forum is one that is personal and deep to a lot of people.
It cannot be an easier job, and you have my sympathies.

I think its a little disrespectful to a forum of freethinkers to suggest that vast majority would pass a vote to oust a staff member based purely on an individuals irritation.. that's absurd to suggest.
I don't care how much I like someone, and dislike the object of their dissatisfaction, if the complaint has no weight, I'm not supporting it.

It was just a suggestion, since I thought the object of this thread was to offer the members the opportunity to air their thoughts on the matter.
To put my thoughts simply, what is more likely;
A close knit staff group acting as a clique to protect poor members
or;
A vast majority of members acting as a clique to remove a staff member they deem unpopular due to minor points of irritation.

To be honest, implemented or not, it would highly unlikely to actually be meaningfully enacted to oust a member of staff, but thats not the point to the suggestion.
The point of my suggestion is that it removes the possibility of accusations of nepotism rather than its ability to remove staff on a "whim".

Klingon Bat'leths until the last one standing.

Seriously though why fix something that ain't broke?

The system as it stands works so I vote to leave it as it is.

This isn't a country were you pick and choose how we live, it's a well run forum and i'd like to keep it that way. With Tiberius at the top and his Politburo electing new officials once an old one has been cast off. Democracy would bring in a popularity vote and I believe that would be certain to bring about a lowering of this site's superiority over other forums.

So I say Nyet, Comrade T.