Do you want Admin votes to be public?

[Onrai]

I'm going to vote yes on this one. What I've learned from RPing sites is that regardless of how sincere the staff may be, in order to unilaterally quash any claims of bias amongst the staff, or any claims of poor decisions, transparency is indeed needed. There has, on multiple occasions in my two and a half years RPing on this site, been instances where such has not been forthcoming. Such transparency will benefit the peace of mind with regards to everyone.

On the other side, I've been on sites that had as little transparency as this one where the admins made poor decisions that negatively impacted the playerbase, and deliberately obscured admin decisions in order to protect people from the community's agitation. Because of this, poor quality administration was allowed to persist for months, and the admin team was never held accountable for mucking about by the community. While that hasn't been the case here, transparency through admin votes being made public will still provide the opportunity for the community to hold the individuals who decide where the site goes accountable. Because if no one's accountable, we aren't a roleplaying community - we're just led about by the leaders where they want to go, our input and views never truly taken into account.

 

[Jsc]

[member="Tefka"]

*feelz

 

[Vaulkhar]

I'm relatively new here, I will admit that. So I don't necessarily know how things run on this site, in terms of the staff team. What I do know, is that no matter how good a staff team is, there are always going to be mistakes made, and sometimes there can even be bias, as hard as the staff tries not to be. I come from other roleplays sites and games, knowing full well that staff aren't always going to be perfect. It's something you deal with when you roleplay. Until recently, I had see no signs of staff bias or anything of the sort, but after spending more time with the community, I've come across various members who do feel the staff is bias towards specific players and groups.

I think the middle ground would be the best option for now.

Throwing all the staff out into the open based upon their decisions could easily ruin how people see staff on the site. People have apparently lost friends over invasions on this site. If people can lose friends over an invasion, imagine how much respect and admiration an admin/staff team member can lose simply due to voting for something or deciding on something a majority of members wouldn't enjoy.

Middle ground for me.

 

[Kei Amadis]

[member="Tefka"]
Nope boss.

By all means let someone answer questions openly and publicly, but don't let people be under the microscope as you put it without cause.

Admins privacy needs to be respected too, they don't need the hassle frankly. People including me won't always agree with something, but as long as its explained and you say you've had a vote, (which is more than most rping boards do) then cool. That's it, move on.

You already do a decent job of having a spread of different opinions I think, so just keep doing that and you're good.

 

[EmKay]

I voted middle ground. I'm not suspicious of staff, I'm just nosy and like percentages. So in my opinion, a statment of "Four out of six admins voted this in" would be a fun statistic.

 

[Jorus Merrill]

Chatham House rules. I vote no. Percentages aren't anonymous with a sample this tiny.

 

[Laira Darkhold]

I would vote Middle Ground, but I also know I am probably not gonna read the summaries anyway. So I voted No. Its not because I don't care about the Admin Votes or what they do, but because every summary will result in someone being upset about it and demanding an explanation. Its just they way it is.

 

[Coren Starchaser]

I trust y'all

 

[Kyber Salurra]

I voted for the last option (the middle-ground) just to give some transparency on my vote.

The staff is always going to be called biased by at least one group at any given time- the group their voting against. A good way to tell if a staff team is biased is if they're being called so on more than just a decision and in general behind their backs, which is of course hard to detect, because you yourself are an admin as well. So how can you even expect the community to be honest and open with you if you yourself are an Admin? The best thing you could do right now is doing exactly what you're doing: communicating. I've seen way too many staff teams go down because of the lack of communication and their fear of bringing up this subject. Just the fact that you brought this to our attention [member="Tefka"] gives me upmost trust in you. If you think we're doing good than that's good enough for me. If you think some staff are biased or not, I'll trust your judgement. However, don't forget to keep an eye on them. Someone you appointed 8 months ago may not be the same person you appointed 8 months ago. People change and you just have to make sure you stay in touch with both the community and the staff on a regular basis. That's why I think a middle-ground would work.

People are biased, it's just the way we're born. Some of this bias is indispensable and crucial to the judging process. I wouldn't trust anyone who said they were completely unbiased, because they'd either be lying, or it means they don't care. And if they don't care, why are they staff? Bias is good as long as their is counterbias. A good mix of Biases from different sources create the friction needed to start a fire. However, like you said, being too open isn't a good thing because players will be against the Staff that are against their bias and then the majority takes over, leaving the staff full of one-sided yes men that destroy the community. The flip-side of that coin is not saying anything, but that leads to mistrust and salty players. Having a little summary after the fact of the votes and what topic received the most votes is as best of a middle-ground as you can get between the two extremes. It gives the staff a sense of security but at the same time gives the community a sense of transparency. A win-win.

Anyway, from everything I've seen you're a great Admin Tefka and I think as a whole you guys are doing a fine job. Keep up the good work and be the best you can be, that's all we can ask.

 

[Julius Sedaire]

Vote is No. Soundly and firmly. No level of transparency will quell any group, future or current, and its fears. You go the middle ground (the only sane option if you insist on any of them, and still a poor choice) and I guarantee that same group griping about it will gripe it isn't enough and demand more. Like a greedy child, either discipline them or ignore them, as the case warrants. Giving in only grows the sense of entitlement and such they obviously feel.

It should be obvious I have a latent mistrust of authority by now. But I have no reason to suspect bias in the staff here. That is blatantly overboard paranoia, even for me. Do what you do, and do it how you do, and be done with it.

 

[thegreatbeyonder]

Can you guys just vote on this and give us the summary of the outcome instead?

 

[Tefka]

[member="Arian Lenar"]

Iseewhatudidthere.jpg

 

[Kurayami Bloodborn]

I like the middle ground idea. I have faith that the Admins have good reason to vote as they do, however the only thing that directly affects me or my RP is the final decision. I don't care, nor do I care to know, how each individual voted. A summary is nice and provides explanation as to why the decision was made in the manner it was. That is all I need to know as a member of the site.

 

[Kamon Vondiranach]

The summary is good enough for me.

 

[Ellie Mors]

I just like the idea of a summary because it elevates your position (staff) in everyone's mind, they see what people are looking for and can understand it wasn't just arbitrarily decided if they thought that was going to happen.

Plus it gives me something else to skim over before going back to work.

 

[Judah Dashiell]

I voted middle ground. Staff shouldn't have their choice picked over by the general masses on SWRP. However, it would be nice to see something like "The general majority voted against Taco Tuesdays" . Still keeps it anonymous for the staff but keeps the regular non-staff users in the loop about things that going on.


Only problem with this option is opening up more threads for drama and butthurt, which seems a popular thing even off SWRP.

 

[Ellie Mors]

Only problem with this option is opening up more threads for drama and butthurt, which seems a popular thing even off SWRP.

 

[The Red of Sinner]

I think middle grounds do a lot, they help members prepare for things, and what not. [member="Tefka"] also is good as making sure that members only take what he offers and not shake him down for more without good cause backing their wants. (give an inch they take a mile thing)

Plus...isnt a community a group of people working together with like minded things?

Middle ground voted. I like being updated.

THOUGH

I trust the Admins, I trust Tefka.

To say the staff is bias is...bias. To say that a member can sometimes be bias....is logically, and only the reality of being human.

Love you guys for this place where I can relax a little, be safe, im going to bed.

Nigh!!

 

[Cyrus Tregessar]

Voted middle ground, mostly because I'm an extremely curious sob.