Hiring Process Discussion |
Hiring Process Discussion |
*incoherent* |
![]()
Post
#1
|
Guest ![]() |
QUOTE(mzkandi @ Oct 12 2005, 5:44 PM) ^ Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. The most obivious issue for discussion would be hiring. So why not make a seperate thread so we can all start brain storming ideas. We can also make seperate threads for other things we would like to discuss. alright, so kiera makes a good point as quoted above. hiring is what everyone disagrees on. lets discuss what we think here. |
|
|
![]() |
*mzkandi* |
![]()
Post
#2
|
Guest ![]() |
^Yes, there have been disagreements in the past on the way members are hired to staff. Mostly concerning more member involvement.
First off, I like the idea of endorsements and also regular member endorsements because it gets both the mods and regular members involved. I'm against community voting for reasons stated in the cb revolution thread. I think mods voting who should be staff members has some faults as well. As far as involvement of the community in hiring, I would be up for some kind of thread stating who the members think would be great and reason for why some candadites would not make good mods that would play factor in the promotion of mods. I'm still brainstorming. All of these are just opinions that I have currently and are subject to change. |
|
|
*brownsugar08* |
![]()
Post
#3
|
Guest ![]() |
QUOTE(mzkandi @ Oct 12 2005, 9:51 PM) I'm against community voting Me too. In most situations, it turns out to be a popularity contest. And the most popular is not always the most qualified. |
|
|
*mipadi* |
![]()
Post
#4
|
Guest ![]() |
QUOTE(brownsugar08 @ Oct 12 2005, 10:04 PM) Me too. In most situations, it turns out to be a popularity contest. And the most popular is not always the most qualified. Anything left up to a vote, however, is a matter of a popularity contest, to some extent. It could be that the mods voted on all new staff members, but then a clear argument could be that the candidates who are most popular with the moderating staff would be the winners. Having said that, I like the idea of allowing community members to comment on candidates for staff, but I don't think the hiring process should be bound by such polling. Call it a non-binding election if you will. I would agree that generally speaking, the staff have the best knowledge of who makes the best staff, not the community as a whole. As an example, I'm an admin on another forum. From time to time, mods step down, and we replace new ones. We sometimes put it to a vote to get feedback from the community, but the process is usually undertaken by the three admins, with heavy input from the moderating staff. We generally hold that as seasoned staffers, we know what's best for the community. For those who read the first paragraph and last and skip everything in between, I'll sum up my post by saying that non-binding community elections are a good way to find new staffers, but the key is that they should be non-binding. |
|
|
![]() ![]() |