Jump to content
Heart

Do you like the new Vote of Confidence system?

What do you think about the new Vote of Confidence (VoC) system?  

25 members have voted

This poll is closed to new votes
  1. 1. Should we keep the current VoC system?

    • Yes
      8
    • No
      10
    • No opinion / Abstain
      7
  2. 2. If we don't keep the current VoC system, should we make a new system?

    • Yes (please post about your ideas for a new system in the comments)
      5
    • No, go back to the old system
      7
    • No opinion / Abstain
      13


Recommended Posts

Serran
11 hours ago, Qutenkuddly said:

I think one of the reasons perhaps that VoC is opposed by many on the staff is simply because it adds a great deal to their workload and stress levels, even if temporarily. Instead of celebrating the dedication it takes to make it two years, a mod has to go around digging up past posts and such to prove they're still fit for the job. Mods work hard, and for the length of the VoC process, they have to work even harder. It might be easier to endure the process if the benefits were more tangible.

Why would you need to dig up old threads? 

 

Make a thread in your section. "Do you want to keep me as an admod? Yay or nay" ... members vote. Should only add like 2 minutes of work to the admod. 

 

If you want to add threads that are declassed to the mix, why not delegate DT to flag a few as they declass the threads when an admod is nearing their 2 year mark? Say, you are at 1 year 8 months. DT gets a PM going "this admod is near mark, if you declass threads with them in it, please post it here so we have a list of examples of their work for when their review comes up". 

 

DT is already declassing the thread, taking an extra 30 seconds to save the link wouldn't add much to their work load. 

 

Then no one has an excessive amount of work or stress. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kimchi Peanut
41 minutes ago, Serran said:

Why would you need to dig up old threads? 

 

Make a thread in your section. "Do you want to keep me as an admod? Yay or nay" ... members vote. Should only add like 2 minutes of work to the admod. 

 

If you want to add threads that are declassed to the mix, why not delegate DT to flag a few as they declass the threads when an admod is nearing their 2 year mark? Say, you are at 1 year 8 months. DT gets a PM going "this admod is near mark, if you declass threads with them in it, please post it here so we have a list of examples of their work for when their review comes up". 

 

DT is already declassing the thread, taking an extra 30 seconds to save the link wouldn't add much to their work load. 

 

Then no one has an excessive amount of work or stress. 

I think this is a great point. It really doesn’t seem like it requires much work if done reasonably.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kisa needs a latte

I agree admods should be held accountable but they aren't and the Vote of Confidence will not, and has not helped that.

 

Admods get away with a ton of insanity that members can't get away with.  Some of it is in threads that are hidden in the admods only forum.

 

How can a vote of confidence by the membership change the system when it's already corrupt?  All the admods have been doing is come up with reasons to keep people around who should have been demodded a long time ago.  The membership doesn't see that admod x kept admod y because admod x will never admit that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Qutenkuddly
5 hours ago, Serran said:

Why would you need to dig up old threads? 

 

Make a thread in your section. "Do you want to keep me as an admod? Yay or nay" ... members vote. Should only add like 2 minutes of work to the admod. 

 

If you want to add threads that are declassed to the mix, why not delegate DT to flag a few as they declass the threads when an admod is nearing their 2 year mark? Say, you are at 1 year 8 months. DT gets a PM going "this admod is near mark, if you declass threads with them in it, please post it here so we have a list of examples of their work for when their review comes up". 

 

DT is already declassing the thread, taking an extra 30 seconds to save the link wouldn't add much to their work load. 

 

Then no one has an excessive amount of work or stress. 

The experience I went through tells me otherwise.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Janus DarkFox
6 hours ago, Serran said:

Why would you need to dig up old threads? 

 

Make a thread in your section. "Do you want to keep me as an admod? Yay or nay" ... members vote. Should only add like 2 minutes of work to the admod. 

 

If you want to add threads that are declassed to the mix, why not delegate DT to flag a few as they declass the threads when an admod is nearing their 2 year mark? Say, you are at 1 year 8 months. DT gets a PM going "this admod is near mark, if you declass threads with them in it, please post it here so we have a list of examples of their work for when their review comes up". 

 

DT is already declassing the thread, taking an extra 30 seconds to save the link wouldn't add much to their work load. 

 

Then no one has an excessive amount of work or stress. 

Looking at it as a member, such a thread could cause unnecessary drama and tensions for an Admod.  I’d think such a thread could be difficult to mod, members can have colourful opinions or have make a concerted effort to privately canvass for votes to remove an Admod that’s done nothing wrong.
 

There’s a procedure of rules that an Admod thread must comply or to qualify for Early Declass or any Declass, provided it not Unmoveable.  The time is usually 6 months old either at the thread creation or at the time the last comment was made before it’s Locking if such a thread was open for an extended length of time or otherwise dramatic needing a longer cool down.  Up to Admods Only to add any additional cool down on threads.

 

It is not the jurisdiction of DT to track VoCs of any staff member.  That’s an Admin Only thing to make clear of that hazarding a professional guess.

 

Declass can take as long as it takes, all depends on the availability of at the very least 2 DT at any given time.  I can Declass many threads, I can’t Proof my own threads to make the process any faster.  Declass of threads depending on its complexity, takes quite a length of time.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Homer

I don't think that having a VoC improves anything. It's just another hoop to jump through. Going by the notoriously abysmal turnout of votes in elections, I don't think that people in general seem to care that much either.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Skycaptain

One of the biggest problems we're dealing with is a lack of continuity and high staff turnover. Whilst bringing in new blood, and new ideas is a positive, the last thing we need to do is wind up either removing, or causing to resign due to pressure, those few staff members who survive two years. 

Would we want a VoC for BoD members?, Admins, or rely on them as the people who ensure that we adhere to the original goals of AVEN? 

 Looking back, more people who leave staff positions leave AVEN entirely, than stay, there are a few who stay (saying before they comment), but overall, I feel that we need to do everything we can to keep staff members, rather than asking everyone whether they should stay in their role 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
iff
7 hours ago, Serran said:

Why would you need to dig up old threads? 

 

Make a thread in your section. "Do you want to keep me as an admod? Yay or nay" ... members vote. Should only add like 2 minutes of work to the admod. 

 

If you want to add threads that are declassed to the mix, why not delegate DT to flag a few as they declass the threads when an admod is nearing their 2 year mark? Say, you are at 1 year 8 months. DT gets a PM going "this admod is near mark, if you declass threads with them in it, please post it here so we have a list of examples of their work for when their review comes up". 

 

DT is already declassing the thread, taking an extra 30 seconds to save the link wouldn't add much to their work load. 

 

Then no one has an excessive amount of work or stress. 

I think the backlog makes this difficult. 

Looking at admod archives, in my VoC last May, I had 5 declassed threads, three of which were declassed for the purpose of VoC. 

 

In the 9 months since, only 1 more thread of mine has been declassed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Serran
1 hour ago, Janus DarkFox said:

Looking at it as a member, such a thread could cause unnecessary drama and tensions for an Admod.  I’d think such a thread could be difficult to mod, members can have colourful opinions or have make a concerted effort to privately canvass for votes to remove an Admod that’s done nothing wrong.

 If enough members hate an admod on a personal level enough to campaign to get enough votes to demod and admod for no reason... then there likely is a reason: enough of the member base dislikes the admod and doesn't trust them to do their duty. Admods are privy to some personal information and if a significant portion of your member base doesn't want you to have that, then that's a red flag. But... given I've watched some efforts both by admods and members to keep a person out of admods because of a personal grudge and they all failed because... the overall membership doesn't care about personal drama, then I sincerely doubt that's a legitimate concern. 

 

1 hour ago, Janus DarkFox said:

There’s a procedure of rules that an Admod thread must comply or to qualify for Early Declass or any Declass, provided it not Unmoveable.  The time is usually 6 months old either at the thread creation or at the time the last comment was made before it’s Locking if such a thread was open for an extended length of time or otherwise dramatic needing a longer cool down.  Up to Admods Only to add any additional cool down on threads.

 

I'm aware how declass works. No one needs you to declass early. Over two years, they've been involved in warns/policies etc. You will declass some of them. In fact, all it really needs is to put the link of the thread into a log under the admods name, or add to the DT log somewhere which admods were in them. You're already declassing the threads they need for their VoC they just need you to give them the links if they have to have some show of work (which, I don't see why they would, the membership can just go read declass threads if they care). 

 

1 hour ago, Janus DarkFox said:

 

It is not the jurisdiction of DT to track VoCs of any staff member.  That’s an Admin Only thing to make clear of that hazarding a professional guess.

No one needs admin approval to provide a link to a declassed thread. Sorry. That's just plain wrong. And when I was admod, DT was always happy to help me find them because they already had been reading the threads recently and knew where to look . Has team collaboration really gone away that much since I quit the mod team? Do admods really have to spend hours scouring declassed stuff to find a thing when they used to just be able to ask DT and the DT members were happy to help? 

 

1 hour ago, Janus DarkFox said:

 

Declass can take as long as it takes, all depends on the availability of at the very least 2 DT at any given time.  I can Declass many threads, I can’t Proof my own threads to make the process any faster.  Declass of threads depending on its complexity, takes quite a length of time.

If it takes more than two years to declass threads so no current admods are in the declassed threads, then DT is useless for anything more than historical logs of how AVEN used to function. Policies change, admods come and go, members come and go. So, then again, the VoCs shouldn't require thread links if you guys literally aren't declassing anything posted within the last two years. 

 

2 hours ago, Qutenkuddly said:

The experience I went through tells me otherwise.

Then you guys opted to implement the system in a very overly complicated red tape filled way... which doesn't surprise me given it's AVEN... sadly. It really should just be a "Hey, i'm your admod. Wanna keep me? Yes or no" and you're done. At most answer some questions. Give the users a week to vote. End it. Voila. Takes little of your time and minimal effort and gives the users a place to voice any concerns they have. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Homer

 

17 hours ago, Serran said:

Takes little of your time and minimal effort and gives the users a place to voice any concerns they have. 

On that note, our PM boxes are open and there's a number of mod communication threads in different forumses to make use of. Nobody needs to wait for two years if there's something they need/want to talk about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Janus DarkFox
22 hours ago, Serran said:

I'm aware how declass works. No one needs you to declass early. Over two years, they've been involved in warns/policies etc. You will declass some of them. In fact, all it really needs is to put the link of the thread into a log under the admods name, or add to the DT log somewhere which admods were in them. You're already declassing the threads they need for their VoC they just need you to give them the links if they have to have some show of work (which, I don't see why they would, the membership can just go read declass threads if they care).

It's only up to the Admods to make a thread a Priority, VoC is an example of a Priority, similar to Policy.  Priority does pauses the main Backlog progress until the Priority backlog is done.  As DT, we can't just take any thread and declass it.

 

22 hours ago, Serran said:

If it takes more than two years to declass threads so no current admods are in the declassed threads, then DT is useless for anything more than historical logs of how AVEN used to function. Policies change, admods come and go, members come and go. So, then again, the VoCs shouldn't require thread links if you guys literally aren't declassing anything posted within the last two years.

Eventually, when the Backlog is complete, Admods themselves could Declass threads themselves, provided it's 6 months old.  Declass could be immediate for Policy and VoC.  At some point, possibly based on a number of rules like leaving dramatic threads to cool or allowing a Disciplinary ruling to become Spent (when a warn expires for example) or like a non participant Admod in a thread becomes the declassifier of that thread.  This may require an Admin to keep track of that all,. a Declass Admin can oversee Admod Declassification or a small team of DT Members only dedicated to brand new declassifying threads 6 months old.  This could cut off the Backlogs increasing size.  At the moment, Admods can only do so much and DT are limited by rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Laurann

Welp all of the talk about grudges and bitterness is fairly terrifying for a new mod like myself, and I can honestly say that so far from what I've seen in the back room I have not found the reason for all that yet, and I'm hoping it won't all be that bad.

 

Since I've become a mod, I do notice my own activity outside the backroom has decreased, because there really is a lot of reading you have to do as a mod so I just don't have the time. I'm doing what I can. Hope it's enough for people in my forum to know who I am and know they can approach me ^^"

 

As for the VoC system, I haven't made up my mind.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LeChat

I've just re-read the poll questions and looked at the results.

 

Aren't both basically asking the same thing?

 

"Should we keep the current VOC system?" "Yes," No," etc.

I thought, if one votes "No," for this question, naturally, it means that the system would need to be changed (because if something that is current isn't kept, then it obviously will change). Currently, there are ten votes for this.

 

However, for the second question, "If we don't keep the current VoC system, should we make a new system?" only five answered "Yes."

 

So, doesn't this mean that there's an inconsistency, here? (i.e. shouldn't both have the exact same number?)

 

It's the same thing for the "Yes" responses for the first question: eight voted to keep the current system, yet only seven responded, "No, go back to the old system" for the second question. Shouldn't these have the same number of votes?

 

Because, with these inconsistent numbers, which ones are supposed to be followed, the responses to the first question or the second?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Janus DarkFox

No, it means in the event of a No for the first question, the second question comes in effect.  If the first question is in favour, the second question does not.  A person can vote for a yes to keep it as is and opt for a change.  The choice of decision isn't always a binary one, in this case it can be rolling back to the way it was before VoC and yes is something completely different.  As it stands for now the membership prefer it back to the way things where without something new.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Heart

Thank you so much to everyone for your input and votes. It's been just over a week now, so I'm going to close the poll:

 

1. Should we keep the current VoC system?

Yes

 8

No

 10

No opinion / Abstain

 7

2. If we don't keep the current VoC system, should we make a new system?

Yes (please post about your ideas for a new system in the comments)

 5

No, go back to the old system

 7

No opinion / Abstain

 13

 

Please note: this isn't necessarily a binding vote. I know a lot has happened in the comments as well, not just in voting. Admods are now going to go back and discuss this further, and try to figure out what to do.

 

Feel free to keep commenting on here if you like, of course. My focus is going to go back to the staff discussion, but I will not lock this thread.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kimchi Peanut

@Heart Thank you for this thread and participating in the discussion around the concerns. I hope everyone’s thoughts are considered by all staff when making a decision.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
daveb
2 hours ago, Kimchi Peanut said:

@Heart Thank you for this thread and participating in the discussion around the concerns. I hope everyone’s thoughts are considered by all staff when making a decision.

Thank you all for your thoughts and concerns. I will certainly keep them in mind in our discussions and any decisions. That's why this thread was created, so we could hear from members. :) 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Heart

I'll second what daveb said. The thread was made specifically to hear from all of you folks, and I know the team will do our best to work with the valuable posts and vote that we've been given. It's not a simple discussion, but it's a very worthwhile one.

 

I, for one, would like to thank everyone again for the time and effort they've put into this thread. I appreciate that our membership is willing to engage and vocalize your thoughts. It really helps.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LeChat

:) Thanks, for reading the posts, too. I didn't get to vote because I was undecided (and reading others' ideas).

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Janus DarkFox
On 2/16/2020 at 7:01 PM, Kisa needs a latte said:

I agree admods should be held accountable but they aren't and the Vote of Confidence will not, and has not helped that.

Would allowing Admods to explain themselves, (assuming full honesty) could be in breach of the Tos or CoC?  I know that explaining accountability could be hurt feelings etc...  It's a bit of a 2 way street here as if one is held in account by themselves asking questions and not getting answers could also be in breach of the ToS or CoC.

 

When and where should a staff member maybe even be given the chance to explain themselves, without breaking any rules if rules are being broken?  An example is that because staff can be reported, such a staff member isn't given the chance to explain themselves as they'd be removed from the report process entirely.  Staff could be given the chance to explain themselves at the resolution of that report, but cant because of rules.  This could be done already in PM's between staff and the administration.

 

Accountability isn't all that well defined or explained anywhere in relation to AVEN, the membership, it's staff or the current CoC.  In time id like to see that somewhere defined.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...