Board Thread:News and Announcements/@comment-5392675-20170913110255/@comment-33032533-20170913162128

Master Hydraffe wrote: Jackboog21 wrote: I feel this making 2 people moderators today only further shows this is a horrible system. Just to be clear, I have nothing against the 2 who became them, they are well qualified users. But no position even existed before today. The community was given no choice of making these 2 moderators or choosing the rank's existence.

The worst part in my opinion is this, The 2 users actually lost the race they were in for admin. So, they would of been normal users. The staff here just picked 2 normal users to become staff without any sort of vote. It is a terrifying thing if staff on this wiki have the right to just promote and create ranks without the community's consent.

Now that the new admin has been picked, you should expect to see my reform thread within the week. No offense, but you said something along the lines of how the admins should have as large as a role in determining the staff. Well, we have, and we decided that since the trial admins have done so well that they deserve moderator positions. Not as a consolation prize, but rather since they have shown to be active and hardworking in removing comments that violate the rules.

I'm sorry that we're not playing by your rules, and somehow that has upset you, but I don't see anything wrong with the system beyond those that have been discussed in the blog post. Obviously I'm biased, but if the community is fine with it, should we really put so much weight on 1 person's opinions?

And besides, isn't that what you do on your Wiki? You have the right to promote whoever you want to admin status. Obviously you use your own criteria, which is completely fair - no argument there. So why is it that it is "terrifying" for us to pick people who have shown to be deserving? If they hadn't been deserving -- for example, if either Zodi or JDisbae had shown to be inactive (no, they did not), we would not have even considered opening up the position of Moderator.

Could the idea of the Moderator positions have been discussed further? Yes, the optimal situation would have been that all 9 existing admins got together for a discussion. Unfortunately, not everything fell into place. I sent out CwM's memo to every one of the other admins, and I saw no objections. As far as I'm concerned, a lack of objection from a group of people I consider to be professional and knowledgeable of what's best for the Wiki is fine enough at this stage.

So yes, criticise the way we run things -- the voting system, the order -- that's fine. But there is no reason to criticise the fact that we picked two very ideal, very deserving candidates who ran for admin but failed to seal the deal.