Round 3 Part 2 - Team 2 (Team Awesome)

Congratulations! You are now part of the staff! Hypothetically, at least. For this task your group will act as the staff, and you must come together to make an important decision...the very same decision that the current staff is trying to make right now.

You must decide the next Cid's Knight. You will not be deciding between real members, but 5 candidate profiles that we will provide you. Each candidate has their strengths and weaknesses that would make them a good Knight.

Please discuss the merits of each candidate in this thread, and together come to a decision on who to promote, with a reason why they were chosen over the rest.

For the duration of this task please stay out of the other teams' threads. We will be watching you. Remember, everything you do is graded.

Here are your candidates:


Candidate 1 -

• Longtime member who has been around for many years.
• Well known and respected by most of the veterans, but has not had much interaction with most of the the newer members.
• Posts mainly in the general categories and Feedback.
• Has a smart unique personality and outlook that not many others have.
• Forum activity is currently moderate.

Candidate 2

• Joined within the last year but has become one of the top posters during that time.
• Well received and like by most of the newer members, but some of the oldbies will probably claim they've never heard of this person.
• Active poster in all forums, but mainly in General Chat.
• Friendly poster but has the tendency to spam and be immature at times.
• Forum activity level is very high

Candidate 3

• Has been an active member for 3 years.
• Posts a lot in the gaming forums but not much in the general forums.
• Is well known and well respected in the gaming forums for their helpfulness and advice.
• Calm and low-key demeanor. Hardly ever participates in forum 'events'.
• Forum activity level is very high in the Gaming forums, much less so in the General forums.

Candidate 4

• One of the top posters in General Chat for a number of years.
• Everyone's buddy. Has won numerous Ciddies in many different categories.
• Generally well liked by the community, but has had run-ins with the staff due to their non-serious, jokster nature.
• At one point claimed to be "anti-staff" but that position has since changed.
• Forum activity level is high in the General forums. Never visits the gaming forums.

Candidate 5

• Since joining EoFF two years ago, this person has dived right into the community and become an active poster throughout the forum.
• Is constantly posting ideas for new events and making interesting, interactive threads.
• Well liked by the community for their upbeat personality.
• Sensitive in nature, this poster shies away from confrontation and prefers to go with the flow.
• Activity level is not always constant. Periods of intense activity are sometimes followed by very low levels of posting.

You have 30 hours (Tomorrow 5pm Pacific time) to complete this task.

Alright well since that scare of Del's (bad Del! :trout:) is over, it's time to get down to business. I'll write up my thoughts on each candidate, but as of the moment the first one is the one I'm leaning towards.

My reasons being are assuming that us 10 are staff, we have a nice mix of oldbies and newbies. But mostly on the newer side, so an oldbie to help balance out wouldn't be a bad idea. They have a unique outlook which I think would be invaluable to any staff, and more outlooks will help us look over anything that comes out way better.

Well then what does everyone else think about the other candidates?

this should be interesting. Each of the candidates has some good qualities, just like we all do. I didn't really see any really negative qualities listed... which is kinda unrealistic. I'm gonna need some time to look them over, and see who'd fit best with our team.

THE JACKEL

After reading this all, so far Candidate 5 sounds like the best to me. I believe a Knight should at least view many forums often, not just general chat. I also think its a good idea for Knights to do things that are interactive with the community, because they have the easiest time running such operations. His weakness would be the inconsistent posting habits, but I feel that is acceptable, because it reminds me much of myself, and I feel one of the reasons I will never end up leaving this place, is because I take occasional breaks.

EDIT: I just noticed Candidate 5 actually sounds a lot like me, which is probably why I'd vote for him xD

Candidate 5 is good, but as it says is shy and avoids confrontation. This could be a problem when having to deal with things. The person may try to tell other people about the problem, rather than attempting to do it themselves. If no one else is online at the time and the problem needs to get taken care of immediately, they may be reluctant to do so.

I think the biggest thing we don't know is how active these people are at reading/monitoring. I know I personally am not very involved in all the areas, but I typically read any new posts, unless there are a lot since I last logged in. A person who does not post often, but is always reading the new things would be able to monitor very well.


I think the real key is who would fit best with our team... so where do our team members post the most?
General Chat - moderate
EoEO- depends on the topic
Lounge- moderate
General Gaming - frequently
FF1-8 - whenever there are new threads I at least read them
FF9-13 I don't go in these sections very often
FFT, TA, CC - I typically read all of these as well
General FF- read and post moderately

later when I have time, I'll post what I see the pro/con of every person to be

THE JACKEL

I would be against candidate four, because they don't go to the gaming forums at all. While they don't get as much traffic, a good moderator should still at least glance through each forum.

Edit:
I post moderately in the general forums exept for EoEO which i post if i feel I have something to add to the discussion and I don't really visit the artists forum.

I read most posts in each of the final fantasy forums, but I only post in the games that I actually played. I actively post in the Kingdom Hearts forum

Yeah the monitoring thing is an issue.

As for where I go, I pretty much post where ever, though General Chat and the Gaming forums are my biggest. I generally glance over most of the posts of EoEo too.

With a lot of things in mind I think candidate 5 might be out just for their lack of confrontation which I feel for a knight is a must. When I used to mod GFF I had to do things I didn't like or required confrontation, there's no way shirking that duty as a mod simply put, as s*** happens and trolls come and you gotta be able to deal with it.

Thats a good point, if we where mods, what gaps would we need filled?

GC- Very often
EoEo- Not much on very specific threads
Lounge- Not at all, only very specific threads
General Gaming- Least of all my activity
Art- Not so much, few specific threads
Writer's Corner- Often I love to write.

FF1-3: Not that often
FFIV: I read more then I post
V-VI: Not that often
VII-VIII: Sometimes
IX-X: Read often
XI: Not often
XII: Often.
KH: sometimes
General FF- Often
The rest: Not often.

This makes me want to eliminate Candidate 2 because he mainly posts in GC.

Well posting doesn't denote lack of activity in other sections though. I've thumbed into writing from time to time (admittedly not a whole lot) and other forums I have a once a year type of posting habit in. I think instead of solely looking at posting patterns, maybe look more into personality, questioning if their the type of person to be more of a monitor type of person even if they don't post in a lot of forums.

General Chat is the most viewed forum, if something is wrong there then someone will see it and warn it. I don't think we need another mod just for GC.

And more so...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by C2

Friendly poster but has the tendency to spam and be immature at times.

---

IMO not really needed. I don't think staff should be immature, it sets a bad example. Most of the staff here, while they can be jokers, are not immature.

Candidate 1
Being active in the general categories which get the most activity is a plus. Posting in feedback also shows high interest in the quality of the site. The different outlook can also be useful in giving new ideas and such that other members of staff may have overlooked. Moderate activity would be enough, as I see we have some very active members in our group. My favorite candidate.
5/5

Candidate 2
Being well received is always a good thing. It’s typical for the oldbies to cling to the oldbies, and the newer people to form their own bond. Being active in all forums is definitely a plus. The spam can be a problem, but could very easily be approached and told that we think hespams too much, and will need to cut back if he/she gets the position.
4/5

Candidate 3
Honestly, this person seems the most like me. I don’t think another me is really necessary on the team. However, knowing my own strong points, I can point out this guy’s. He is well known where he posts, which is always a good thing. The fact that he typically gives advice and tries to be helpful which shows that he is out to help others, and will probably do a good job trying to help run the forums. I know I browse basically every forum, but post mostly in gaming. Not participating in events may make it seem like he’s not too into the website however. Being calm and low-demeanor can be a positive and a negative. It will be useful in keeping calm when dealing with a problem, but also can distance himself from the rest of the group. Awesome candidate but, since he’s like me, I don't necessarily need him for the team.
2/5

Candidate 4
Being well known and well liked probably means a people person. Someone who can get along with anyone is always a welcome addition to the team. Not being active in the gaming forums can be hurtful though. The problem with being a jokster all the time is that when a serious problem comes up, people may not take you seriously. Being anti-staff and having a run in with the people in charge in the past, may show this person has a problem with authority. Two things could happen if given more power. He could either clash with those who have even more power and experience, going on a power trip, or be happy with it and fit well with the team. Not a bad candidate by any means, but my least liked candidate.
1/5


Candidate 5
Candidate 5 is good, but as it says is shy and avoids confrontation. This could be a problem when having to deal with things. The person may try to tell other people about the problem, rather than attempting to do it themselves. If no one else is online at the time and the problem needs to get taken care of immediately, they may be reluctant to do so. Posting new ideas shows interest in the forum, and being well liked is always a plus. Probably can get along with anyone. Having varying times of intensity does not necessarily mean they’re not visiting/reading the site.
3/5

going off of the other people in the group(from reading their round 2 responses), I'd go with Candidate 1 or Candidate 5.

THE JACKEL

I agree. So candidate 2 and 5 I opt to be off our list of consideration lest someone provides good reason otherwise.

They show 2 qualities that aren't fitting of a mod I think. A Knight needs to be mature, and needs to be able to confront people when necessary.

I have an idea, lets rank each candidate on who we would pick. Here is my list

1) Contestant 3
2) Contestant 5
3) Contestant 1
4) Contestant 2
5) Contestant 4

I actually thought non-confrontational might not be a bad thing. This may translate into just closing a thread, or answering with an exact reason, then getting personally involved in a situation. Lekana would be a person who I can say is "confrontational" she'll argue with the person, and get very personally involved with the situation. qwerty seems like a non-confrontational person, and would avoid arguing with the person over a call, and just say "________ broke the rules."

EDIT: I'd rank it...

1) Contestant 5
2) Contestant 3
3) Contestant 4
4) Contestant 1
5) Contestant 2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bahamut2000X

I agree. So candidate 2 and 5 I opt to be off our list of consideration lest someone provides good reason otherwise.

They show 2 qualities that aren't fitting of a mod I think. A Knight needs to be mature, and needs to be able to confront people when necessary.

---

being mature all the time can present a problem too. Sometimes joking around can actually lighten the mood during a serious problem, helping people to relax. Immaturity isn't a bad thing, if the person knows when it's appropriate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goldenboko

I actually thought non-confrontational might not be a bad thing. This may translate into just closing a thread, or answering with an exact reason, then getting personally involved in a situation. Lekana would be a person who I can say is "confrontational" she'll argue with the person, and get very personally involved with the situation. qwerty seems like a non-confrontational person, and would avoid arguing with the person over a call, and just say "________ broke the rules."

---

confrontational and shy are two different things. Being shy means avoiding the situation altogether and not talking to the person. While the person may have done something minor, you never know how they'll react. If a person is shy and can't handle and backlash, it could present a problem. Being overly confrontational is also a problem.

EDIT: I completely agree candidate 3 is great, and would support choosing him... just feel he reflects me the most and may not be needed for OUR team.

we also need to wait for all the other members to post their opinions and such. A team has to work well together, so we have to see who fits best with us.

THE JACKEL

It never says "shy" it says "shies from confrontations".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goldenboko

It never says "shy" it says "shies from confrontations".

---

well that still fits with my point if a confrontation is brought to them. I'm not arguing they're not a good candidate, just that the flaws in every candidate needs to be pointed out.

No candidate is perfect, we have to note the problems, accept and maybe even embrace them.

THE JACKEL

GC- Moderate, more reading then posting.
EoEo- Moderate, Read a lot more than post
Lounge- Low, only if I want to make a thread or see the newest post is something I like
General Gaming- Moderate, like reading about games and occasionally posting my input.
Art- Low, need to work on that.
Writer's Corner- Low, again, need to work on that.

FF1-3: Low.
FFIV: High, read new posts when there are some.
V-VI: Moderate, wander in to read from time to time.
VII-VIII: Moderate, see above.
IX-X: Low, really end up here.
XI: Low, never.
XII: Low, never.
KH: Low, never.
General FF- Moderate, usually read thread not involving "Which _____ is ______?"
The rest: Low, not a lot.

From the profiles, I must say I'm leaning toward Candidate #3. There don't seem to be a ton of Knights that are gaming forum nuts, so it's a niche that needs filling. Plus he/she has been here a fair amount of time.


EDIT: Oh geez, lot has happened since I started this post. Anyway, list of Candidates...

1) Candidate 3
2) Candidate 1
3) Candidate 5
4) Candidate 2
5) Candidate 4

Oh wow.

I think 4 should be out. We don't need another CK in GC. We need one that goes to at least a number of other sections.

I like 1, 3, and 5. Actually, strike that. I am between 3 and 5. I think they are the best two candidates.

Out of everyone, 3 and 5 stand out as the biggest needs in both our staff, and the real staff.

I feel that the FF sections could always use more help, in our staff and the real, which is a plus for both 3 more then 5.

I'd like to see mods that like to do fun interactive things with the forum. I think thats what really separates EoFF from other places, this competition being a an example, a plus for 5.

Well it is safe for us to say that 4 is out for us.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by qwertyxsora

Well it is safe for us to say that 4 is out for us.

---

I can agree with that, Ciddies aren't important to become a CK, we have enough of GC CK's (real and on our imaginary staff), appears to have had problems with the staff already, I don't really see any advantages here.

So are we pretty much down between 3 and 5 now?

ljkkjlcm9 favors candidate one, and we still have members who have yet to contribute.

Candidate 1 - I like this guy because he has been around. He has seen how the forums evolve and change as time goes on as well as how moderation has flowed through out the years.

Part of the problem with this guy is that he only goes to the general areas(at least now) and is not insanely active.

Not really being active with newer members is also a big problem because those are were most of the problems one would have to deal with comes up. They are new, inexperience with the rules and the flow of EoFF. Old members know the limits and know the boundries better.


Candidate 2 - This person I like a lot. Because most of the problems will come from newer members, it is always good to have a fresh popular face on the staff. Spam and immature is not that big of a deal. Being new he will grow into it. It isn't that big of a deal.

He is active in all forums and eventually people just get sick of the same threads in FF1-12 and start to stick to just general.

Old people not knowing him isn't a concern either...that is why BoB and Kawaii are still on staff...so that old people don't have to change their ways ;D

He is new so who knows how long that enthusiasm will change but for now he seems pretty good.


Candidate 3 - General Forums are the most active and he doesn't post there. I think he will eventually. It is a good idea to have a person in the other forums that is active there and has been for a decent amount of time.

Even though a lot of the other activity in the generals is low, having a person who knows the flow of the other forums very well out wieghs that.

Candidate 4 - This could be a fun person to put on the staff but he is less of what other candidates are. His biggest prospect is that he was anti-staff and probably fought with them all the time. This is a big plus because he knows that line of thinking and how to handle those people. I think he is overall one of the weakest candidates as there are already jokesters on the staff ;D

Candidate 5 - Non-confrontational is a bad thing but he isn't the person who would go out there and defuse a problem. There are plenty of others to do that. Part of the staffs job is more than that. It is helping to promote the community and keep it active and interesting. That is always a good thing and another person like this on the staff is always a good thing. Spiking inactivity isn't always a bad thing as far as I am concerned. Big tests at school need studing for, vaction, business flights. People have a life outside the forum but he keeps coming back and since he isn't the enforcer type, this spiking inactivity is not as big of a concern.

I like the order of
2
5
3
1
4

Part of the problem I think you all are having is thinking that this person needs all the best qualities of a staff member instead of thinking where the holes on the staff need to be filled. The staff works as a unit and not a bunch of solo individuals.

Hey....BoB...can we get some made up statistics on where coverage gaps in the staff are ;D You are the stat man XD

Alright, sorry I havent been here, now let me jump right into this.

Candidate 1 would be a decent addition, for one he is an older member, that means he has seen a lot of people come and go, so he knows the drill. If he is well respected by most of the older members then there is a good chance he would be respected with the staff. Unfortunately, our staff has less older members and more newbie’s. Another negative thing is that he doesn’t have much interaction with the newer members, but if he is active in the feedback forum he could see a range of peoples views on the site and what should be changed. If he is a moderate member after being a long time member then it is safe to say he probably won’t take off from the site anytime soon.

Candidate 2 is harder to get a view on. He is a newer member, but quickly became one of the top posters, so a lot of members will know him and like him. A problem is, while the newer members would respect him as a CK a lot of the older members may not take him seriously as a member of the staff, though I doubt that any oldbie would not show respect to a Cid Knight. Mainly posting in General Chat is a good thing as General Chat is where the majority of problems arise, and he still browses through the rest of the forum, that is a good thing as he is spending more time in the spamiest area of the forum. I think it is alright for a CK to act immature and spam sometimes, as long as they don’t let it get in the way of there moding activity. And it would give them the look of not taking themselves to seriously and make them well liked amongst the general public.

Candidate 3 seems like a friendly member who would be fun to know, but I am not sure that they would be the best CK. One thing that comes to mind is that he doesn’t get involved in Forum Activities, he wouldn’t be active in most areas that need modding, and he wouldn’t be involved with the staff when there were trying to get the forum to get involved. Being calm and low key could be a plus as they wouldn’t get angry at other members and the way they reacted to a member would be more driven by reason rather then emotion. Could be up to the job, but not my first choice.

Candidate 4 is the person I think is least fit for the job. First things first, if he never visit’s the gaming forums then he wont get a cross section of what is going on in around the fora. I don’t think the past Anti-Staff attitude bothers me, as many people change there tune. I could also forgive his past run ins with the staff if they were in the past and he has kept in line for recent history, but if not then he could end up simply undermining the efforts of the staff, now with power. Simply put, my last choice for staff.

Candidate 5 seems like a good candidate, but is not without his flaws. If he has been posting for two years than I think that his periods of inactivity could be overlooked as long as they weren’t for exceedingly long times. He seems like he is already active in the site, coming up with ideas, and keeping activity in the site fresh and fun, that could be a good edition to the staff. Being well liked is an obvious plus, people who are well liked are more likely to be listened to without them having to resort to using the CK authority. But them being unconfrentational could be a problem, making them want to stay away from a member who is causing seriously problems, and leave it up to another member of the staff. He could make a decent addition.


This is just my initial look at what is going on. Obviously I think canidate number four is out.

the only reason I didn't say candidate 3, is because it seems a lot like me.

The fact that you're all picking candidate 3 actually makes me feel really good, I love the candidate personally! lol
I think we're determining based off of us, not off of the current staff.

I think it's between 1, 3, 5

the reason I'm counting 2 out at this point... yeah it's because he's pretty new. The one thing about older candidates is you can be sure they're going to be around for awhile. A new person might get bored with it after a short while.

THE JACKEL

I'm going to reread 1, 3, and 5 and decide who I like and why.

Yep...That is why I favor 2 and 5. I don't think most of us really create new activities or are super active in the gaming forums as a whole.

My main strike against the 3rd guy is that he doesn't participate in events or go the the general at all. I think #2 covers this area and is active through out the rest of the forum. Being new is also a plus because he will be more free to bring up different ideas on how a situation should be dealt with rather than the same old same old.

As they say...new is the wave of the future? XD

I like most of these candidates, and with the exception of four, I think all of them would be great additions to the staff. After reading 2's description a little more, I think that s/he moved up on my list. I just really like that s/he posts in all areas, and I feel that s/he will eventually stop with the spamming.

A big problem I would have with 1 is that s/he does not interact well with the newer members. That is the only negative that I see with him/her, as originality is good.

I still favor 3 or 5 the most, but I can see how 2 can be a good addition to our group.

Alright, looking at this again, my favorite candidates are 1, 2, and 5. I find myself agreeing with Ed for the most part.

The only thing that makes me slightly nervous about letting number two into the staff is the fact that is new and may drift off and become inactive. Who knows how long his gusto will last. But I do think he is a good candidate, even though he is new, a new face, new ideas, not someone who takes himself to seriously. He also visits all the forums, epically GC so that is another plus in my book. Hopefully if we make him a CK he will start taking the responsibility a bit more seriously and stop spamming so much.

I feel that a newer member should have time to prove they really want to stick around. Often people do something a lot more during beginning of something. I remember when we first got the XBOX my brother played in constantly, but now, he actually doesn't play it very often. If you actually love something, you need to have a certain amount of time to prove it, for me, thats about a year and a half.


My main strike against 3 is, "doesn't take place much in events." Personally, again, I feel EoFF is great, because of events, and this is an area that can always use a helping hand.

My main strike against 5 is the "shies away from confrontations", but on our staff, I think we have plenty of people that would have no problem taking on someone like VTG when he had his "rebellion", same goes for the real staff.

1 and 4 are okay, but, I think general, and Feedback, are watched pretty well already.

Candidate 2:

It said he joined within the last year....So am gonna say he has been around for 10 months of high activity. From what I see, a person will usually leave in the first few months if they get bored so I think he is safe there.

I just think Candidate 2 would be better if we just left for a while, see if he matures and spams less on his own (and if he's CK material he probably will). He seems like someone who could definitely be a CK, in time.

Sorry guys, I just got home a little while ago, so I didn't get to read the thread until now. :)

My choices would be the following:

1) Candidate 3: For reasons already mentionned, we already have a lot of Cid's Knights in General Chat and the other general forums, so another one that frequents the gaming forums in my opinion is a plus. This IS a site about video games, after all. The fact they're helpful and have been here for years makes me think they'd be the type of staff who, when catching someone (which often happens to be a new member) doing something they shouldn't, they'd actually take the time to explain to that person why s/he's being warned and make sure they don't have any questions about the rules. The fact they don't participate in a lot of forum events doesn't bother me because they make themselves valuable in another way than being a social butterfly.

2) Candidate 1: Another one who has been around for years, so they know how the place is run, and the fact they have an outlook that's different from the majority would come in handy in some situations, giving insight to the other staffs and perhaps making them see something they might have missed while studying a problem. They post in the general forums, which as I said for Candidate 3 is not necessarily needed because there are already a lot of Cid's Knights who post regularly in those forums, but they also spend a lot of their time in the Feedback forum. Cleary, this person would not have any problem getting involved to make the forums run smoothly. The lack of interaction with the new members can be worked on.

3) Candidate 5: I have mixed feelings about this one. On one hand, I appreciate that they are involved a lot within the community since their joining and always has ideas for events and such, because members wouldn't have a hard time approaching them if there are any issues that need the staff's attention and they contribute to keep the place alive and entertaining. On the other hand, I do not like that they tend to shy away from confrontation because, as already pointed out, it could mean they'll ask another staff member to fix a problem instead of taking care of it themselves. It could be problematic if they happened to be the only moderator online and something bad occured. It's probably just a question on semantics, but if it said "avoids confrontation unless it's necessary" instead of "shies away from confrontation" I would have had a better opinion on this one. Still a good candidate, but they would need to grow a backbone.

4) Candidate 2: Their forum activity level is very high and I like that they post in all forums, even if they're in General Chat more often. That gives them more chances to catch problems other staff members might miss because they concentrate their effort in a few forums. The tendancy to spam and be immature could be problematic, because it can give the staff a bad image. It can be worked on, however. I wouldn't rule out this one completely, but I'd give them a little more time and experience in the forums first before considering them.

5) Candidate 4: The thing that makes my warning signals flash in my head about this one is the trickster nature. To me, it is synonymous with "cannot be fully trusted". Being humourous is nothing wrong, we have plenty of staff already that are funny, but it can reflect badly on the Administrators and Cid's Knights if this person says or does something and then goes "teehee, just kidding!". I also have a hard time with them posting exclusively in General Chat, because that can make them miss important problems in other forums. And that's probably just me, but being well liked and popular does not equal being competent.

So there, my votes would go with 3 or 1.

The biggest knock against candidate 3 is not participating in events. Alright, I can see this as a "problem." However the main job of a moderator is not to be active in everything, but to be aware of it. Honestly, how many people here participate in events all the time. I've been here since 2004, and this is the first "event" I've really taken part in. However, I've been well aware of all of them and watched them take place.

I like 1, but I'd say 3 or 5 would fit with the group. Considering I feel I'm very similar to 3(extremely biased for him), I'll let you guys pick on that, and put my vote is between 1 or 5, but 5 seems to have more support at this point.

everyone should put their top 2:
mine are 1 and 5 (cause I vote for 3 is like voting for myself lol)
Dolentrean said his was 2 or 5 just now on MSN
takara said 3 or 1 on msn as well

THE JACKEL

OK then, I gave each rank a point value. 1st gets 5, 2nd gets 4, you get the pattern. If you didn't rank your choices, then if you do so or change your rank we can edit this. The columns are

ljkkjlcm9 - qwertyxsora - Goldenboko - Rase - edczxcvbnm - Takara - Total

Candidate 1 - 5 2 2 4 2 4 = 19
Candidate 2 - 4 3 1 2 5 2 = 17
Candidate 3 - 2 5 4 5 3 5 = 24
Candidate 4 - 1 1 3 1 1 1 = 8
Candidate 5 - 3 4 5 3 4 3 = 22

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ljkkjlcm9

takara said 3 or 5 on msn as well

---

No, I said my top picks are 3 or 1, but that myself, personality-wise, am a mix of 3 and 5. :)

I'm not gonna be able to help for a little while, I'm very sick right now. My favorites are 5 and 3 in that order.

My top 2 still has not changed, 3 or 5 in that order.

Edit: and feel better Boko

Get well, GB. :(

I like the way qwertyxsora has listed the priorities of everyone's candidates. We can use that method to score them all and see who the first to eliminate might be. I think we should take this one step at a time and take off one candidate at first and narrow it down, much like what the staff have been doing with us.

As far as each candidate goes and my opinions of them, I'll have to have some time to look over them. I'm about to head off to work so I'll be able to put a lot of thought into it. ;)

I disagree with your ranking of my choices XD

Candidate 2 = 5
Candidate 5 = 4.5
Candidate 3 = 1.5
Candidate 1 = 1.5
Candidate 4 = 0

Just because I ranked them in the order of best to worse does not mean I think they should be given points based on that.

Honestly, I think it's down to pretty much candidate 3 or 5

and you know Ed, taking 1.5 away from candidate 3, and adding .5 to candidate 4, makes them both in the lead with 22.5
well done! lol

THE JACKEL

XD I didn't even know XD I was just assigning values based on who I favor. I really don't favor candidate 3 over my top 2 at all XD

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by edczxcvbnm

XD I didn't even know XD I was just assigning values based on who I favor. I really don't favor candidate 3 over my top 2 at all XD

---

I know, I just went to re-do the math with your new numbers, and laughed at the fact and felt like mentioning it lol

THE JACKEL

The ones I like are 1 and 3 the best.

2 I dislike because of the spamming and immature attitude. Sure they might get better, but they might get worse or not change either. Their too new still so I think more time to let them be on the forums is needed.

4 I wouldn't mind on staff, they seem like they will do a good job, but already looking at our group I think they will probably just be a rehash of what we already have covered well.

5 I already said I disliked because they were non-confrontational, which I feel a mod of any forums needs to be ready to handle. Sometimes closing a members thread for spam won't go over well. Remember that 'ATTN: AZAR!' junk for not that long ago? Closing over and over won't fix the problem, eventually you just have to talk to the person and let them know what they did wrong and why moderative action was taken.

Alright, I have given my reasons, but to make it a bit easier for everyone to see, this is the list of my favorites in order of top to bottom.

2
5
1
3
4

We also have to think about who would work best with all of us, I mean we are the staff, I think we should all be at least somewhat in agreement over who we want on the staff. I think this ranking system is useful to get an idea of where everyone is at, but it shouldn’t be a decisive factor in who we pick.

I'll update the tally with Dolentreans and ed's changes. If you want to give your own column it's own number rating from 0-5 feel free to change your own. I also added colors. :p

ljkkjlcm9 - qwertyxsora - Goldenboko - Rase - edczxcvbnm - Takara - Dolentrean - Bahamut2000X - oddler- IBPengwynZ- Total

Candidate 1 - 5 2 2 4 1.5 4 3 5 _ _ = 26.5
Candidate 2 - 4 3 1 2 5.0 2 5 0 _ _ = 22
Candidate 3 - 2 5 4 5 1.5 5 2 5 _ _ = 29.5
Candidate 4 - 1 1 3 1 0.0 1 1 0 _ _ = 8
Candidate 5 - 3 4 5 3 4.5 3 4 0 _ _ = 26.5

Bahamut says he supports 1 and 3, so I assume he wants to fill in 0's for the rest.

I don't think anyone is saying that's how we'll decide. But that's how we can tell which candidates are favored and discuss the strengths and weakness of them each better.

THE JACKEL

My biggest problem with 1 and 2 is the whole oldbie/newbie rift. I like 3 and 5 because they both bridge the gap between old and new members, which is something i think the forum needs as a whole.

Sorry guys. I've been gone most of the day, so I only got a few words in before.


Candidate 1 - 3
I don't really like how this candidate is not very interactive with the newer members. That can be fairly important. And as to this member only really posting in GC and Feedback, well, that says nothing to how much this candidate browses other sections and just doesn't post.

Candidate 2 - 2
The immaturity and spamming is obviously the issue here. That is not becoming of a CK at all. While I like everything else about this candidate, that just weighs to heavily for me.

Candidate 3 - 5
I find this to be an excellent candidate. Being active in the General forums is not necessary at all. They are active where they are, which happens to be the gaming forums. I have no problem with them not participating in events. It is not a requirement to do so, nor does that stop them from being part of the community, as it said this was a well respected member.

Candidate 4 - 4
This candidate is extremely active and friendly. Used to be anti-staff, but this member changed, therefore there is no longer an issue there.
There is nothing wrong with a jokester. It does say that this member never goes to the gaming forums though. I firmly believe that any member of these forums who has been here some time and was bestowed the honor of CK would focus on their duties. So, while they never go to the gaming forums as a regular member, as a CK they would know their duty and likely would begin monitoring everywhere.

Candidate 5 - 4
A well liked member who's threads are typically of good standing. This would be an excellent candidate if it weren't for the occasional low levels of inactivity and non-confrontational attitude. But like I said for #4, I believe that being a CK would inevitably change that. Maybe not the inactivity, because that could be for any number of personal reasons. Anyways, if the candidate wasn't doing enough, I am positive that the other staff would point it out and this candidate would learn.

Personally, I think 3 is the very best choice, hands down. But I would rather have someone like 4 become CK. And I find myself to be very similar to 5.

I'm suppressed that you ranked 2 so low on being spammy and immature, yet game 4 a high ranking even though he was anti-staff and had confrontations with them, that normally shows immaturity, and that you would expect them to change once they got the title of CK, and not expect 2 to change as well.

I am not knocking your choices, just think its kind of strange.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dolentrean

I'm suppressed that you ranked 2 so low on being spammy and immature, yet game 4 a high ranking even though he was anti-staff and had confrontations with them, that normally shows immaturity, and that you would expect them to change once they got the title of CK, and not expect 2 to change as well.

I am not knocking your choices, just think its kind of strange.

---

This decision was mostly based on my perception of immature. There are some members here who are extreme jokesters, but I would never think to call them immature. When I see immature, I see it as someone who doesn't present themselves well in their posts. Such as always using 'leetspeak', for one example. Or someone who is obviously caught up in themselves and all their glory. I'm not sure if that explained it very well, but I see a large difference in the two.

And don't worry about knocking my choices. We need to be critiquing to find the right choice.

ljkkjlcm9 - qwertyxsora - Goldenboko - Rase - edczxcvbnm - Takara - Dolentrean - Bahamut2000X - oddler- IBPengwynZ- Total

Candidate 1 - 5 2 2 4 1.5 4 3 5 4 3 = 33.5
Candidate 2 - 4 3 1 2 5.0 2 5 0 3 2 = 27
Candidate 3 - 2 5 4 5 1.5 5 2 5 3 5 = 37.5
Candidate 4 - 1 1 3 1 0.0 1 1 0 2 4 = 14
Candidate 5 - 3 4 5 3 4.5 3 4 0 4 4 = 34.5

I've added my scores in there for the candidates.

Just a couple things overall about them that I see:

Candidate 1 - Well respected by veterans. Hasn't had interaction with newer members but that doesn't mean that this person is against new members. Posts mainly in General and Feedback. This doesn't mean they don't post other places and actually implies that they post everywhere. Plus, they're moderately active. SMART UNIQUE PERSONALITY AND OUTLOOK. Key, key, key. Why would we want to miss out on a member like this?

Candidate 2 - Posts a lot. Good relations with new members but not noticed by veterans? I'm not sure if that's alluding to possible grudges coming up after this person's possible promotion or if it's just saying that this person isn't in the limelight much. Active... and spammy. Not a good combination if you ask me. Normally, I would hold high activity in high regards but when you mix it with a pretty habitual tendency to spam, it's sort of a double-edged sword. Immature, also. Kinda knocks this person down a bit, in my opinion.

Candidate 3 - Active in Gaming, not so much in General. Respected for gaming help and advice. Low event participation. This person doesn't sound like moderator material to me at all, to be honest. Sure, moderators are there to help with the forums but there's not much in a moderator's job about being knowledgeable about games. In promoting this person, the forum may actually lose a great game guru in exchange for a half-decent Cid's Knight.

Candidate 4 - A top poster in General Chat and on good terms with everyone. Non-serious and a jokester. Never visits certain forums. Eek. Red flag. If this person is going to maintain a tunnel vision view on the forums and not take things seriously, they're not the type of person I see being a moderator.

Candidate 5 - A strong part of the community and active throughout. Comes up with fresh ideas, events, and threads. Upbeat. All good stuff until we come to the "shies away from confrontation" part. Right? Not necessarily, I think. Every single Cid's Knight doesn't have to have the in-your-face thing down. Weighing all the good things this person could bring to the table against this one "bad" thing... I think the pros outweigh the con.

Now, as far as you guys were talking about our posting or activity habits, here are mine: I post a lot in General Chat. I'm active in every forum, though. I use New Posts and read through all areas of the forum so I'm all over. Never know when you're going to catch some bored guy post porn in a remote corner. ;)

Overall, I think Candidate 4 can be safely dropped from consideration. I think this rating system was a good idea for us to get going. We might be able to use it to knock off one more candidate but after that I'd say we better rely on debate. :up:

Drop Candidate 4?

Yes, I think we should drop 4. 4 was never a top choice for anybody, even me, and I am ever the optimist. I'm all for it.

I think it's really down to 1, 3, or 5

I'm gonna post my opinion on the 3 the more I looked

Candidate 1
The thing that gets me about the candidate the more I look at them, is they're is nothing really weak, but nothing really strong about them either. They're pretty much moderate in every aspect, except for how long they've been here.
the negative/positive was sorta combined here

Candidate 3
negative
Not participating in forum events seems to be everyone's gripe with this guy. Sure, I can see that, but again, how many people here always participate in them? Also says much less so active, in the general areas.
positive
He's extremely active in the gaming areas. Being much less active in the general might still be normal person active. If the average is say 500, and this guy posts 1,000 in gaming, but posts 400 in general, that's much less active, but still active. On top of that, he is well respected, and gives out advice. Someone you can look up to

Candidate 5
Alright, the more I look at this guy, the more I see his role in this forum. This guy is always coming up with new events. He also shy's away from confrontation. I say let this guy do exactly what he's good at. Let him come up with the cool events for the site to do. Making this person an admin could cut back majorly into this, and end up hurting the site more than helping.

THE JACKEL

Alright, after talking to The JACKAL and looking over the candidates more I think that 1 and 3 have a lot of potential, I also think 5 is a good candidate, but I am looking at 1 and 3 because they are active in opposite areas.

As we are looking for someone to join our staff we should look at where we are most active in so we can see where we need to beef up our activity, if we are mostly active in the General Areas of the forum than that makes 3 look like a stronger applicant, if we are strong everywhere than that makes 1 look more useful because as oddler said he has a smart unique personality and outlook that not many others have. That is something that could be invaluable in a staff.

Thank you oddler for pointing that out.

This sucks, I have to go to school sick today :mad2: I'm going to voice my opinion before I go, and sick or well, I will make it back here before the end.

I only have the time to write up one opinion or I'll be late :(

Candidate 1 -

* Longtime member who has been around for many years. +1 This is good, we know we have a member who won't be up and leaving on us.
* Well known and respected by most of the veterans, but has not had much interaction with most of the the newer members. 0 For our staff, this wouldn't be the worst thing in the world, considering we don't have that many older members, but seeing as newer members (0-2 years here), tend to make up the general populace, its not really a plus. Also if this where the regular staff we'd already have plenty of old members
* Posts mainly in the general categories and Feedback.0. We have lots of people watching general and feedback in the real, and our staff.
* Has a smart unique personality and outlook that not many others have. +1 This is good, its always nice to have new views. The only possible question are his views radically different in which they would just get in the way, but that doesn't look like the case by this description.
* Forum activity is currently moderate. +1 moderate activity, nothing wrong with that

Overall score. 4

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goldenboko

Candidate 1 -

* Longtime member who has been around for many years. +1 This is good, we know we have a member who won't be up and leaving on us.
* Well known and respected by most of the veterans, but has not had much interaction with most of the the newer members. 0 For our staff, this wouldn't be the worst thing in the world, considering we don't have that many older members, but seeing as newer members (0-2 years here), tend to make up the general populace, its not really a plus. Also if this where the regular staff we'd already have plenty of old members
* Posts mainly in the general categories and Feedback.0. We have lots of people watching general and feedback in the real, and our staff.
* Has a smart unique personality and outlook that not many others have. +1 This is good, its always nice to have new views. The only possible question are his views radically different in which they would just get in the way, but that doesn't look like the case by this description.
* Forum activity is currently moderate. +1 moderate activity, nothing wrong with that

Overall score. 4

---

I like this format. It's a nice way for us to elaborate on each part of the candidates. Does anyone have a problem with doing this for Candidates 1, 2, 3, and 5? I think it'll help us start up some conversation as to what traits we're really looking for, too. :)

I see a lot of negatives about 1 being an oldbie, which I don't think that's too bad of a thing I'm a little partial I guess though because 1 is most like me (minus that not interacting with newbie thing). I mean let's just look at it for a second at our staff. Me and ed are the 2 oldbies here. Beyond that the gap in years is about 3 I figure in newbies and oldbies. I would say an oldbie to help balance out the differences between our gap in years is something to consider.

The only thing not making me out right say 1 is 3 is a big gaming forum person, which we seem to lack a little bit more then GC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dolentrean

Candidate 1 -

-Oldbie - Good thing, as Bahamut said that is something we are lacking +1
-Well known and respected I think respect goes along way +1
-Not much interaction with the newer members, I think we have that covered anyways with most of our staff. 0
-Posts mainly in GC and Feedback, this isn’t really a bad thing, but as we already have these areas covered very well with our staff this isn’t necessary. 0
-Has a smart unique personality and outlook that not many others have, this is a very big plus for obvious reasons +1.5
- Form activity currently moderate, This isn’t a bad thing, he is still active. 0

---

Overall +3.5

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dolentrean

Candidate 2 -

- joined within the last year and is a highly active poster, this could show someone who is going to get burnt out and leave the site in the near future. -0.5
-Well received and like by most of the newer members, but some of the oldbies will probably claim they've never heard of this person. This is something that isn’t really a bad thing, it just isn’t a good thing, again, we have most of the new members covered. 0
- Active everywhere, mainly GC. I think this is a good quality, anyone who is in all the forums is a plus, GC is the area with the most spam and need for modding. +1
- Friendly poster is a plus, but tendency to Spam and be Immature at times is a negative aspect, this might change when he is made a CK but as of now he probably isn’t ready to join the staff. -1
-Activity level: very high. This is a good thing, activity is good. +1

---

Overall +0.5

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dolentrean

Candidate 3 -

-Has been an active member for three years. This is a good thing, he isn’t a newbie, maybe not an oldbie but not a newbie, also if he has been active for three years then he probably wont vanish on us. +1
-Posts a lot in the gaming forums, but not as much in GC. This I find as a plus, I think that while we do have a good cross section of the site covered with our current staff the Gaming Forums is where, we as a staff are slightly lacking, so some more activity there could be a plus. +1
-Is well known and well respected in the gaming forums for their helpfulness and advice. There is that key word respect again. There may be a small chance that they could be less helpful in the gaming forum once they become a CK, but maybe not. +0.5
- Calm, hardly ever participates in forum 'events'. This isn’t a good thing, but it isn’t really a bad thing, not much else to say. 0
-Forum activity level is very high in the Gaming forums, much less so in the General forums. He isn’t gone fully from the General Forums, just not as active. I think that the high level of activity in the Gaming Forums is very useful. +1

---

Overall +3.5

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dolentrean

Candidate 5 -

-Joined two years ago, has become an active member. +1
-Posts interactive threads and event ideas. He obviously is trying to keep activity high and make the forum fun for everyone, I think this has staff written all over it. +1
-Well liked by the community for their upbeat personality. While not the same as being respected being liked is still a plus, just not as much. +0.5
-Shies away from confrontation. This isn’t a good thing obviously, a CK has to be able to stand up to the plate, but as it says the reason they shy away from conflict is because they are sensitive and not nervous, I am not taking off a full point. -0.5
-Sometimes is inactive, vanishes for periods of time and doesn’t post much. Bad thing, not a very bad thing as they always come back, but not a good thing. -0.5

---

Overall +1.5

Alright heading to work so I'll be gone by the time we finally make the decision and the round ends. Time is running low so I suggest we take everything said into consideration and do a simple ranking to determine which knight to pick.

I suggest the way we do it is majority ranking through the points. To make it simple we should each rank a candidate, 1 and 2, 1 being first choice, and 2 being second.

First choice gets a point of 2, and second gets a point of 1. Highest points win.

Either that or we stick with our current ranking (which I find a little more complex then necessary :p) . So at the moment it seems like candidate 3 is winning. Anyways if we do my system then my first choice is for 1, and second is for 3.

Well then this is my last post before I get back, so I hope to see our results when I get back.

I'm going to do my post soon, big post though so give me a few minutes.

Alright, I'm back, and I'll be here to help. Sorry about all that, I didn't plan on getting sick.

Anyway, I thought about it while drifting off in class. I've decided to interpret this as THE JACKAL did, and incorporate whether we'd need them in our staff. So, I'm going to put this in order in this whether we need them or not, and have the pluses and minuses be based off of that.

NOTE: Gonna make 5 separate posts for each.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Del Murder

Candidate 4

• One of the top posters in General Chat for a number of years. Woulda like this to be the entire forum, but long-term activity is never a bad thing. +0.5
• Everyone's buddy. Has won numerous Ciddies in many different categories. Well liked- not bad, not the most important thing in the world, Cid's Knights aren't voted on based by popularity +0.5
• Generally well liked by the community, but has had run-ins with the staff due to their non-serious, jokster nature. Well liked, again not bad, but not enough to save him from the second part. Non serious and jokey isn't enough to get voted out, but it would be something he has to prove he can control. -0.5
• At one point claimed to be "anti-staff" but that position has since changed. This I don't like one bit. I was good friend with VTG, and I could see how being "anti-staff" can actually WAY alter someone's opinions. By the time I had ended up talking to VTG about the staff, his views where so distorted he basically called me their dog, and I believe those feelings could have lasted, even if he started denying if they where there. -1.0
• Forum activity level is high in the General forums. Never visits the gaming forums. We have lots of people in our staff that visit GC (Me, B2000X, qwerty, oddler, ed, and The Jackal, all watch it well. +0

---

Overall Score-.5. On our staff I just don't see the need for this member. He's jokey, and no offense ed, but I think you'd cover that base pretty well. I don't like the anti-staff bit, that may mean he went along with VTG, and as a personal friend of VTG, that revolution spread ignorance. He doesn't view much outside of General.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Del Murder

Candidate 2

• Joined within the last year but has become one of the top posters during that time. I don't agree with a member who's yet to be here a full year yet. If they're CK material, they can have a little patience and prove themselves a bit more. -1.0
• Well received and like by most of the newer members, but some of the oldbies will probably claim they've never heard of this person. Its nice that he can connect with newbies as there are quite a few of them. It woulda been nice for him to be more known. +0.5
• Active poster in all forums, but mainly in General Chat. Again, we have GC covered, but this one at least posts in all forums. 0.5
• Friendly poster but has the tendency to spam and be immature at times. Friendly=Good, immature and spam=bad. I think that this would be bad, it may present a bad example to newbies, that spam and immaturity is encouraged. -1.0
• Forum activity level is very high. This is good, if your activity is high then you read a lot of posts, and threads which makes you good for monitoring. +1.0

---

Overall score 0. Not needed now. Holds promise, and could be a CK candidate in the future, but not now.

This really how we want to do it... well I've stated what I think about each already, so I'll just show how much I weight each.

Candidate 1 -

* Longtime member who has been around for many years. +.5
* Well known and respected by most of the veterans, but has not had much interaction with most of the the newer members.+.5
* Posts mainly in the general categories and Feedback. I don't feel we need this in our group +0
* Has a smart unique personality and outlook that not many others have.+1
* Forum activity is currently moderate.+.5

+2.5

Candidate 3

* Has been an active member for 3 years. +.5
* Posts a lot in the gaming forums but not much in the general forums. I think we need this in our group +1
* Is well known and well respected in the gaming forums for their helpfulness and advice. +1
* Calm and low-key demeanor. Hardly ever participates in forum 'events'.+0
* Forum activity level is very high in the Gaming forums, much less so in the General forums. +.5

+3


Candidate 5

* Since joining EoFF two years ago, this person has dived right into the community and become an active poster throughout the forum. +.5
* Is constantly posting ideas for new events and making interesting, interactive threads. 0
* Well liked by the community for their upbeat personality. +1
* Sensitive in nature, this poster shies away from confrontation and prefers to go with the flow. -.5
* Activity level is not always constant. Periods of intense activity are sometimes followed by very low levels of posting. 0

+1

I honestly feel we should choose between person 1, and person 3, based on where we post the most. If we need more people in general areas, I say we go with 1. If we need more in the gaming areas, I say we go with 3. That's just my opinion.

THE JACKEL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Del Murder

Candidate 3

• Has been an active member for 3 years. This is good. Like long term commitment. +0.5
• Posts a lot in the gaming forums but not much in the general forums. Good, I think we're in need for someone in the gaming forums more then the general, so I like this. +1.0
• Is well known and well respected in the gaming forums for their helpfulness and advice. Respect good, not necassary, but helpfulness is a plus. +0.5
• Calm and low-key demeanor. Hardly ever participates in forum 'events'. I think we're most understaffed with this department, as I see me and qwerty the only ones who are would to be fully committed to it. -1.0
• Forum activity level is very high in the Gaming forums, much less so in the General forums. I'm not gonna give a point considering I already gave him a point for this. +0

---

Overall score: 1. This is someone I could actually see us needing. We'd have to see if we could get him involved in the events because I feel we are understaffed in that part.

Edited for my views on this ;D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dolentrean

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dolentrean

Candidate 1 -

-Oldbie - Good thing, as Bahamut said that is something we are lacking +1
-Well known and respected I think respect goes along way but old members should matter as much as they know the drill and should know the rules by now. 0
-Not much interaction with the newer members, I think we have that covered anyways with most of our staff but it is the new people that need the most dealing with...or so I think >.> -.5
-Posts mainly in GC and Feedback, this isn’t really a bad thing, but as we already have these areas covered very well with our staff this isn’t necessary. 0
-Has a smart unique personality and outlook that not many others have, this is a very big plus for obvious reasons +1.5
- Form activity currently moderate, This isn’t a bad thing, he is still active. 0

---

Overall +2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dolentrean

Candidate 2 -

- joined within the last year and is a highly active poster, this could show someone who is going to get burnt out and leave the site in the near future but he has been here for what I am gonna say is 10 months and would have burnt out months ago. He might eventually not post as much but that just eventually happens to a lot of people. I think he will remain active. +0.5
-Well received and like by most of the newer members, but some of the oldbies will probably claim they've never heard of this person. This is something that isn’t really a bad thing, it just isn’t a good thing, again, we have most of the new members covered. 0
- Active everywhere, mainly GC. I think this is a good quality, anyone who is in all the forums is a plus, GC is the area with the most spam and need for modding. +1
- Friendly poster is a plus, but tendency to Spam and be Immature. Spamming isn't a bad thing. Only in excess is it a bad thing. The forum typically goes through times of spam and stuff and other times there is more of a crack down. The immaturity is what gets the minus but that just comes with time and responsiblity. -.5
-Activity level: very high. This is a good thing, activity is good. +1

---

Overall +2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dolentrean

Candidate 3 -

-Has been an active member for three years. This is a good thing, he isn’t a newbie, maybe not an oldbie but not a newbie, also if he has been active for three years then he probably wont vanish on us. +1
-Posts a lot in the gaming forums, but not as much in GC. This I find as a plus, I think that while we do have a good cross section of the site covered with our current staff the Gaming Forums is where, we as a staff are slightly lacking, so some more activity there could be a plus. +1
-Is well known and well respected in the gaming forums for their helpfulness and advice. There is that key word respect again. There may be a small chance that they could be less helpful in the gaming forum once they become a CK, but maybe not. +0.5
- Calm, hardly ever participates in forum 'events'. This isn’t a good thing, but it isn’t really a bad thing, not much else to say. 0
-Forum activity level is very high in the Gaming forums. I award zero for this point because it is just the same thing as point number 2. "Posts a lot in the gaming forums, but not as much in GC. " Yeah...we know he is active in the gaming forums and not in the generals already. This is just redundant. +0

---

Overall +2.5

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dolentrean

Candidate 5 -

-Joined two years ago, has become an active member. +1
-Posts interactive threads and event ideas. He obviously is trying to keep activity high and make the forum fun for everyone, I think this has staff written all over it. +1.5
-Well liked by the community for their upbeat personality. While not the same as being respected being liked is still a plus, just not as much. +0.5
-Shies away from confrontation. This isn’t a bad thing at all. Not every staff member needs to be able to go in and deal with big conflicts. I think we have a good representation of ass kicking ability 0
-Sometimes is inactive, vanishes for periods of time and doesn’t post much. Bad thing, not a very bad thing as they always come back, but not a good thing. -0.5

---

Overall +2.5

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Del Murder

Candidate 5

• Since joining EoFF two years ago, this person has dived right into the community and become an active poster throughout the forum. I like the placement here, good bridge between new and old. Also "throughout the forum", big plus. I think someone who monitors all is the best situation. +1.0
• Is constantly posting ideas for new events and making interesting, interactive threads. I feel we are most understaffed in the events, I feel me and qwerty would be there, but I think we'd need more! +1.0
• Well liked by the community for their upbeat personality. Nothing wrong with being well liked, and an upbeat personality is nice addition. +0.5
• Sensitive in nature, this poster shies away from confrontation and prefers to go with the flow. Shy, sensitive, not awful, but not positive. I think this could be worse, considering we have many people here on our staff that aren't shy. -0.5
• Activity level is not always constant. Periods of intense activity are sometimes followed by very low levels of posting. This means little to me. It means they are a well rounded person, and they have responsibilities outside of the forum. +0.0

---

Overall Score: 2.0. I believe this is someone we may need. I feel we're understaffed in the event department, and on top of that, they view all the forums anyway! So we can expect a cut-down on spam, double-posting, etc being underchecked. Naturally they aren't perfect because they won't be the best in really confrontational situations, but I feel that we have a good amount of people that would be able to check it out and deal with it.

EDIT: The Jackal. I think your forgetting, that events something that are very difficult and need to be monitored, and are on par with watching forums. Anyway, last one coming up, then we need to discuss who stays, who goes, etc.

my only problem with taking candidate 5 because of the events, is that you don't have to be on staff to organize events. He's already posting ideas and organizing things. That's why I think it should be 1 or 3

THE JACKEL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Del Murder

Candidate 1 -

• Longtime member who has been around for many years. +0.5 This is good.
• Well known and respected by most of the veterans, but has not had much interaction with most of the the newer members. Woulda liked for him to have some interactions with newer members but, I feel that on our staff, connection with old members is actually one of our biggest weaknesses! So this is a big plus. +1.0
• Posts mainly in the general categories and Feedback. Would preferred for it to be in the entire forum, but feedback is a bit understaffed, so there is a plus here. +0.5
• Has a smart unique personality and outlook that not many others have. Awesome. Love new outlooks! This is good. +0.5
• Forum activity is currently moderate. Already gave points base on activity.

.

---

Overall score: 2.5. As you can see I feel he's a great choice. He's active, and bridges us to the veteran's way of thinking, something we don't have a big plus on yet. We are a bit understaffed in feedback, not as much as events. He also has a new outlook which is good.

EDIT: @The Jackal: Only staff members can be Award Guy, only staff members could set up this event, staff members are needed to assist all of the Mafia game, the staff plays a huge role in all events.

I think you're forgetting that every event does not to be planned and run by the Cid's Knights. Anyone can post any idea they have, such as something like EoFF Survivor. Could easily plan and run it himself, especially if he didn't have to worry about moderating the entire forum. He could easily ask one member of staff to help him moderate it. He himself does not need to be a member of staff to run the game, or even moderate it. The only time a Cid Knight would even be needed for an event like that, would be if someone got out of hand.

On top of that, the big events run by the Cid Knights.... well... this competition is one of them. Obviously we're all interested in it, and I'm sure would all be helpful if we were on the other side of it. My point is, the really big events, I feel every member of our 10 person staff would help out.

THE JACKEL

I stand by that having someone who helps in events cannot possibly be a negative, only a positive, and it says that he views all the forums as well. And not all staff members would be the most helpful in this, certain people have strengths and weaknesses, and our weakness is understaffment in events, and his strength is events, seems like a good fit. With that said I don't know whether 1 or 5 is my choice, for reasons already stated in previous posts.

EDIT: Again, only one CK is Award Guy, the whole 10 staff doesn't help with that, and tbh, Award Guy is a very tough job.

can't be a negative sure... but I really don't think they're needed on our staff. Would you be award guy? All we need is one person to do that job.

I think 1 or 3 would be better for out staff. And as I stated, we should pick based on where we need more mods. General or Gaming areas.

EDIT: One thing I just thought about, is it says shies away from confrontation AND goes with the flow. This can be a problem inside the staff area. Say there's a problem on the site. This person is creative and may have a different way to fix it. But everyone else already has an idea or way to take care of it. Rather than bring up this idea and possibly create argument, this person would rather just agree with everyone else.

I find candidate 1 would be the best at bringing ideas like this to the table that would better improve our staff. My first vote is still candidate 1, with candidate 3 next.

THE JACKEL

Candidate 5:

We seem pretty well-rounded, I don't think any forum would be very understaffed which is why...

Quote:

---

Since joining EoFF two years ago, this person has dived right into the community and become an active poster throughout the forum.

---

Is a decent fit. I think the real choice is between 1 and 5. 3, we already have you, me, qwerty, oddler, and Rase, who visit many of the gaming forums often.

Alright, I think at this point we should narrow it down to 1, 3, and 5. Ed, you have been the main supporter of two so are you alright with taking him out of the running? If anyone is against this speak up.

EDIT: I also think that between 5 and 1 the clear choise is 1, I think that event planning is a good thing, but I also think we also have that covered.

I agree with Dolentrean, on our staff 1, 3, or 5 seem like the best fit.

After your point about the people posting in Gaming, which must post in some of the areas I don't go to in gaming, as I don't see all of you where i post in gaming... I think we have that area covered.


I truly think that candidate 1 will be the best for our group.

THE JACKEL

Candidate 1 is fine by me...although I would prefer 5. I am already the the old as crap guy that doesn't talk to newbies XD

1 and 5 are tough choices for me, I'd like to hear opinions on them.

Both of them provide qualities that the other doesn't.

1 bridges the gap to the old that is a weakness for us, and has a good outlook which is always a plus.

5 will help a lot with events, which is good, because we'd need another good candidate for Award Guy, and have help with the other events. He also views more forums then 1.

Candidate 1 -

• Longtime member who has been around for many years. I see this as a plus, as this person is dedicated enough to the site to keep coming back. +0.5
• Well known and respected by most of the veterans, but has not had much interaction with most of the the newer members. I do not like that this person does not interact with new members. A good mod should have at least some interaction will all members, and especially with newer members as new members are constantly coming to the site. -1.0
• Posts mainly in the general categories and Feedback. While general gets the most traffic, it is also the best covered by our group. S/he still at least posts in the other forums at least. +0.0
• Has a smart unique personality and outlook that not many others have. Being unique will always be a plus too me. +1.0
• Forum activity is currently moderate. This person is not the most active, but still comes to the site after years, and it shows that s/he likes this site enough to come back. +0.5

Overall score = +1.0 While this person could make a good moderator, more interaction with the newer members should occur before I felt more comfortable adding him/her to the staff.

Candidate 2

• Joined within the last year but has become one of the top posters during that time. This person really loves the site, however some of these posts could be spam. +0.0
• Well received and like by most of the newer members, but some of the oldbies will probably claim they've never heard of this person. This is the opposite situation from candidate 1. While being popular with the newer members is good, everyone should at least know who each moderator is. +0.0
• Active poster in all forums, but mainly in General Chat. This person is active in all of the forums, and may be able to catch rule breaking quickly. +1.0
• Friendly poster but has the tendency to spam and be immature at times. Being friendly is good, but the spam would have to be cut back a lot for this person to be a good moderator. This person would be a much better candidate without the spam. -0.5
• Forum activity level is very high This could taper off after another year, or stay active. +0.0

Overall score = +0.5 I would keep this person on watch as a possible Knight in the future. If the spam lessened, I would be fine in Knighting this person in six months to a year.

Candidate 3

• Has been an active member for 3 years. Active for a good time. Not as much as 1, but still a good amount. +0.0
• Posts a lot in the gaming forums but not much in the general forums. This is where not as much traffic is, but also where there is less moderator activity in our group. +0.5
• Is well known and well respected in the gaming forums for their helpfulness and advice. A helpful attitude would always be a good thing, and I think that this attitude would transition well into being a CK. +1.0
• Calm and low-key demeanor. Hardly ever participates in forum 'events'. This is the main problem I have with this person. Our group is moderate with event activity, so I am not too caught up in this detail. +0.0
• Forum activity level is very high in the Gaming forums, much less so in the General forums. This person is active mainly in the gaming forums, but at least post occasionally in the general forums. +0.0

Overall Score = +1.5 This is one of my top picks for knighting, as s/he covers some of the less covered areas of the forum.

Candidate 5

• Since joining EoFF two years ago, this person has dived right into the community and become an active poster throughout the forum. Again not the oldest member, but an active member of the community. Also somewhat active in all the forums. +0.5
  
• Is constantly posting ideas for new events and making interesting, interactive threads. This is similar to candidate one, as this person is original and could bring new ideas to the staff. +1.0
• Well liked by the community for their upbeat personality. A well liked moderator is always a plus. +0.5
• Sensitive in nature, this poster shies away from confrontation and prefers to go with the flow. This is not as much of a problem for me with the members, but if this person is added to the staff and does not agree with one of us but not speak up would hurt the moderation team and the site in general. -0.5
• Activity level is not always constant. Periods of intense activity are sometimes followed by very low levels of posting. While there are periods of low levels of activity, this person still at least occasionally comes on during these periods, and still does come back. +0.0

Overall score = +1.5 I could see this person as a good addition to the staff, but s/he needs to be able to confront others on at least some issues.

I'm still in favor of 3 and 5, but I can agree to 1 as well.

Well now we will have another crotchety old man for you to play backgammon with, or whatever you bitter old guys do.

Anyways, we still need to hear from a lot more people, and it could only be a positive thing to hear your contrast between 1 and 5.

EDIT: I personally think 5 will be a good candidate in a couple of years, maybe the next time we need a CK they will be ready, right now I just think 1 has more experience, is going to prove more useful, is smart, thinks outside the box, just a generally good seeming candidate.

I think 1 would be better for dealing with problems that arise, which is really important. 5 would have a hard time arguing with any of the other members of staff, or bringing up new points when everyone else is agreeing. 1 would be perfect for this, as his smart unique outlook and such would give him different ideas that we may not have considered. And being an old well respected member would mean he probably wouldn't be shy like candidate 5, to bring it up and possibly create conflict.

also, in a situation like this where we're arguing over whoever is the best candidate. I feel candidate 5 would just side with whichever was the more popular choice, while candidate one would inspect each candidate and probably help bring up things we didn't think of.

THE JACKEL

Tbh I think they are both excellent choices. So excellent that I feel we should refer to the first post

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Del Murder

Please discuss the merits of each candidate in this thread, and together come to a decision on who to promote, with a reason why they were chosen over the rest.

---

I think we should promote both 1 and 5. As they both are completely different in their strengths and are both excellent choices.

a'ight. I be down.

We promote 1 and 5 because 2 is too n00bish, 3 just games and nothing but that, 4 a douche bag XD

Actually promoting two candidates is a pretty decent idea, the only thing i disagree with on that is that if there are two separate candidates we promote I think that one of them should be 3 so we have the diversity >.< and that just brings up more problems. Though I would be alright with both 1 and 5 joining our ranks.

I think what we should do right now is each post our thoughts on candidates 1 and 5, compare, contrast, who should be picked, and why you think they should be picked. Sure it is just us reviewing what we have already said, but it may give someone else a new perspective on it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goldenboko

Tbh I think they are both excellent choices. So excellent that I feel we should refer to the first post

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Del Murder

Please discuss the merits of each candidate in this thread, and together come to a decision on who to promote, with a reason why they were chosen over the rest.

---

I think we should promote both 1 and 5. As they both are completely different in their strengths and are both excellent choices.

---

I agree with 5 fully, and can accept 1 into our staff. Bahamut approves of 1, and I can agree with this promotion.

Lets start a final vote. If a member of the group submits no vote, they automatically vote yes. We should try and get a unanimous approval of the promotion. If we get a no vote, then we can discuss this further.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dolentrean

Actually promoting two candidates is a pretty decent idea, the only thing i disagree with on that is that if there are two separate candidates we promote I think that one of them should be 3 so we have the diversity >.< and that just brings up more problems. Though I would be alright with both 1 and 5 joining our ranks.

I think what we should do right now is each post our thoughts on candidates 1 and 5, compare, contrast, who should be picked, and why you think they should be picked. Sure it is just us reviewing what we have already said, but it may give someone else a new perspective on it.

---

I fail to see how 1 and 5 don't give us diversity... can you explain more on that?

Also, I think we could go around in circles about why one is better then the other because their strengths are so different.

I fail to see how candidate 5 would be useful. All he can do is events.

A problem comes up, and they're the only one online. Can we be confident this person can fix it?

A bigger issue comes up, and the staff is all arguing over what to do. This person will sit back and avoid getting involved with the argument, and just side with the popular opinion.

I'm sorry but, I can't promote this person to staff. If candidate 5 were on our staff right now, being a part of this. He would sit back and watch this argument and say nothing, in the end, siding with the popular opinion.

THE JACKEL

Alright, the only thing special five brings to the table is the events, but there is also the problem that they are absent for periods of intence inactivity. There usefulness in helping with events is all but worthless if they aren’t here when we are trying to put one together. Shying away from confrontation, going with the flow aren’t attributes that go with being a CK.

Now, I think that with 1 mostly active in the general forums, and 3 mostly active in the gaming forums, then we would have diversity, both are popular and well liked, both are respected in there fields. If we had 1 and 5 we would have two new moderators, one in General, and one is active without focus everywhere in the forum, one we use to help plan events, and that is there only real strength, when me, and I am sure many others are more than happy to help work in the events.

I think we should promote 1 and 3 to give us the best blend of attributes we are looking for!

Another valid point. Let's say candidate 5 posts an event idea in the staff area. Majority of the staff disprove of this idea. They just don't see the point. Is this the type of guy to argue and prove his point to the rest of the group, or to just crawl away and accept defeat without fighting?

Candidate 5 would just be someone we could all boss around.

THE JACKEL

Your blowing "shies from confrontations" way out of proportion.

A big confrontation would be VTG's "Social Test". I feel its very easy to understand someone not wanting to get involved in that, but closing a thread, deleting something for someone, merging posts. This is something that someone who doesn't want confrontations can still do. And I don't think you could say the person wouldn't say anything, they might not present a totally different opinion, thats more of 1's territory, but I could see someone who likes to go with the flow adding opinions.

5 does have a weakness, but I feel that he has serious strengths, viewing all the forums, and working on events.

*sit back and watches this argument and says nothing, in the end, siding with the popular opinion*

Just kidding.

My vote still goes to 3 and 1, in that order, for reasons specified in my first post in this thread that I don't want to rewrite because I currently have a migraine the size of Australia and just can't focus at the moment.

I agree with boko that you are pushing his "shyness" to its extreams, but I think I made some good points, if we have two different members, each with a focus on polor opposites of the site, but still venture into the other areas, then we have the whole area covered. We can still do events on our own, and we have to smart, respectable new members in our ranks.

"Shies from confrontation and goes with the flow."

If enough people are against this person, they will never stand up and fight back. That's exactly what that description says. If I were candidate 5 right now, I would've given up long ago.

plus, we have 10 people on staff, currently in an event right now. I don't think that strength is enough.

THE JACKEL

Goes with the flow doesn't mean they are never passionate about something. Again, I feel shooting someone down only because they aren't confrontational isn't a good choice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goldenboko

Goes with the flow doesn't mean they are never passionate about something. Again, I feel shooting someone down only because they aren't confrontational isn't a good choice.

---

and I feel event planning isn't a good enough reason to promote someone.

THE JACKEL

What about viewing the entire forum a rare quality?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goldenboko

What about viewing the entire forum a rare quality?

---

Candidate 3 also views the whole forum, just posts in the gaming areas more often.

plus candidate 5 is really active at times, and really inactive at other times. We need someone who will be constant, even if it's constantly moderate.

THE JACKEL

... Is no one even listing to my suggestions?

Viewing the entire forum isn’t a huge deal if we have two people that focus on two different aspects of the site, and still look at the rest of the site. 1 and 3 BOTH look at the whole site, they just have an area they focus on, so they have an area they could focus there moderating abilities on.

Now I am not hell bent on keeping 5 out of the staff by any means, I just think we should hold off on promoting him. And if you two keep arguing like this then we are not going to come to our decision in time! Neither of you are going to change your views so how about you look at the other aspects that could make someone a good CK?

It says, "Much less in general". We need to take that at face value that he doesn't post much in general. He also doesn't help with events.

I feel that 5 would make a great moderator and a behind the scenes person

But 1 would be a bad moderator and a good behind the scenes person.

EDIT: Dolen, calm down, spirited debate bud, spirited debate :)

I completely agree with promoting candidate 1 and 3. I'm against promoting candidate 1 and 5.

THE JACKEL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ljkkjlcm9

I completely agree with promoting candidate 1 and 3. I'm against promoting candidate 1 and 5.

THE JACKAL

---

Reason plz kthxbai :D

for the exact reasons that dolentrean presented about 1 and 3. And for the exact reasons i presented against candidate 5

THE JACKEL

So, are we in agreement on the promotion of 1, and either 3 or 5?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by qwertyxsora

So, are we in agreement on the promotion of 1, and either 3 or 5?

---

Pretty much, and we can safely say I'm gonna support 3, and GoBo will support 5.

THE JACKEL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by qwertyxsora

So, are we in agreement on the promotion of 1, and either 3 or 5?

---

I think that is where everyone who is active in the debate right now is at... I am seeing if we could make another thread for our final votes to keep everything orginized.

EDIT: Alright, all of our votes have to be managed within this thread, in an hour and a half at latest we should make our final votes.

1 and 5 for me.

Like I said before concerning Candidate 5, not taking initiative or shying away from a conflict can be a bad trait but, when everything else is added together from all the other candidates, I feel that there is going to be something about each of them that's going to make us want to hold back on promoting them.

After reading what you guys have said, I have had no change of heart for Candidate 3. It seems like this person would be a better help to the forum as a go-to guy than a moderator.

I'm definitely leaning toward Candidate 1 for promotion. Hands down.

Edit: Bear this in mind. When a person is promoted, they have access to everything we've written. They'll see what has been thought about them and I think that has a strong chance to change the things that the staff thinks they lack. With Candidate 5, that would be the confrontation problem. I think being promoted could actually help Candidate 5 with that problem.

1 and 5 for me, also.

Ok, 1 for certain.

If we promote a second person I am for 3

so right now

me: 1 and 3
Takara: 1 and 3
Dolentrean: 1 and 3
Ed: 1 and 5
Boko: 1 and 5
Oddler: 1 and 5

why don't we just support candidate 1 and only candidate 1?
if we were really staff in this competition, we could easily approach candidate 5 or 3 and say why they weren't accepted. If they wanted to be on staff in the future, they could improve in the lacking areas, and get promoted later.

THE JACKEL

Alright Dol said that "Its okay if we have 2 people viewing the entire forum instead of 1." Having 1 and 3, we leave out events, something we're understaffed on.

Also using your own argument 3 was described as "Calm and low-key demeanor."

Just talked this over with someone, Low-key in demeanor, means people are more quiet, a bit more to themselves. Don't you think your main argument, unwillingness to stand-up for themselves, applies to someone low-key in demeanor?

EDIT: Because if we only support candidate one, then I feel he has holes. He doesn't visit gaming, and he doesn't bridge with newbies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goldenboko

Alright Dol said that "Its okay if we have 2 people viewing the entire forum instead of 1." Having 1 and 3, we leave out events, something we're understaffed on.

Also using your own argument 3 was described as "Calm and low-key demeanor."

Just talked this over with someone, Low-key in demeanor, means people are more quiet, a bit more to themselves. Don't you think your main argument, unwillingness to stand-up for themselves, applies to someone low-key in demeanor?

EDIT: Because if we only support candidate one, then I feel he has holes. He doesn't visit gaming, and he doesn't bridge with newbies.

---

low key in demeanor means they're more restrained. Someone low-key in demeanor is in control of their emotions. Doesn't get overexcited, won't get angry easy... etc etc

and I really don't see how you can say we're understaffed in events when we have 10 people doing an event right now!

THE JACKEL

But we do, Goldenboko. This person is here to fill our holes. :bigsmile:

Edit: Exactly what ljkkjlcm9 just said.

We're doing an event, which as much easier then setting one up.

I had trouble with holding together a small C9 mafia. Can anyone here say they're confident they can do a great job being Award Guy?

We are understaffed because we are not creating and running events.

Yeah, I could do Award guy if I wanted to. If no one else wanted to, I would gladly step up and fill the role. But obviously, no matter what, award guy becomes a full time position and that person's other moderating things would slack off. It doesn't matter who is in that position.

I would gladly organize and form events. And if the claim is that only staff can organize and form events, well, then how do we know how well half the people in this group we already have, would be good at it.

THE JACKEL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ljkkjlcm9

Yeah, I could do Award guy if I wanted to. If no one else wanted to, I would gladly step up and fill the role. But obviously, no matter what, award guy becomes a full time position and that person's other moderating things would slack off. It doesn't matter who is in that position.

I would gladly organize and form events. And if the claim is that only staff can organize and form events, well, then how do we know how well half the people in this group we already have, would be good at it.

THE JACKAL

---

In Candidate 5 we have someone with experience setting up events. Have you ever set up an event?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ljkkjlcm9

Yeah, I could do Award guy if I wanted to. If no one else wanted to, I would gladly step up and fill the role. But obviously, no matter what, award guy becomes a full time position and that person's other moderating things would slack off. It doesn't matter who is in that position.

I would gladly organize and form events. And if the claim is that only staff can organize and form events, well, then how do we know how well half the people in this group we already have, would be good at it.

THE JACKAL

---

I can step up and go be a kick ass mofo in the gaming forums also! The fact is that we do not do either of those things currently. If all we have to do is step it up then we don't need a mod.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goldenboko

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ljkkjlcm9

Yeah, I could do Award guy if I wanted to. If no one else wanted to, I would gladly step up and fill the role. But obviously, no matter what, award guy becomes a full time position and that person's other moderating things would slack off. It doesn't matter who is in that position.

I would gladly organize and form events. And if the claim is that only staff can organize and form events, well, then how do we know how well half the people in this group we already have, would be good at it.

THE JACKAL

---

In Candidate 5 we have someone with experience setting up events. Have you ever set up an event?

---

at this website, no

I run a facebook group for an online game, and constantly update and start events for people. I post at another forum where I moderate and run events. There has been no reason for me to do events here because other people always have.

Hell, in high school I ran tech crew, and stage managed, and ran entire school plays. Advertising, selling tickets, and then the actually running the show.

THE JACKEL

I'm gonna do homework for 15 minutes while I consider this. At school I only considered Candidate 1, but Candidate 5 gave me a very good reading when I came home.

I'll be back.

Alright, we are all in agreement in candidate one. Like others pointed out, we are the staff, we can make an effort to be more active where we lack.

So, are we for sure promoting candidate one?

Okay this is the best possible solution I could come up with...

Unanimous opinions are very important, one opinion shouldn't be worth more then another

We all agree one on one, some of us agree on 3, some of us agree on 5, no one wants 4 or 2.

So we should give our results to Del as...

Promotes
Candidate 1

Possible Future Recruits
Candidates 3 and 5

Doesn't Recommend
Candidates 2 and 4


All in favor?

that's fine with me

THE JACKEL

Yah, we should wait for the people who haven't voted yet, as I think only six of us have voted. But other than that I think that we call 3 and 5 possible future recruits.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dolentrean

Yah, we should wait for the people who haven't voted yet, as I think only six of us have voted. But other than that I think that we call 3 and 5 possible future recruits.

---

I like that name better :D

Let's wait for others, but I like qwerty's idea that silence is support, because if it isn't then we'll miss the deadline.

Yah, I say we give them an hour, that will give us one hour till the deadline. Everyone good with that?

Well, I think we should ask someone running this if we have to manually submit the decision, I'd like to give everyone a fair chance and the more time the better.

I know I feel good, so I will probably be able to give them the results all the way up to the deadline itself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goldenboko

Well, I think we should ask someone running this if we have to manually submit the decision, I'd like to give everyone a fair chance and the more time the better.

I know I feel good, so I will probably be able to give them the results all the way up to the deadline itself.

---

well I just asked Rubah, and she said she wasn't sure. I think if it's in here, unless they ask for it otherwise, then we'll be good
she said

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rubah Lapah

his thread seems like it suggests you just post it with official pomp and circumstance in the threads

---

so yeah

THE JACKEL

I'm happy with our decision.

i would rather we vote on 3 or 5. not everyone is gonna get who they want and being able to live with the decision everyone else has made. you see not always gonna come to a consensus.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by edczxcvbnm

i would rather we vote on 3 or 5. not everyone is gonna get who they want and being able to live with the decision everyone else has made. you see not always gonna come to a consensus.

---

I think supporting candidate 1, and then if we were actually Cid Knights and seeing how candidate 3 and 5 developed for a little while after, is a much better decision. I'm sure the staff is looking at us and thinking some of us could be good Cid Knight's in time, but aren't ready for the job yet either.

THE JACKEL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by edczxcvbnm

i would rather we vote on 3 or 5. not everyone is gonna get who they want and being able to live with the decision everyone else has made. you see not always gonna come to a consensus.

---

This staff doesn't make a CK unless its unanimous, and I full agree with that notion.

Alright, if we manage to come to a decision we will promote another, but for now it seems like 1 is the only canidate that we are all for.

EDIT: Alright, this is bad timing, but I got to go, I more than likely wont be back until after the deadline. Good luck with the possible second promotion.

I'm still for my idea of mentioning 3 and 5 as future prospects.

we have it stated in here. Lord knows they've read this and are reading it. They know our debate, and they know what we think.

We support candidate 1, and if we were staff, we'd wait and see on candidate 3 and 5.

THE JACKEL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ljkkjlcm9

we have it stated in here. Lord knows they've read this and are reading it. They know our debate, and they know what we think.

We support candidate 1, and if we were staff, we'd wait and see on candidate 3 and 5.

THE JACKAL

---

Basically, now just to see if any more of our team shows up to throw in new ideas and such.

I like the idea of keeping tabs on 3 and 5 for possible knighting in the future. However if we get six votes in the next hour for a second candidate, we will let them pass through, otherwise we keep them recommended, agreed? I vote 3.

Sorry qwert I can't agree with that. That would do a majority rule, and I believe to say, "We want _______ as a Cid's Knight" I really think we need unanimous.

Well I brought that up because Bahamut and Dolentrean won't be back until after the deadline, and IBPengwynZ has been pretty inactive. If you don't agree though we can strike the motion.

Sorry for the general lack of being here...

Anyway, what you all have worked out sounds perfect to be. Also, I don't think it needs to be stated that we are keeping tabs on 3 and 5. This is about who we're promoting, so if they aren't being promoted why mention it?

I think they should be mentioned because, many of us are very to saying they should be Knighted, we just can't come to an unanimous vote that we would make them CK's

Whether or not it should be mentioned, it already has been lol

THE JACKEL

I'm sorry I have been so inactive today, but school and school activities has kept me away.

Anyways, while number 1 was not one of my top choices, I could certainly agree to knight said member. And I especially like that we are keeping the thought of 3 and 5 as possible future knights.

EDIT: Wait, can somebody give me an overview of how we as a staff look in strengths and weaknesses?

I'll make the official response then, If you have time, feel free to add to the reasoning.

We, team awesome has decided to promote candidate one to the rank of Cid's Knight. We chose 1 because we feel that the originality would be a god thing, and candidate one fills in any gaps that our group would miss.

But what exactly are those gaps?

EDIT: I am still going to go along with this choice. I trust you guys to have made a wise decision, and I would want us to be a solid team. I would just like a clear view of what you guys came up with.

The main gap is the connection with oldbies.

All right. I can understand that.

Thank you qwerty.

qwerty forgot we thought his unique view and smart personality would be a plus to our team.

Yeah, I'll add that to the official post. Eating dinner at the same time.:p


We, team awesome has decided to promote candidate one to the rank of Cid's Knight. We chose 1 because we feel that the originality would be a good thing, and candidate one fills in any gaps that our group would miss. We like his unique view, and think his/her personality would be a great addition to our moderating team.

My first choice was candidate 3, but candidate 1 was my second choice. So, I have no objection about promoting candidate 1.