Well, as I mentioned earlier, I'd personally choose candidate three over candidate four. I agree with Linus's assessment of the importance of having a member who can help the community outside of moderating. I'm sure we'd all be competent moderating the gaming fora, as would candidate four, certainly, but it seems that candidate three would offer more than just that.
Quite honestly, our group probably has the diverse personality thing already covered in the staff. I don't know about the rest of you quite as much, but I'm certainly not capable of spouting off the kind of information that it would appear candidate three is. I mean, I play a lot of video games (the amount of cash that has disappeared from my wallet over the past few months can attest to that), but I'm not often able to answer some of the more specific questions that make appearances in the gaming fora. While it's not absolutely necessary that a staff member can answer these questions (after all, there are likely plenty of non-staff members perfectly capable of doing it), it wouldn't hurt to have that kind of representation amongst our ranks.
It seems general consensus is leading towards candidate four and candidate three. For this reason, I'd like to more specifically focus on the merits of these two members and how they'll fit in our group. I'm going to tackle each candidate point-by-point and weigh the value as I see them fitting into the dynamic of our group. Once again, candidate three:
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.
All the members of our team have been part of this community for some time. Three years is a considerable amount of time to devote to EoFF, and we can be sure that this member is familiar with the way the place works and also sees how it has grown. I think he'll fit in great in that aspect.
As previously noted, the activeness in the general fora is always good, especially since it seems harder to come by. Combined with point three--that he is respected for his helpfulness and advice--we can see that candidate three will be able to offer something new to our group.
The calm and low-key demeanor is both a hit and a miss. Ideally, we want staff members to be involved with forum activities. However, I'd say our group as a whole is currently very active in the community. As a result, I tend to put less weight in this fault.
Again, activity in the gaming fora as a trade off to the general fora isn't terribly bad. Upon knighthood, the member can be encouraged to participate more actively in the general fora. That's something easily changed, as opposed to character traits.
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.
Being a top poster is certainly an advantage. Then again, looking at our group... many of our members already have this covered. To an extent, in this regard candidate four may just be more of the same.
Candidate four seems like an all around friendly guy. He seems to get along with everyone, and is generally popular with a majority of the board (he does win a lot of Ciddies, after all). Again, we've got both of these fairly well represented here. That cover the popularity bit of point three, as well.
I think there's enough of us in this group who can be classified as jokesters and non-serious. I don't really think our group requires any lightening up or comic relief. In fact, we might need a little bit of the opposite.
I think we've decided that point four is moot. The past is the past, and there's really no reason to hold previous anti-staff sentiments against candidate four if he's changed.
Like in the case of candidate three, forum activity can be changed. However, candidate four doesn't offer the added bonus of being able to contribute to the gaming fora (at least, the information provided doesn't seem to suggest that), so while we may be able to convince this candidate to frequent the gaming fora, I don't expect to be able to get him to actively contribute. While this normally wouldn't be much of a problem, in comparison to what three can offer, I see this as a bit of a fault.
I'll concede that my analysis has been biased by my own preference for candidate three, but that's how I'm justifying said bias right now. Hopefully someone can provide with some altering opinions. If not, perhaps we're all already in agreement? While there's no rush (we've got almost seventeen hours left), I'm going to go ahead and throw in my vote for candidate three. Of course, I'm open to being convinced, but I think that candidate three can best broaden the horizons of our hypothetical group of Knights.