Round 3 Part 2 - Team 1 (Team Fruity)

[Heath]

To be honest I don't get where this "there are lots of 4's" has come from either, the only one I can see is Psy, unless Michael and Warren have got a storied history that no one has filled me in on. Either way that's no reason to be choosing someone or not anyway, it doesn't make a jot of difference whether "there are too many of this type of person on staff!"or not, all that matters is how good they'll do the job. :monster:

edit: oh I see, in this group of 10. Well, either way, I still say the way they'd do the moderators job is far more important than what sort of flavour they add to the staff. :smash:

In all honesty, when I was picking between the three I had left (having safely eliminated 2 and 5), that wasn't a deciding factor. Me and Rye were discussing in #teamfruity yesterday how she figured that number 4 not posting in the gaming forums is easily amendable. By that right, I figured that number 3 not posting in the general forums was also easily amendable and - on the face of it - preferred that candidate overall anyway. I'd say the potential for that individual to become more rounded with the staff role as an incentive to do so would be worth considering.

Edit: You crazy kids posting while I am. As Mullet is comfortable with 4 as well as 3, so am I. But my preference is definitely number 3.

[Flying Mullet]

I know someone can read forums they don't engage in regularly, but I like the idea of choosing a CK that posts regularly in said forums because the populace that regularly reads those forums are going to respect them and their decisions more(i.e. a regular in gaming will be respected more than a non-gaming regular that shows up, shakes their billy club and then leaves).

For the other qualities between 3 and 4, since we're focusing a lot on Gen Chat vs. Gaming forums right now:
* They've both been active for while and know the ropes, nothing to distinguish one or the other here.
* Candidate 3 seems to be more serious than Candidate 4. The fact that Candidate 3 has a history of offering help leans me more towards Candidate 3.
* Candidate 3 doesn't participate in forum events. That can be bad, but as long as they're doing a good moderating job, I honestly don't care. There are enough people on staff, fictitious or real, that can handle the events, come up with fun stuff and participate. This is why we have Recognized Members and why I like embracing the newbie populace to keep it fresh.

[Rye]

I'm not deciding yet. I'm waiting to see if any people who are staunchly 4 are going to post anything that will convince me to vote 4, if not then I will vote 3. But that'll come later.

I think one of the most appealing features to 4 is that it improves the relations between the CKs and the general forum goers. People are going to be bitter, resentful, and will disobey someone who is a 100% hardass. Candidate 4 seems like they've matured to the point where they can be serious when they need to, but the general forum respects them and will listen to them when they tell them to knock it off, etc. I feel like when you treat someone right, they will respect you better. I guess you could say Candidate 4 has the charisma.

On the flip side of that, since a lot of our members stay in GC, they would probably be less respectful for Candidate 3, if they just pop out of nowhere from the Gaming Forum and start moderating. It's definitely not Candidate 3's fault, but I've seen it happen various times, and you know that as well as I do, Dan. That's definitely something to consider.

I think that participating in forum events is important, though. It shows that you do want a great position in the forum community. Participating in events in the forum can show a lot of leadership. Running them is a lot of hard work, and involves organization and telling people when they have to cut the crap, at times. Doing odd jobs for site staff and the front page, which is really great and also shows a sense of community, seems more like a candidate for site staff/admin positions. I truly think 3 would be an amazing admin, but maybe not the best CK. They're still 2nd place to me, though.

I'll probably add more to that later, but that's something I respect in 4, and I feel hinders 3. Both are great candidates, but those reasons are big ones that make 4 pop a little more in my eyes.

[Flying Mullet]

Perhaps we should invite Candidate 3 and 4 to dinner and slip roofies in their drinks. While they're unconscious we'll do some Frankenstein-style voodoo and make the ideal candidate that has the best of both worlds.

[Heath]

I think one of the most appealing features to 4 is that it improves the relations between the CKs and the general forum goers. People are going to be bitter, resentful, and will disobey someone who is a 100% hardass. Candidate 4 seems like they've matured to the point where they can be serious when they need to, but the general forum respects them and will listen to them when they tell them to knock it off, etc. I feel like when you treat someone right, they will respect you better. I guess you could say Candidate 4 has the charisma.

Having said that, I don't think there's much to suggest that candidate 3 would be a hardass, despite there being evidence that candidate 4 wouldn't be. The fact that 3 has acted mature for some time and seems to enjoy helping people out suggests a pretty friendly nature and someone who wouldn't be authoritarian. I'd agree that 4 would probably more charisma though.

Perhaps we should invite Candidate 3 and 4 to dinner and slip roofies in their drinks. While they're unconscious we'll do some Frankenstein-style voodoo and make the ideal candidate that has the best of both worlds.

You've got my vote.

[Rye]

Awww yeahhh.

[Rye]

Having said that, I don't think there's much to suggest that candidate 3 would be a hardass, despite there being evidence that candidate 4 wouldn't be. The fact that 3 has acted mature for some time and seems to enjoy helping people out suggests a pretty friendly nature and someone who wouldn't be authoritarian. I'd agree that 4 would probably more charisma though.

Oh no, that wasn't to imply that Candidate 3 is a hardass, but they probably wouldn't have as great as a standing with the forum and wouldn't be given as great as respect and listened to as well. That may, depending on their nature, make the resort to being hard ass to get people to listen to them. Or it might make them give up and just slink back off to the gaming forum. It depends on them so much. It's hard to tell from 5 lines of text.

[Flying Mullet]

Unless I'm mistaken, it sounds like we're deciding between Candidates 3 and 4.

I know it might sound obvious, but I figured I would summarize for those coming in later that don't want to reread all of the posts that got us to Candidate 3 versus Candidate 4.

[Rye]

Good idea, Mullet! Summarizing is good. Cliffnotes for Team Fruity. CHICKEN SOUP FOR THE MODERATOR'S SOUL.

I'll try to stop now and let everyone else mull it over. And I'll say it again, despite sounding really anti-3 in my last few posts, I do think they'd be a great candidate. I just really see a lot of potential in 4. I'll be very happy with either though. What do you guys think, those of you who haven't put in a definite vote?

[Flying Mullet]

And if someone strongly wants to consider another candidate, please speak up. I'm basing my super-green summary on the last dozen posts or so.

[Linus]

Perhaps we should invite Candidate 3 and 4 to dinner and slip roofies in their drinks. While they're unconscious we'll do some Frankenstein-style voodoo and make the ideal candidate that has the best of both worlds.

I like this idea.

I vote for Candidate 3 based upon our many exquisite observations.

[Breine]

I think one of the most appealing features to 4 is that it improves the relations between the CKs and the general forum goers. People are going to be bitter, resentful, and will disobey someone who is a 100% hardass. Candidate 4 seems like they've matured to the point where they can be serious when they need to, but the general forum respects them and will listen to them when they tell them to knock it off, etc. I feel like when you treat someone right, they will respect you better. I guess you could say Candidate 4 has the charisma.

On the flip side of that, since a lot of our members stay in GC, they would probably be less respectful for Candidate 3, if they just pop out of nowhere from the Gaming Forum and start moderating. It's definitely not Candidate 3's fault, but I've seen it happen various times, and you know that as well as I do, Dan. That's definitely something to consider.

I agree with Heath that nothing says that Candidate 3 is gonna be a hardass. Since they're known for being helpful, and respected for that, becoming a 100% hardass just by becoming a Cid's Knight seems unlikely.

Also, candidate 3 is already a respected member, although mostly in the gaming forums, and candidate 4 has to go from being everyone's buddy and being popular to being respected. Respect is not easily attained and although people will probably respect the Cid's Knight title and the powers that come with it, it certainly doesn't hurt having attained it the hard way, rather than sort of having been given it when made a Cid's Knight.

EDIT: The summarizing is a great idea

[Rye]

Breine - 3 (runner up: 4)
Ouch! - 3 (runner up: 4)
Roto - 4 (runner up: 3)
Rye - 4 (runner up: 3)
smittenkitten - 3
Heath - 3 (Runner up: 1)
DK - 3 or 4
Linus - 3
Jess - ???
Flying Mullet - 3 (Runner up: 4)

---

So basically, we're candidate 3, unless we have any major objections from others and votes are changed. I think we should have our candidate chosen definitely by an hour to the task deadline, just to be safe.

[Breine]

So basically, we're candidate 3, unless we have any major objections from others and votes are changed. I think we should have our candidate chosen definitely by an hour to the task deadline, just to be safe.

Yeah, that's probably a good idea. Might as well have our candidate chosen as soon as possible - we largely agree with each other anyway, so there haven't really been any issues.

I'm still waiting to see what Jess is going to post, though.

[Flying Mullet]

What happened to Jess? Does she have narcolepsy and fall asleep mid-post?