Round 3 Part 2 - Team 2 (Team Awesome)

[Dolentrean]

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.

[Goldenboko]

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.

[edczxcvbnm]

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.

[Goldenboko]

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.

[Takara]

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.

[ljkkjlcm9]

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

[qwertysaur]

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

[Takara]

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.

[Goldenboko]

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.

[qwertysaur]

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

Edit: and feel better Boko

[oddler]

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.

[edczxcvbnm]

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.

[ljkkjlcm9]

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

[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

[ljkkjlcm9]

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