I hadn't thought of it that way; I suppose calling it a probation period is a bit adversarial; your way is better.Originally Posted by Raistlin
I hadn't thought of it that way; I suppose calling it a probation period is a bit adversarial; your way is better.
Master of the Fork
Cid's Knight
For extra context, this use to be a very productive staff who's been there for years. The site wouldn't be the same without them kinda thing.
Seriously? xD Like what? "PSY ADMITTED HE HAS A CRUSH ON JULIAN!"? I know there are things in staff said, mostly about the regular members, that the staff would prefer not be shared. But the risk of that "getting out" seems a much lesser evil and pain in the ass than having such a whiny baby on staff in the first place. I just don't see it as much of a threat.
But even so, if I thought it could be saved, I'd urge the staffer not to do anything rash, or else any hope of them remaining on staff would be gone. If they wanted to stay on staff, then they need to be mature and reasonable. If they continued to throw a fit, then we have our answer. Demote, and if they still act out, ban. And if the person is that big of a dick for that to be necessary, then good riddance.
Nothing said in Staff should be so vile that it cannot be said in public, if it is, then that is a problem within itself.
If the staffer has been deemed by the group to have the title removed, and the staff is threatening to blow the top on an event or something, it should be understood that grave (banning) consequences can be handed out.
This is sounding less and less like a hypothetical situation
Are we still on the blackmailing staffer, or is this back to someone who's on the block for mere inactivity?
Master of the Fork
Cid's Knight
No just trying to get more discussions out of you! Trying to make the scenario harder xD I'm bored
It's not necessarily that it's vile. There are a lot of personal things that are discussed that the general public just does not need to know about. It's not smack talk about the rest of the forum. (well okay, it probably is.)
As for the third installment of kc's question - EoFF has greatly changed over the years. Key members for this place have come and gone over less crap than this hypothetical situation. Immediate decisions shouldn't be made and the situation should be diffused as best as it can. Consquences should be handed out according to a member's actions. They'll probably still get preferential treatment anyway, if they were a member that the site would just not be the same without. It's great if they've been useful and helpful and a great member over the years, but words or actions can change things in the blink of an eye. Threatening to "expose the great secrets of staff" isn't something that should be taken lightly. Threatening in general shouldn't be taken lightly.
As Bleys said, don't negotiate with terrorists.
Same ban threat applies then?It's not necessarily that it's vile. There are a lot of personal things that are discussed that the general public just does not need to know about. It's not smack talk about the rest of the forum. (well okay, it probably is.)
Should have said the member in question was Sean, then. That'd really be a tough nut to crack.
EDIT: Actually, not. Sean is actually entitled to a staff post for life because he created the goddamn site in the first place.
"boot and ban sean"
yeah that'd go over well
In all fairness, though, the only way Sean would actually try to blackmail the rest of the staff would be if he were kidnapped by a face-raping robot Nazi from the planet Speng, and do we really want staffers who aren't from Earth? I say no!
If the staffer in question had been very productive for a long time, it would certainly make things more difficult. Not only because of their contribution, but because of personal friendships made during that time. But people change, and EoFF changes. If a friend of mine flipped out like that, threw a tantrum, and tried to blackmail the rest of the staff, I would lose a lot of respect for them; past contribution does not justify present immaturity and hurting EoFF. It might be harder, but I think the outcome probably has to be the same, given the exact same facts.
EDIT: Oooh, ooh, could I ban Sean? I want to see what screen name he'd use for his second account when he found out. Maybe his wife would post again! That was fun last time.
This is said brilliantly. Just because a particular staff member has been very helpful or whatever doesn't mean the rules should be bent for them. If the staff can't follow the same rules as everyone else, then there's something very wrong.
a calm sea never made a skillful sailor | MILLIEGOESBEEP
I wouldn't want to be known as the guy who banned Sean, or some other influential member like that. Loony BoB, Yamaneko etc. These people are essentially untouchable in my opinion. Not unwarnable, but certainly unbannable.
The above situation sounds incredibly unlikely, but if it was ever truly necessary to make a threat like that, it wouldn't be you being the guy, but being the collective Staff at the time. Staff is a team, that's what this entire thing is challenge is about, see if you can settle differences and be a team player. If someone is banned the responsibility would be equally shouldered.
Posting Permissions
