[Answered] Posts required for admin

I personally feel the posts required for admin threshold is too low. Going from 100 to 10 seems fairly drastic. I could understand 50. Anyways, good luck though!

The thing about it, is it just makes more work at the top end, because even before even there was 100 posts, the big thing about it is the application process. The BDs(/ATs?) have to go through each applicant and see what the community has said, and their own thoughts/what they've seen. However, if they're willing to go through every app, I suppose why not, right? As long as quality control is high, quantity of applicants doesn't matter.

I agree with @Ejivis on this one. The 100 post count was a little too much and scared off many regs that were great admin material from applying. I was talking to @Bdcoll about this issue earlier, and came to the agreement that 25-50 posts would've been better. It allows regulars from different servers to have a better grasp on who's applying, and it helps users become more familiar with the way things work around the SG community.

I personally feel the posts required for admin threshold is too low. Going from 100 to 10 seems fairly drastic. I could understand 50. Anyways, good luck though!

The reason it was dropped because there was influx of admins that stepped down some and many of the new admins only have like 30-80 posts which is a win win situation for SG and the new players.

The reason it was dropped because there was influx of admins that stepped down some and many of the new admins only have like 30-80 posts which is a win win situation for SG and the new players.

I understood that, but 10 is way different than 30-80.

I understood that, but 10 is way different than 30-80.

The required amount should probably be around like 30 posts. 10 is too low, 50 is, too high. So, I think something around 30 would be a good number. Plus, we shouldn't want admins just because they reach a requirement of 10 we should want admins that actually want to be admins so much that they spend a lot of time making posts and contributing to the community.

I don't understand why the post count is such a big deal. Having 10 posts vs having 2,000 posts means nothing in an application, other than you use the forums more often. I've never been too concerned about posts unless there were ones that really stuck out. Even then, I'd say there is little to no times that someone in-game who is great admin quality and one of the best people who could join the staff, comes to the forums and makes horrible forum posts. I'm not trying to say applicants shouldn't be using the forums and making posts, as they should be, but it shouldn't be the reason we turn down good applicants.

The required amount should probably be around like 30 posts. 10 is too low, 50 is, too high. So, I think something around 30 would be a good number. Plus, we shouldn't want admins just because they reach a requirement of 10 we should want admins that actually want to be admins so much that they spend a lot of time making posts and contributing to the community.

For me, I want admins who play the servers. That what I looked for when I would vote on applications. After all, they are applying to be in-game administrators, not forum moderators.

I agree with @Ejivis on this one. The 100 post count was a little too much and scared off many regs that were great admin material from applying. I was talking to @Bdcoll about this issue earlier, and came to the agreement that 25-50 posts would've been better. It allows regulars from different servers to have a better grasp on who's applying, and it helps users become more familiar with the way things work around the SG community.

I don't exactly agree with requiring posts just so players of other servers get to know them. While I think an applicant should be trying hard to reach out to the community and frequent all of the servers, I'm not going to use the lack of posts against a ZE player just because I don't frequent ZE. Examples being Charizard and Cept for Her. I didn't vote on their applications because they pretty much exclusively play ZE and it wouldn't be fair if I, someone who rarely plays ZE, used their posts to make a judgement. Clearly they were admin quality in-game because of the amount of support they got from the ZE playerbase, and as it turns out, they are both fantastic admins and contributors to SG and ZE. At some point, voters need to be accountable for their activity as well.

As long as quality control is high, quantity of applicants doesn't matter.

I mean, the point of having the community vote on applicants is to serve as a quality control. If the community is supporting applicants who aren't ready for admin, perhaps the system needs to be changed.

I strongly believe that you're voting for the wrong reasons if you make a decision based on forum posts and not in-game interactions. In-game you have seconds to minutes to make a decision, but on the forums you can take days to make a post. For example, I'll usually think about how I should make a post for days before finally posting. I've been thinking about this post for at least a day. So to me, it doesn't make sense why people look for posts that someone had time to think about, reword, or completely rewrite when no one gets that opportunity in-game, which is where their actions and words really matter.

I strongly believe that you're voting for the wrong reasons if you make a decision based on forum posts and not in-game interactions. In-game you have seconds to minutes to make a decision, but on the forums you can take days to make a post.

I, myself, don't make any judgments or vote on admin applications based on forum posts. And now that I think about it you're right, the post requirements are honestly mostly just there so random people that have 30 days on the forums don't apply and waste people's times. (at least that's my opinion) To an extent, posts don't matter, what really matters is if an admin at least checks the forums a few times a week so they could at least be involved a little bit more with what's happening on the servers and in the community apart from just moderating the servers.

 

 

 

 

I don't exactly agree with requiring posts just so players of other servers get to know them. While I think an applicant should be trying hard to reach out to the community and frequent all of the servers, I'm not going to use the lack of posts against a ZE player just because I don't frequent ZE. Examples being Charizard and Cept for Her. I didn't vote on their applications because they pretty much exclusively play ZE and it wouldn't be fair if I, someone who rarely plays ZE, used their posts to make a judgement. Clearly they were admin quality in-game because of the amount of support they got from the ZE playerbase, and as it turns out, they are both fantastic admins and contributors to SG and ZE. At some point, voters need to be accountable for their activity as well.

 

 

I mean, the point of having the community vote on applicants is to serve as a quality control. If the community is supporting applicants who aren't ready for admin, perhaps the system needs to be changed.

 

 

 

I strongly believe that you're voting for the wrong reasons if you make a decision based on forum posts and not in-game interactions. In-game you have seconds to minutes to make a decision, but on the forums you can take days to make a post. For example, I'll usually think about how I should make a post for days before finally posting. I've been thinking about this post for at least a day. So to me, it doesn't make sense why people look for posts that someone had time to think about, reword, or completely rewrite when no one gets that opportunity in-game, which is where their actions and words really matter.

@Gator, I just said that because many people who play on servers main one specific server instead of playing all the game modes. If a user wants to comment on an application for someone they don't play with but have interacted with online, it would give them a better idea on who's applying if they know who they are based on Forum and TeamSpeak interactions. It would allow them to make a more personal vote rather than just supporting them or reapplying them based on what they see in the Application thread.

I don't understand why the post count is such a big deal. Having 10 posts vs having 2,000 posts means nothing in an application, other than you use the forums more often. I've never been too concerned about posts unless there were ones that really stuck out. Even then, I'd say there is little to no times that someone in-game who is great admin quality and one of the best people who could join the staff, comes to the forums and makes horrible forum posts. I'm not trying to say applicants shouldn't be using the forums and making posts, as they should be, but it shouldn't be the reason we turn down good applicants.

I disagree. I believe it shows you care about the community. If you play on the servers and do not interact with users on the forums then how much do you really care compared to others? Maybe my expectations are too high for an administrator, but I expect more of them than a regular on the server. Posts should be constructive and helpful and not just spam. They should be thoughtful and to the point with context. Admins should share thoughts on other admin applications as well. I believe exceptions could be made for some individuals, but 90% of the time most of the people applying for admin with only 10 posts do not deserve it.