Trq2b2m7

1Monbrey: I'm going to build a wall and I'm going to make the Contest section pay for it.
2
3I even have a sexual harassment infraction, which seems to be a prerequisite to be involved in US politics.
4
5I like the Council idea
6
7- 
8WinterVines: I like the idea behind this in getting more people to help out and such, but I can't help the overwhelming feeling (at least before) of when I read these for seeing to mean all the current people should step down. And I know that's not really what it's saying, unless there's someone more active and qualified in the community pool (which would be determined by current crowd, who, as I'll point out from the other issues, people have complained about poor attitudes). I do need to revisit and read them more fully, but I find myself hesitant. 
9
10And I dunno, after all the time and effort I've put into the URPG, having to step down from something like this just makes me overwhelmingly sad. Many times, doing section work is all that kept me in URPG to begin with when I would have left for good. 
11
12Maybe that's me being arrogant. Or maybe feeling underappreciated. And perhaps stepping down would make that feeling worse, of being swept under the rug. I don't know anymore. Maybe we do need a whole new crew.
13
14Menegoth did express wanting to be co Head Grader today because Smiles and Elysia were busy.
15
16- 
17
18Elysia: WinterVines said: ↑
19And I dunno, after all the time and effort I've put into the URPG, having to step down from something like this just makes me overwhelmingly sad. Many times, doing section work is all that kept me in URPG to begin with when I would have left for good.
20I don't mean for any of this to make anyone feel underappreciated -- people in Staff have made huge changes in URPG and have dedicated hundreds of volunteer hours to keeping the community afloat, and for me it almost goes without saying that everyone reading this has sunk so much time into making this place kickass. I made this thread to address the flip side: there's no clean way to leave and people often feel embarrassed to step down when they should be congratulated for their years of dedication.
21
22Staff here is one of the only places I've seen where you're basically stuck for life once you get it, and I think that alone contributes to a ton of burnout on our end. which is no bueno for staff fam, including + especially the people who are burned out but feel tied to their duties. I think having staff cycles would make it easier to juggle this commitment and lessen the feeling that you're losing something permanent by taking some time off from Staff -- once irl stuff clears up/you feel more able to hop back in with all of your energy, you have an opportunity to reapply and work at your full capacity.
23
24Maybe that's me being arrogant. Or maybe feeling underappreciated. And perhaps stepping down would make that feeling worse, of being swept under the rug. I don't know anymore. Maybe we do need a whole new crew.
25I think there are two halves to this equation -- fresh eyes are also good and there's not a good way for non-Staff to have their voices heard, which leads to a lot of their frustration and complaining, which makes us feel unappreciated, which feeds back into the cycle. also no bueno 
26
27Menegoth did express wanting to be co Head Grader today because Smiles and Elysia were busy.
28He did indeed, and reached out to me. Smiles and I are discussing.
29
30Ash K. said: ↑
31I think we need more frequent discussions on promotions/demotions, but not necessarily a change on how they're done other than "not taking as long". I agree that staff should not be "a trophy", but I didn't think that was happening?
32There have been concerns that Staff/section heads are not performing their jobs to the extent that they are expected, and it's been brought up that perhaps other members could fill that role. I don't want to imply that that statement is fully true and I know people here have been working a lot, but I want to acknowledge both the outstanding work being performed here as well as the general sentiment that some non-Staff members think non-Staff members could help perform these tasks well.
33
34- 
35
36WinterVines:  think also, the expectations of each job/role should be clarified.
37
38I am tired of the "ash doesn't ref when hes a senior ref" and similar arguments when basic reffing is not the main job of the senior ref, etc. 
39
40For things that non staff can do, people are more than welcome to help out. Like, interested parties often run things like events when they express interest in it and such. 
41
42But some things, like the testing part, not everyone who holds that job is qualified to do that, as from the discussions earlier, Judging and Ref Tests seemed to be the two things most people were concerned about. 
43
44People like Dash expressed wanting to ref test, but to be honest, and no offense to him, I'm not sure if his knowledge of correct mechanics is enough to administer tests. I'm not sure there are many current active refs who know the mechanics well enough to do so. I've always left discretion of Senior Ref up to Monbrey since Head Ref generally appoints them and knows who is best suited for that sort of thing. 
45
46As for other sections, I don't know what else really needs to be done. As usual, it's not the specialized tasks that sections need help with--it's activity and performing the baseline job (ie, needing more curators, more people to write stories, etc).
47
48With a Staff cycle, wouldn't that just end up with a huge staff in the end? Like, if some groups return but the others don't want to step back and take a break, do the new staff get first dibs, or should everyone just be on it, or what? What if a section has like 4 heads? That can also really slow the process, much like how we often struggle to come to a consensus. I think the phrase term limits is what triggers me a little since that implies that once you run your cycle, you're out. 
49
50I also don't feel that sweeping in a new set of leaders and replacing old will acknowledge what the older ones have done. It seems more of a "good riddance" sort of feel or a "now we can get things done" thing. That's how I feel the current crowd views it anyway. I feel there's little respect in general for professions and stuff with a lot of members--mostly based on how the refs feel underappreciated. 
51
52Sorry rambly. I'm tired.
53
54- 
55WinterVines: All of this also sort of hinges on the idea that the section leader wants to step down and take a break. What if that leader doesn't want to and are continuing working on stuff and whatnot? What if others still want to oust that person?
56
57I may just be being paranoid or something. But the gist of this idea, for example if it was Park up for the chopping block put to the people, I feel they'd oust me and put Magik in just because he's had a surge of activity, not because he knows Park material and function best. I think that's what I ultimately dislike about elections, as we've seen from other contests in ages past. 
58
59I do like people being able to bring up concerns, but it was always my understanding that they already did that. People went to the section heads or to a staff member when they thought something was amiss. That has been standard course for forever and I think is stated in the rules that they should do so. Idk, I feel like setting up an elaborate system to do that when it already exists is kinda strange and a bit hand-holding. 
60
61A council giving support who is also knowledgeable about the section is a different thing entirely, which is what the seniors of a section are supposed to be right now (or at least contests, park, battling and art do)--there just aren't a lot of people who are active in these sections to do this. For example, even though Mistral is on break, I can't promote Magik or K'sariya because they pretty much just became Rangers and are still muddy about a lot of things so we work through those.
62
63- 
64Monbrey: Oh boy, if you thought I was annoyed in the other threads...
65
66First of all, I thought this is why we set up the #pseudostaff chat in the first place. However we probably didn't continue to use it how we could have, inviting new members whenever they show interest in making contributions to the development of URPG.
67
68I think I've made it very clear that I am not going to pass off the job of ref testing to anybody besides a Senior Ref, and I won't be writing a script for the test either. The role of Senior Ref isn't about being someone who refs a lot - all the people I currently have are there because they have excellent knowledge of battle mechanics, are constantly monitoring chats to ensure that the refs are doing their job correctly, and are trusted to step in where required. These qualities are what makes them suitable for administering ref tests and ensuring that anybody who passes is good enough to be a ref. As Winter pointed out, I'm not sure any of the current refs have these qualities. If anybody else thinks someone does, I'm not against promoting additional Seniors.
69
70A lot of people whine. Some of the do show some initiative, which is good. I want to support that, but that doesn't mean they're necessarily good enough to be doing what they ask for.
71
72Menegoth for co-Head Grader because they asked for it? God, you must be REALLY busy to consider that, especially given how you seemed appropriately appalled when Magik out-rightly asked for promotions.
73- 
74
75Monbreu: How much harm could a system of voting for your leaders possibly do?
76
77[​trump image here] 
78
79- 
80
81Elysia: Monbrey said: ↑
82How much harm could a system of voting for your leaders possibly do?
83
84[​IMG]
85Click to expand...
86Q. Are you fucking insane the US elections show what a terrible idea this is already why would you ever.
87A. Something something not having bipartisan stuff would honestly make this less of a clusterfuck than it would imply, and also the qualifications for being head of an RPG section are much less important than the quals for running a country.
88If we could keep the shitposting to a minimum, I would greatly appreciate it.
89
90Meanwhile, @Smiles i think the bet we made is satisfied here <3
91
92- 
93
94Elysia: 
95
96Monbrey said:
97A lot of people whine. Some of the do show some initiative, which is good. I want to support that, but that doesn't mean they're necessarily good enough to be doing what they ask for.
98WinterVines said: ↑
99Or are they just vying for a power seat? Without actually having a specific thing they want accomplished and just new faces in charge.
100Can we not perpetuate this current mindset? There have been maybe one or two bad apples in the past, and we're letting that color our perceptions of a lot of non-Staff who just want to help make the place more active.
101
102I don't think anyone is actually pushing for "fire everyone/mostly everyone here and replace with the loudest complainers"; I think the ideal end goal is a solution where:
103Current Staff AND members are fully aware of what each section head/staff member is in charge of doing
104A system exists for members to tell section heads/staff when it appears that section heads/staff are not fully completing their jobs
105A system exists so that section heads/staff who aren't doing their jobs can get help doing their jobs so that the system can run properly
106Furthermore, non-Staff members who want to help sections feel comfortable coming forward doing so.
107
108Addressing the last point first: we vaguely have this in place, and we certainly don't have any rules strictly against it, but I don't think it's been upheld to its fullest. The two examples quoted in thread:
109As that's what people have done in the past when they wanted to do a certain thing, such as Sou with the art event or even farther back like Ace to run a battle tournament.
110= iirc Sou was Staff when she ran the Art event, or is this not the Alola one?
111= I still talk with Ace via the Writer's Workshop, and he's actually cited that tournament (idk he called it the Gauntlet or something) and the resulting fallout as the reason he quit URPG while still maintaining an active presence on BMG.
112= Other non-Staff members have approached me saying they want to help in particular sections but feel like it's pointless to ask since they think they will be shot down anyway.
113= Won't mention the only other incident I can remember since it means kicking puppies.
114
115Not the best track record.
116
117In my experience, no non-Staff has felt comfortable asking to run things. There have been a few tournaments, but that's usually under the helm of "if you want ____ style tournament so badly, run it yourself", and we've occasionally invited other members to host WC's, but that's us approaching them when ideally it should be the other way around.
118my conclusion from this is not necessarily the same as yours, but I see it as us having created an environment where Staff makes decisions and passes them down, and members are not comfortable asking us anything. this is not good.
119
120Like Smiles said, this is a hugely personal conversation for all of us, but I would rather look at it from an objective point of view. Staff has historically been a very insular position where an inner circle makes decisions and the outer circle feels like they have no say in what's going on in a community that they love. We've tried the lax approach of "make them come to us," but I don't think that's worked out very well for us from a community standpoint.
121
122@ people who made posts about Council; still mulling that over and have not come to a concrete conclusion yet, but I've read your stuff and am not ignoring it
123
124- 
125
126WinterVines: I'm not pursuing Sou's point out of a negative mindset--I'm genuinely wanting to know what they have in mind, because when asked, they haven't really said much, or at least that part hasn't been posted here. I would like that perspective.
127
128And sure, it's also posted here that communication should be open and stuff, which is true, but is that exactly what most others have in the front of their brains? I would like to know what they want exactly from these changes because that will help decide what should be done. Specifics would be good because I feel a lot of our conversations generate around these lofty ideals but there's never any specific course of action thing that we should put in motion to get across all these ideals.
129
130If you recall, this is why Harry and I get into it sometimes, because he's a big idea man without giving us hints on a means to enact those ideas.
131
132- 
133
134Mistral: I'm in class right now and my attention is divided between paying attention and trying to read this. There's a couple points I want to make here though before I forget.
135
136- I don't think the shitposting in serious discussions is necessary.[/i] I'm all for joking around and shitposting, but when we're in the middle of a serious discussion, I find the shitposting very unnecessary and irrelevant to the thread at all, and it's a little annoying too when we're trying to have serious discussion and get stuff done. Not just directing this at Monbrey (since he is the one who posted in this thread with the shitpost), but everyone here; I called Ely and Seppe on it in #pseudostaff last night. (And I'm guilty of shitposting a bit too, so it's not just the few people I mentioned.) If I want shitposting in a serious conversation, I'll go to #general because that's the shit I expect from them. I'd rather see the shitposts after we're done talking about an issue than while we're discussing it. I feel like part of the reason why we don't get stuff done is because we get shitposts in the middle of a discussion, and then it's derailed and rip that topic for the time being.
137
138- I don't think we should judge people solely on their behavior in general chat. A person who doesn't take shit seriously all the time may still actually be a good staff matter. In a big group chat with others who are shitposting, it's easy to get distracted and start shitposting right along with them. I'm sure that if we DM'd some people who are shitposters and whiners, they'd be great one on one or where there's no one else around them shitposting.
139
140- 
141
142Monbrey: Would like to hear Harry's thoughts on the whole voting concept.
143
144I'm not sure I support the idea at all, but I definitely can't without the responsibilities of roles being clearly defined.
145As Winter pointed out, whoever happens to be particularly active as the base profession is likely to get voted for, without any real thought put into if they are capable of doing the rest of the duties which would come with the higher role.
146That's always our first consideration when we pick people under the current system - I have lots of good refs, but I'm not sure how many I would trust to keep the rest in line.
147
148I distinctly remember a time when we were hesitant to promote Ash to a higher position of power due to concerns that vets and URPG members may not give him the respect required for people in that role.
149Thankfully when he was promoted that hasn't been an issue, and people do respect him for the contributions he's made and knowledge he has. They just want him to ref more.
150
151Everyone is dancing around the point - we are the staff and I'm sure we don't want to risk being voted out. So why would we ever agree to implement a system where we could be?
152I'm not opposed to our members getting involved in contributing and improving URPG, it would be stupid to oppose that. I don't agree with the premise that they need a Council or promotion in order to do so.
153
154We have the Trainer's Court for people to post public discussions about things, and private messaging to discuss anything with a Section Head, me or Harry.
155If there is a perception that we are unapproachable, too slow to act, or will shut down their ideas, then that is the problem and that is what we need to work on. Official titles or changing in promotion processes won't change that.
156I would much rather address our processes for responding to and implementing ideas so that people don't feel that their efforts and thoughts are wasted.
157
158
159- 
160
161Elysia: 
162
163WinterVines said: ↑
164And sure, it's also posted here that communication should be open and stuff, which is true, but is that exactly what most others have in the front of their brains? I would like to know what they want exactly from these changes because that will help decide what should be done. Specifics would be good because I feel a lot of our conversations generate around these lofty ideals but there's never any specific course of action thing that we should put in motion to get across all these ideals.
165Offhand, trying to hit as many sections as possible, I've seen members with concerns about (paying refs more, helping ref wages come on time, having ref/judge tests happen more frequently, running story section events, running AH events, and running art events) murmur things and usually get brushed aside. Even by my section, even by me. I would like to fix this.
166
167Mistral said: ↑
168I don't think the shitposting in serious discussions is necessary.
169Specifically with my involvement: I'm very sorry about that. I will not do it again; if I do, hold me to this.
170
171swiftgallade46 said: ↑
172To preface this and I do not mean this rudely at all, there is a lot of tl;dr so it would be great if I could get some kind of summary if anyone has time. I did read the last few posts though, so I guess I'll start there.
173hmu on discord if you still want this
174
175I think we addressed potential promotions/the rest in discord, but again, I could be wrong. The gist was that we have way too much shit going on right now to bring in new staff at this exact moment?
176
177Monbrey said: ↑
178Everyone is dancing around the point - we are the staff and I'm sure we don't want to risk being voted out. So why would we ever agree to implement a system where we could be?
179because we value the success of the game more than we value modship.
180I'm not opposed to our members getting involved in contributing and improving URPG, it would be stupid to oppose that. I don't agree with the premise that they need a Council or promotion in order to do so.
181agreed on the first point, of course, and then the second point is probably where we diverge slightly
182
183We have the Trainer's Court for people to post public discussions about things, and private messaging to discuss anything with a Section Head, me or Harry. If there is a perception that we are unapproachable, too slow to act, or will shut down their ideas, then that is the problem and that is what we need to work on. Official titles or changing in promotion processes won't change that. I would much rather address our processes for responding to and implementing ideas so that people don't feel that their efforts and thoughts are wasted.
184I don't see why we can't address this issue from multiple points: we can build an inclusive community from both the top (how we run ourselves) and the bottom (how we run the community).
185
186I'm not sure I support the idea at all, but I definitely can't without the responsibilities of roles being clearly defined.
187okay then
188let's do it
189
190Spoiler
191I hate red tape as much as anyone else, so this is minimized/as in-tune with our current system as possible and ultimately centers around defining roles and accountability/being held to those roles. Using Stories as a sample here, but just replace "grader" with [profession of your choice], "writing contest" with tournament/festival/park event/thing, etc. etc.
192
193Head of URPG:
194=ensure that all Section Heads (ie Head of __) are performing their outlined duties
195=hold public, bi-yearly meetings with Section Heads
196
197Head of Stories: has the final say for all events in the Stories section, second only to majority Staff opinion or Head of URPG*
198=field upper-level complaints & approach problematic users (I'm thinking Mlouden/Jack-tier incidents, etc)
199=ensure consistency across graders
200=organize (but not necessarily host) bi-annual writing contests
201=ensure Deputy Graders are performing their outlined duties
202=Share Deputy duties as necessary (grader wages, testing, etc). If core facets of the section are being neglected, it is the Head's duty to ensure that they are not.
203=adapt section as necessary to maintain an active environment
204=grade shit be awesome
205*we discuss so much stuff in staff when doing changes in our sections that I doubt this will ever be necessary, but throwing it in for precaution
206
207Deputy* Graders:
208=provide feedback to head of stories + ensure other deputy graders are performing their duties as outlined
209=compile grader wages on a monthly/fortnightly basis (depends on section; must be consistent to maintain trust with graders)
210=test new graders + encourage strong members in the section to become graders
211=assist in running of bi-annual writing contests + additional events throughout the year
212=grade shit be awesome
213*no idea what the actual title should be; this is a placeholder
214
215Graders:
216=grade shit be awesome
217
218Yearly Actions:
219=section heads: will update head of URPG on status of their section, promotions, replacements for themselves if necessary, etc; this meeting will be public for all of URPG
220=deputy grader: all graders may submit applications for deputy grader. Current deputy graders are not automatically considered for a position and do not have any inherent preference over new candidates. These applications are submitted publicly and will be privately reviewed by Staff, with the final decision being made + defended by the section head
221
222- 
223
224Elysia: Did some soul-searching after solid conversation with Swift/others last night, and I made some tweaks + additions to address some very valid concerns about the original system. someone else pls post in this thread tho
225
226I hate red tape as much as anyone else, so this is minimized/as in-tune with our current system as possible and ultimately centers around defining roles and accountability/being held to those roles. This is a template for each section, but obviously different section heads can set different goals for their section.
227
228Head of URPG:
229=ensure that all Section Heads (ie Head of __) are performing their outlined duties
230=hold public, bi-yearly meetings with Section Heads
231
232Head of Section: has the final say for all events in their section, second only to majority Staff opinion or Head of URPG*
233=field upper-level complaints & approach problematic users (I'm thinking Mlouden/Jack-tier incidents, etc)
234=ensure consistency across [professions] in their section (ie ref/grader/curator/judge/chronicler/ranger)
235=organize (but not necessarily host) bi-annual competitions, at least one of which is open to the entire URPG/has no entry requirements (ie not a year of Writing Invitational or Gym Tourney)
236=ensure Deputies are performing their outlined duties
237=Share Deputy duties as necessary (wages, testing, etc). If core facets of the section are being neglected, it is the Head's duty to ensure that they are not.
238=adapt section as necessary to maintain an active environment
239=ref/grade/curate/judge/chronicle/range shit be awesome
240*we discuss so much stuff in staff when doing changes in our sections that I doubt this will ever be necessary, but throwing it in for precaution
241
242Deputy* Graders:
243=provide feedback to head of section + ensure other deputies are performing their duties as outlined
244=compile wages on a monthly/fortnightly basis (depends on section; must be consistent to maintain trust with professions)
245=test new professions + encourage strong members in the section to become professions
246=assist in running of events throughout the year
247=ref/grade/curate/judge/chronicle/range shit be awesome
248*no idea what the actual title should be; this is a placeholder
249
250Professions:
251=ref/grade/curate/judge/chronicle/range shit be awesome
252
253Bi-Annual Actions:
254=section heads: will update head of URPG on status of their section, promotions, replacements for themselves if necessary, etc; this meeting will be public for all of URPG
255=deputy grader: all professions may submit applications for deputy
256=These applications are submitted publicly and will be privately reviewed by Staff, with the final decision being made + defended by the section head.
257=Current deputies do not need to resubmit an application, but they should submit a quick summary of what they've done this term
258
259Section Heads and Deputies are Staff of some sort, unless there are huge concerns (in which case they probably are not in consideration for those positions, I guess?)
260
261Okay but here's the crazy one:
262
263General Staff:
264=on a bi-annual basis, applications are opened for general staff to all members. Applications are submitted publicly, privately reviewed by Staff, and the final decision is made/defended by head of URPG.
265=general staff do not necessarily hold a Deputy/Head/Profession position
266
267General Staff roles:
268=weigh in on discussions in Staff (what we normally do)
269=approve stuff (ie mart/trades/etc) (what we normally do)
270=help host general events as needed (ie gift stations, awards, new life) (what we normally do)
271=be active be awesome
272
273---
274
275The goal is that this is just a formal hashing out of things that we pretty much do already.
276
277I know this is a solid chunk of text, but thoughts?
278
279
280- 
281
282Swift: I like the idea of holding bi-annual/annual applications provided we are consistent. I don't mean this as a jab at any staff, but we if we do this we need to
283A) consistently post on time announcing that we are taking applicants
284B) get the applications sorted, evaluated, and returned in a timely manner
285
286The only reason I say this is because, currently, we are supposed to (or I guess I just kind of assumed we are supposed to) be holding yearly discussions of promotion/demotion and I don't think we've been keeping up with that as diligently as we could. It would also help if Harry were around a bit more but I know he trusts us to make the right decisions. And *sigh* yes I know we also have to rely on BMG staff to help us.
287
288We could also have a caveat each time we post the announcement that we are accepting applications that we may not be hiring any new Staff at this time if we truly feel that there are no open positions. Also to clarify I'm talking specifically about general staff; not section staff.
289
290- 
291
292Monbrey: To clarify "hold public, bi-yearly meetings with Section Heads" - how public are we talking? A chat that they can view/voice they can listen to but not talk in? Or a completely open forum?
293
294What qualifies somebody to submit an application for a particular role? For general staff I assume it's pretty open, for a Deputy spot I assume you need to hold the base profession?
295
296I'm not really concerned about a power struggle, I am concerned about the sort of staff culture this could introduce. I work in a department where most people are on limited contracts, always unsure about their future, and it's not a great thing to endure. From a higher position, I worry about people getting positions that they can't handle - I'm aware this could happen even if we hand pick them though.
297
298And yeah, I am worried about people being voted out. Not because they're inactive, but because maybe someone else is more publicly active while they're working behind the scenes, keeping things running with all the knowledge and experience they've gained. Who actually votes on this kind of thing? A council of people who don't actually hold positions? A higher council, like the deputies and other section heads?
299
300- 
301
302WinterVines: Just some quick things before I go to work: Agreed with Swift, Liam, and Ash on their points, as well as the unease Monbrey talked about with the contract situation.
303
304There are a few non-staff I trust and think are level-headed too, but I also know some of them have no staff aspirations. 
305
306Also to clarify the old post of mine that Smiles posted, it was about not having enough professionals in the jobs, not enough staff, to run them. You need the base job to run sections, and that's what I was stating there, since those sections had a head and seniors and was doing fine in that aspect--just that the head and senior were doing most of the work because nobody else wanted to help out the section. I don't know if those two ideas should be mixed into this because this seemed to be centered around staff and staff of sections, not the base jobs.
307
308- 
309
310Elysia: I just wanted to put in large, bold, readable text that my proposal for staff roles didn't have public voting in any portion of it, and I'm honestly not sure how it sparked the election conversation back, but okay, let's jump straight back to the elephant in the room
311
312Monbrey said: ↑
313To clarify "hold public, bi-yearly meetings with Section Heads" - how public are we talking? A chat that they can view/voice they can listen to but not talk in? Or a completely open forum?
314I imagined a public channel that they van view/listen in but not necessarily speak, with the ability to submit concerns beforehand, and transcripts posted publicly after the meeiting.
315
316What qualifies somebody to submit an application for a particular role? For general staff I assume it's pretty open, for a Deputy spot I assume you need to hold the base profession?
317Yes, and yes.
318
319I am concerned about the sort of staff culture this could introduce. I work in a department where most people are on limited contracts, always unsure about their future, and it's not a great thing to endure. From a higher position, I worry about people getting positions that they can't handle - I'm aware this could happen even if we hand pick them though.
320I don't think the limited contract is a fair comparison -- I have no outline for the voting system, but I would assume it takes place annually, meaning you know precisely how much time you have in your term. And realistically, none of us were prepared for the jobs we had when we started, but we learned along the way; this isn't a company and people's livelihoods aren't on the line if they get fired, so I can't see the same level of stress being applicable.
321
322In my working experience, a yearly rotation is perfectly sustainable and also makes people more incentivized to do their best in the time that they're given. I'm the HR department of a 40 person business that goes through a larger volume of coffee than any privately-owned shop in Houston. Last year, that position was held by someone completely different; next year, it will be someone completely different again. I have minimal experience in HR and learned a billion things in the first week alone, but everyone here is more capable than they think. I knew going in that I had one year to make as much as a positive difference in a workplace that I loved as I could, and it motivated me to make a complete outline of the improvements I would make -- knowing that I had the job for life, I guarantee you I would not have operated with nearly as much gusto or cared as much.
323
324And yeah, I am worried about people being voted out. Not because they're inactive, but because maybe someone else is more publicly active while they're working behind the scenes, keeping things running with all the knowledge and experience they've gained.
325This is why there's applications, where you can put all of your achievements and experience and this behind-the-scenes work into a public venue? Like hey, I could hop on Discord and realize I haven't seen bbycakes Swift around for a while and assume he hasn't done shit, but in his application he'd be like "lol I made the push for gen vii implementation, helped re-tier mons story/art ranks to match their competitive value, regularly update my league, helped address ref battle payouts, pushed for lower EM prices to account for wider competitive rosters", and it'd be extremely clear that he does a ton of work and is deserving of a role.
326
327Who actually votes on this kind of thing? A council of people who don't actually hold positions? A higher council, like the deputies and other section heads?
328idk, none of this was in my drafted proposal
329/shrug
330
331---
332
333swiftgallade46 said: ↑
334There are many non-Staff who I do trust, but just as many and more who I feel wouldn't take it seriously. Even if Staff were the ones making the nominations in the first place, I'm still not completely trustworthy that things wouldn't turn into popularity contests with mud-slinging and volatility. I much prefer the option that was suggested of taking applications and evaluating them as Staff.
335I have enough faith in our userbase to believe that this won't happen, but I guess that's where we differ.
336
337---
338
339Ace Trainer Liam said: ↑
340I agree with this 100%. I remember when I wasn't staff I had little an idea of what staff really did. I knew they talked about situations, dealt with punishments, and created events, but I didn't know the nitty-gritty and what all went on behind the scenes.
341And this in-the-dark-ness for all of our non-Staff is exactly the kind of attitude that we're trying to stop perpetuating. If we post public applications for jobs whose roles are clearly outlined, then you know exactly what Staff is doing and exactly how you should prepare to do it.
342
343---
344
345Smiles said: ↑
346Staff Rollcall, March 2016 - All people had to do was pop on the forums even if they hadn't been online in months to say "yes I'm here I guess I still want to hold this job." No assessment or advice on how to improve individually as a head / leader or as a urpg team as a whole. By the time you log in to say you're there, maybe you don't actually still want to be here. You're not rewarded or encouraged, which doesn't reflect the heads of URPG by any means, just reflects the system of leadership selection currently. We can be better. We can be more efficient.
347I think this is a hugely important sentiment that we overlook. The literal only requirement to be on staff is to log on once a year and post a gif. That is kinda crazy, given that a lot of members can and would do the bare minimum.
348
349And by reading this post and having this discussion, I think everyone here is past that bare minimum, but I guess that really hits home is that even we don't know how far beyond that baseline we're supposed to go.
350
351Smiles said:
352I think it's important for us to unpack the definition of a power struggle in this context. We are all holding powerful positions that we can essentially hold indefinitely as long as we can prove we're active on a spotting basis. If we're the ones afraid of a power struggle, what does that say about our leadership as is?
353Also this. Why are we guaranteed tenure with absolutely 0 check-ups after getting the role? Even freelance gigs have people checking in on you--both to make sure that you're able to deliver deadlines, but more importantly, to make sure that you're capable of the job and have access to help/guidance when you are not. This is a volunteer effort, and I think for that reason it's even more important that we have a support network + means of making sure that Staff has the tools and guidance to perform optimally.
354
355Ash K. said: ↑
356As for the other points, I'm going to go out and say (and I'm probably not alone) it's not that I'm afraid of being removed because we added a new system, it's that I'm afraid of being removed for the wrong reasons because we added a new system. Most notably, I'm afraid that it will turn into a popularity contest (as voting usually does) and let's just say I'm not always the most popular member around. Suppose it was Head Judge that was up for reselection, and the current head and chief judges were the nominees. Depending who this council was composed of, I imagine a lot of them would vote for Morru potentially for no other reason than he judges more contests than the other candidates. That's good, activity is always good, but that's not the primary job of a section head. Is Morru qualified for it? Potentially. Would he be better at it than me? Potentially.[/b]
357This sentiment feels very wrong to me, and I know it feels very right to you, so I apologize if anything I'm about to say hurts you.
358
359None of us were ready for the positions we were given. I think we all came in with different ideas of what to expect, but like Smiles and Liam said (with totally different extrapolations after), new Staff doesn't know what Staff actually does -- but we all learned and adapted, because we are all capable individuals who can learn and are dedicated to this game. Realistically, the only other thing we need is activity, because that's how you actually know what's going on in your section.
360
361In the situation you outlined, with Morru being called to step up and fill your shoes? It's a tough role to fill, but it's not like him being in charge makes you vanish off the face of the internet. There's a transition period, where you can give Morru tips and pointers and all the things you wish you'd known coming in, and Morru would probably come to you with questions, and eventually he would learn to set his own goals for the situation and lead it in his own right.
362
363We have this weird mindset where we somehow know more than the sum total of our members about how to run this game for them, and that's an unfair burden for us and an unfair assumption to make of them.
364
365- 
366
367WinterVines: As an addendum if we do go with some sort of application process for seniors of a section, I do agree that position roles should be outlined.
368
369However, I'm sort of back and forth on the actual submission of the applications by members being privately sent to the staff/heads of sections instead of publicly. Even with the statement that we may not choose from the applications, if say none are needed or none reach the requirements/etc, it may dissuade people from applying because they don't think they're good enough. 
370
371There's people who carry that sentiment of worrying about that sort of thing now; we also encountered it during the mentor/mentee thing. I get that publicly is a good way to defend the work that's been accomplished if trying to retain a position, but if that's what we go with, I think a private application should also be available for those who are more nervous. Especially if they see someone who they think is way more qualified than they are who posts--they may not post their application for that reason too, regardless if more than one person could be accepted.
372
373- 
374
375Monbrey: Elysia said: ↑
376because we are all capable individuals who can learn and are dedicated to this game
377And that is exactly why we were selected by Harry without the need for an application or election.
378
379- 
380
381Elysia: Monbrey said: ↑
382And that is exactly why we were selected by Harry without the need for an application or election.
383...but this makes elections an applications a bad idea because?
384
385If I had a room that I wanted to fill with people wearing red clothing, but the bouncer at the door only let in people with red shirts, that doesn't mean that all the people wearing red pants should be locked outside. Just because the current system generates a viable Staff pool does not mean that a) it's the only way or that b) it's the best way.
386
387- 
388
389Monbrey: Elysia said: ↑
390If I had a room that I wanted to fill with people wearing red clothing, but the bouncer at the door only let in people with red shirts, that doesn't mean that all the people wearing red pants should be locked outside. Just because the current system generates a viable Staff pool does not mean that a) it's the only way or that b) it's the best way.
391That's a weird-ass metaphor that doesn't really advocate a change of system. It means the bouncer is doing his job incorrectly. The red pants should also be let in. But the bouncer has at least maintained a room of people with red clothing.
392If the system relied on the group of clothed individuals determining if each others clothes were red or not, and then they started agreeing that dark orange and pink were okay too and suddenly OUR PURE RED SOCIETY IS RUINED.
393
394- 
395
396Elysia: Monbrey said: ↑
397That's a weird-ass metaphor that doesn't really advocate a change of system. It means the bouncer is doing his job incorrectly. The red pants should also be let in. But the bouncer has at least maintained a room of people with red clothing.
398If the system relied on the group of clothed individuals determining if each others clothes were red or not, and then they started agreeing that dark orange and pink were okay too and suddenly OUR PURE RED SOCIETY IS RUINED.
399If we agree that the bouncer isn't doing his job correctly, why can't we agree that the current system of staff selection isn't doing its job correctly either?
400
401This isn't a call to change the criteria for staff (aka being active, not being a turd, and generally being good at conflict resolution; correct me if there's some huge category I'm missing and [s]no that's not an invitation to point out that we miraculously got in without having #2)[/s]; this is a call that our system of selecting staff based on those criteria isn't working out as it should/could.
402
403
404- 
405Swift: Our current system has flaws, yes, but I would much rather fix those flaws by being more consistent, adding to, and overall improving the current system. I don't think what we need is a total overhaul. I'm fine with applications. It's a good way to gauge interest in becoming Staff and helps us determine who should be Staff much more easily. 
406
407I am still against elections and have already extensively explained why. I really don't have much else to say.
408
409- 
410
411Monbrey: Elysia said: ↑
412If we agree that the bouncer isn't doing his job correctly, why can't we agree that the current system of staff selection isn't doing its job correctly either?
413Because the bouncer's system DID work, but he was missing valid selections. He was at fault, not the system. Which probably does apply to us - there are more people out there who can contribute and aren't being given the opportunity.
414
415Why do we need to change our whole system if we're now aware that we have been missing people and can ensure that we do select and include them in future? Why is a system of elections required to achieve this?
416
417- 
418
419Elysia: Monbrey said: ↑
420Also regarding the "lets define roles".
421
422Literally stickied in the Staff forum, right above this thread.
423http://forums.bulbagarden.net/index.php?threads/staff-authority-guide.168527/
424we never referred to/held people to the old one, this is a more detailed version with some key changes, and I'm pretty sure you were the one who brought up defining roles in the first place edit, it was Winter but you supported her, but noted!
425
426Because the bouncer's system DID work, but he was missing valid selections. He was at fault, not the system. Which probably does apply to us - there are more people out there who can contribute and aren't being given the opportunity.
427
428Why do we need to change our whole system if we're now aware that we have been missing people and can ensure that we do select and include them in future? Why is a system of elections required to achieve this?
429Because awareness =/= action, and so far we haven't done anything that suggests that this won't be a problem this time next year. This is still the same system, with different levels of how far we're tweaking it. There will still be sections, section heads, and a hidden staff forum for more serious discussions; we're literally just trying to figure out who gets invited into that secret sanctum and how. It's still figuring out how the bouncer decides who gets in.
430
431And hey, are you saying that if the bouncer doesn't do his job for prolonged periods of time, he probably shouldn't be a bouncer?
432
433- 
434
435Mistral: 100% on the idea of outlining duties for section heads/senior section people. This way if we see someone not holding up to their duties, people can point it out and say "ok but this says this is what you're supposed to do, why are you not doing it." 
436
437I also agree with applications being private if we do them. Not everyone may feel confident with submitting a public application, and if we want to throw real world shit into this, technically your application is only visible to you and those that are hiring you. Obviously we're not a company or whatever, so we can deviate from that, but I feel like that's something we should maintain regardless.
438
439EDIT: Also I see Monbrey posted a link to something where we discussed this before, and I don't know if it was posted publicly/don't feel like checking to see if it was, but if it wasn't posted publicly, I think we should post it publicly somewhere, whether on the forums or on Infohub, just so members can see it and hold us accountable for shit if they see us not doing shit. Also it'd let us be more transparent about what our roles are in this game.
440
441- 
442
443Monbrey: Elysia said: ↑
444we never referred to/held people to the old one, this is a more detailed version with some key changes, and I'm pretty sure you were the one who brought up defining roles in the first place edit, it was Winter but you supported her, but noted!
445Yeah I meant this more of a "How did we not notice that we already did this" thing. Only just noticed myself. I like Felly's idea to post it in public.
446
447Elysia said: ↑
448And hey, are you saying that if the bouncer doesn't do his job for prolonged periods of time, he probably shouldn't be a bouncer?
449Yes, which is why we should be clearing out people like FossilFusion (sorry Chris (not that you'll see this)) way more often than we currently do.
450
451I'm just not supportive of it being a public vote for... pretty much anything really.
452
453- 
454
455Swift: Yeah I think personally that any shortcomings our current system has is not because it doesn't work; it's because we aren't enforcing it consistently and properly. I'd rather we start doing that than completely overhaul it. Some minor adjustments could be made too.
456
457
458- 
459
460Smiles: The fault in the staff system is really that we don't have a transparent, outlined system to become staff right now nor do we have an outline of how to keep that position. I am here because the person before me in Head of Stories disappeared some odd years ago, and I like to think I've done an alright-enough job of contributing back to the game that I would have been here regardless. And I like to think that we all see boundless potential in all of our members as well.
461
462For the "I don't trust urpg members with major community changes / don't change our red staff society" argument, I'm deeply disheartened. I will always think of myself as a urpg member first before a grader, chronicler, Co-Head of Stories / Head of AH and I hope others think of themselves in the same way. If not, I'm afraid I've misunderstood where we stand on community. We have to be on the same page about what members can provide given enough encouragement and a supportive structure. There are so many members right now trying to do amazing things for URPG, and we're just here trying to not sleep on them.
463
464This is why we want a Council System that can provide that encouraging feedback and motivation for others to become staff in the process and a Terms-based System to ensure the best for the community.
465
466The bouncer's great, but he gets tired as all humans do. He's been standing all night and the party's dying because he won't change how he lets people in at the 11th hour, and as a response all those people go to party elsewhere. The club's now a pressure cooker. Those people outside could help with the steam and help everyone have a better time, but that boundary of the bouncer's strained.
467
468- 
469
470Monbrey: Smiles said: ↑
471The fault in the staff system is really that we don't have a transparent, outlined system to become staff right now nor do we have an outline of how to keep that position.
472I agree on this, but we clearly don't agree on how to address this issue.
473
474Smiles said: ↑
475We have to be on the same page about what members can provide given enough encouragement and a supportive structure. There are so many members right now trying to do amazing things for URPG, and we're just here trying to not sleep on them.
476
477This is why we want a Council System that can provide that encouraging feedback and motivation for others to become staff in the process and a Terms-based System to ensure the best for the community.
478I don't think we are on the same page and I don't think we're going to be. I think several people in this community do not have the attitude or temperament to be staff members. 
479Granted, you may also think some of the existing staff don't and that's why you want a new system. It reeks of a hidden agenda. I do not want and will continue to stand against any system where URPG members vote for Staff.
480
481Multiple options have been thrown around this thread. Applications or nominations would allow the community to get involved and still provide us the selection process.
482However recently when people were asking for promotions (you could almost call that "applying") we all acted quite off-put by that. So which is it?
483
484- 
485
486Elysia: Monbrey said: ↑
487I agree on this, but we clearly don't agree on how to address this issue.
488We can start by acknowledging it's an issue, which most people have yet to do.
489
490Granted, you may also think some of the existing staff don't and that's why you want a new system. It reeks of a hidden agenda. I do not want and will continue to stand against any system where URPG members vote for Staff.
491Monbrey, I fucking wish I had the free time, motivation, and capacity to institute an underground coup in an online game where I volunteer to read fanfiction, but why the fuck would I spend time on that. I'm sure Smiles feels the same. Turns out we're real people and ruining your life isn't on my agenda; you can put your tinfoil hat away and I promise this discussion will be a lot more productive.
492
493I don't know Smiles's motivation, but I'm the one who initially proposed this, and I did so because I believe that too much discussion goes on behind closed doors, or not at all.
494
495Multiple options have been thrown around this thread. Applications or nominations would allow the community to get involved and still provide us the selection process.
496However recently when people were asking for promotions (you could almost call that "applying") we all acted quite off-put by that. So which is it?
497I think unsolicited requests for promotion are sketch. However, when one Staff actively tells people to ask for promotions, we can't exactly blame them for listening.
498
499Furthermore, having open applications removed a lot of that sketchiness and helps us move toward a more transparent promotion process.
500
501- 
502
503Monbrey: I didn't mean it in terms of a coup. I just don't see why you'd want a system in which people are voted out unless you want people voted out.
504
505Anyway, in the interest of trying to determine some conclusions in this going-on-5-page thread, I'm going to list the options we've discussed below. Can people give their thoughts on if and how the following should be implemented? Add anything else you think I may have missed.
506The defining of the roles has been fairly unanimously agreed on either way.
507Members nominate others for promotion to Staff / Profession can nominate others for promotion to Senior Profession.
508Members can apply for promotion to Staff / Profession can apply for promotion to Senior Profession.
509Members vote for others to be promoted to Staff / Profession votes for others to be promoted to Senior Profession, possibly after one of the above.
510Staff continue to select members for promotion, optionally after one of the above.
511A Council is created which is responsible for one or more of the above.
512Who would be in this council?
513No change to promotion system as such, but implement something which elevates users into a role where they feel more comfortable making their intended contributions.
514Maybe this is what the/a form of Council does?
515My thoughts:
516
517I have no real objection to allowing people to nominate or apply for Staff roles.
518If we do wish to use a process of nomination/application we need to be clear if its "apply at any time" or "applications now open".
519For nominations I think it definitely needs to within an open window, otherwise we'll get a lot of "hey you should make X staff" out of nowhere.
520
521I am opposed to allowing members to vote. Anybody who does support this, please clarify at what levels and if it would be in addition to or replacing existing people.
522
523Reserving thoughts on a Council at this stage until I have a clearer idea of who/what it would be from people who proposed it.
524
525Entirely open to allowing people to contribute more outside of any promotion system, regardless of which one it is.
526
527- 
528
529Elysia: Monbrey said: ↑
530I didn't mean it in terms of a coup. I just don't see why you'd want a system in which people are voted out unless you want people voted out.
531I'm not focusing on voting people out. I want people voted in. There are tons of great ideas in this community and we don't hear them as often as we should.
532
533The rest of your points, numbers not matching:
5341. Applications are necessary at this point. Now that we've started the precedent of people asking for Staff, we need a logical system of dealing with these requests.
5352. Some kind of check-up system in staff that amounts to more than shitposting is also a must. How are you doing/what are you planning on doing/how can we help are questions that each staff should know the answer to. 
5363. Elections are the best way to get a complete understanding of how the community is feeling. Otherwise, our previous system of guesswork and waiting for them to come to us hasn't been working.
5373a. I think we should elect the general staff role outlined in my previous post. This ensures that individual section leaders are still up to whatever snuff you want, while allowing members to actually have a voice.
5383b. There would be some tiny stipulations in who can vote (ie have 4 Pokémon or something) to prevent people from making fake accounts or coercing newbies.
539
540-
541
542WinterVines: Mobile cos computer dies but can sum up thoughts rq. 
543
544I like the idea of some sort of ideas council but I'd like defined who it's comprised of as well. 
545
546Apps from members are cool, tho I think they should be private for reasons I stated earlier and I think current staff should decide together who they're picking and not have it just based on vote. But recommendations or whatnot arw fine. Not fussed on whether the window is all the time or selective times. The same could happen for seniors of section if there's a council thing for discussion, though head of section should reserve right to pick. 
547
548For the record, I told people to bring up their interest in promo or whatnot because I got bitched at for not knowing everyone's aspirations and figured that'd be a good way to get info in the open. Because its unrealistic for us to constantly know those kinds of things if the person never says or a lot is going on. If someone has specifics in mind, like ideas or events or whatnot, there's no real harm to them asking directly.
549
550- 
551
552Swift: Elysia said: ↑
553The rest of your points, numbers not matching:
5541. Applications are necessary at this point. Now that we've started the precedent of people asking for Staff, we need a logical system of dealing with these requests.
5552. Some kind of check-up system in staff that amounts to more than shitposting is also a must. How are you doing/what are you planning on doing/how can we help are questions that each staff should know the answer to.
5563. Elections are the best way to get a complete understanding of how the community is feeling. Otherwise, our previous system of guesswork and waiting for them to come to us hasn't been working.
5573a. I think we should elect the general staff role outlined in my previous post. This ensures that individual section leaders are still up to whatever snuff you want, while allowing members to actually have a voice.
5583b. There would be some tiny stipulations in who can vote (ie have 4 Pokémon or something) to prevent people from making fake accounts or coercing newbies.
559I fully agree with 1 and 2 and will elaborate more on that in a sec.
560
561I still disagree with #3. I think our previous system was meant to be (i.e. we need to be better about doing this more consistently) Staff (really it was just Harry) reaching out to members that have demonstrated leadership, initiative, desire to help etc. Applications are a great way to remedy the qualms with guesswork, but it does require them to come to us (which is the opposite of what I perceive our current system to be). I fundamentally disagree with the notion that our previous system has never worked and fails in every way. I do agree that it becomes far less potent when we ignore/forget about it. It can certainly be improved, however.
562
563What I propose is this:
564
5651. New Staff: Bi-annually during Winter (December?) and Summer (July?) (these are typically our most active periods making it easier to evaluate members), we open applications (we should create templates) to non-Staff members for a set period of time (2 weeks?) while also compiling a list within Staff of members we believe would be good candidates. 
566Following this, we have an evaluation period wherein we:
567a) Evaluate and choose new Staff based on applicants
568b) Narrow our list of chosen members based on applicants
569Finally, we approach our final choices and offer them positions. I think this system could ideally apply to both general and section staff.
570
5712. Evaluating Current Staff: During the application period, Heads of Staff and section compile lists of Staff they feel have not been adequately contributing to their sections/URPG as a whole. Criteria for making such a list should be created and would be based on the thread we have here that defines Staff roles. (As a side note this thread should be made public). This list of Staff will be demoted during the period in which we announce our new Staff members. They are welcome to re-apply in the future (with no special preferences given). The criteria itself can be based on a points system (although that could be messy); really it's up to the discretion of the Heads.
572
573Additionally, we should create a private system for reporting Staff that non-Staff can take advantage of. this can be done through providing a template that members can fill out and send to appropriate overseers of the staff-position. If the issue lies with the overseer him/herself, the report can be sent down the ladder to a mod/section deputy etc. There should be systems in place which staff members lower on the chain can call for higher-ups to resign should certain conditions be met. IDEALLY LET'S NEVER HAVE TO USE THIS BUT I THINK IT WOULD PUT SOME PEOPLE'S MINDS AT EASE JUST TO HAVE THIS EXIST. To clarify further, I don't think any of our current Staff need to be deposed at this time. Again, this is just to help ease minds.
574
575Finally, I think it would be a good idea to do some numbers clarification. We should have a range of about how many Staff we should have in each position at any given time. (i.e. how many Officials, Mods, deputies, etc.). This would help us know just how many new Staff we should consider hiring, and how many Staff should be demoted in favor of more-active and capable non-Staff. 
576
577As a side note, let's remember that we all want what's best for URPG. None of this is about power or hierarchy. We all want to keep this game fun and infuse it with as much longevity as possible and that includes both Staff and the majority of non-Staff. I appreciate everything we're all doing here! =]
578
579- 
580
581Monbrey: swiftgallade46 said: ↑
582Finally, I think it would be a good idea to do some numbers clarification. We should have a range of about how many Staff we should have in each position at any given time. (i.e. how many Officials, Mods, deputies, etc.). This would help us know just how many new Staff we should consider hiring, and how many Staff should be demoted in favor of more-active and capable non-Staff.
583This is the only part I really disagree with, based on what I thought we we're originally trying to achieve. Numbers would continue to limit how many people we are accepting, when the impression I had was that we want to be fully open in engaging the whole community and allowing them to volunteer/contribute.
584However I do also think that an official title isn't required for anyone to do this, eg Julio currently running a tournament.
585
586swiftgallade46 said: ↑
587Additionally, we should create a private system for reporting Staff that non-Staff can take advantage of. this can be done through providing a template that members can fill out and send to appropriate overseers of the staff-position. If the issue lies with the overseer him/herself, the report can be sent down the ladder to a mod/section deputy etc.
588Dat sweet Cinnabar Gym immunity.
589
590- 
591
592Smiles: Monbrey said: ↑
593Granted, you may also think some of the existing staff don't and that's why you want a new system. It reeks of a hidden agenda. I do not want and will continue to stand against any system where URPG members vote for Staff.
594. 
595
596not even going to dignify that with a response.
597
598However recently when people were asking for promotions (you could almost call that "applying") we all acted quite off-put by that. So which is it?
599Yes, in one of these initial conversations I was quite thrown off by the applicant. However, as I thought about the motivation of that applicant and for another person who wanted to do more for the URPG, I reflected on how the system could be made more efficient in answering peoples' aspirations to do more: to help their staff, to host events, to help with time-consuming aspects like wages. I recognized that Ely was right in pointing out the gap we have right now in the system and with my earlier realization, knew that I needed to be part of the change for the betterment of the community. 
600
601To explain something critical: names carry self-fulfilling prophecies and awaken potential. In this game, where we're not actually paid anything in real life, titles are validation. I could cite countless psychological studies proving how if you simply call someone special they conform to that and perform better on tests, with their peer relationships, etc etc. They do more just because you said they could. The idea behind creating the Council seats and applications for staff is not simply that you're improving the collaboration of a section and strengthening it, but that you're also tapping into people's potentials by offering them a special position that recognizes that potential. 
602
603Sometimes, people need a special role to really soar. They can help out here or there, and I'll list members right now who are doing that right now, but from a motivational / emotional perspective people go even further when you've given them that opportunity for that role. In the system we have right now, those opportunities don't exist on as efficient a scale as they could. I'm going to grad school next year for this stuff, I swear it's true! 
604
605To combine with what Swiftie's said above: 
606why not have applications and nominations (bi-annual, open for a month each - > 2 weeks of the open app window, two weeks of us deliberating). The apps could be open for Moderator, Official, Council and for Head positions. We would evaluate using a rubric. Everyone has to reapply. 
607
608-> everyone votes for Moderators and Officials (need to have at least 4 mons, etc) 
609-> Staff selects Council and Heads (guided by Council Evaluations) 
610
611Council performs evaluations on a quarterly basis. Council forums could be located on PWN, and Council evaluations could be posted in a public place. The Staff would perform all the selections from there, but the Council's evaluations are held in a public place. The evidence is all there, and if we make a non-favorable decision then we need to have a good reason - that's transparency and accountability. 
612
613Yes on a private system for reporting staff - that goes straight to Mon and Harry.
614
615- 
616
617Monbrey: Smiles said: ↑
618.To combine with what Swiftie's said above:
619why not have applications and nominations (bi-annual, open for a month each - > 2 weeks of the open app window, two weeks of us deliberating). The apps could be open for Moderator, Official, Council and for Head positions. We would evaluate using a rubric. Everyone has to reapply.
620
621-> everyone votes for Moderators and Officials (need to have at least 4 mons, etc)
622-> Staff selects Council and Heads (guided by Council Evaluations)
623
624Council performs evaluations on a quarterly basis. Council forums could be located on PWN, and Council evaluations could be posted in a public place. The Staff would perform all the selections from there, but the Council's evaluations are held in a public place. The evidence is all there, and if we make a non-favorable decision then we need to have a good reason - that's transparency and accountability.
625Click to expand...
626I'm now very confused by this system.
627
628We open our own positions up to the public to vote for.
629Then the elected Staff select a Council which will evaluate Staff? Or evaluate applications? What exactly is a Council Evaluation?
630Who exactly are we selecting from? That sounds like Trump appointing his own Supreme Court judges.
631
632I really feel like I must be missing something here because this continually sounds like a self-sabotaging or horrendously biased system.
633
634@HKim seriously you need to get on this. I'm strongly opposed to major aspects of this proposal, and therefore feel it would be too controversial for me to make the final decision on for obvious reasons.
635
636So you do with this as you will, I've made my thoughts fairly clear.
637
638- 
639
640HKim: First off, I apologize to everyone for not being as active as I should be. That's mainly my fault and I acknowledge that. I have been busier with life, but that isn't an excuse for someone in my position. I owe it to you and the members to be a leader in this community and to help direct us forward. I admit that I have been quite lacking on that front. You are some of the best people I have ever met and you are leaders that have always been capable of caring for our members. I have taken that for granted. And I apologize. If you honestly feel that I have not served you well in this capacity, I can stand aside and let Monbrey take over.
641
642Thank you for sharing your thoughts and ideas. It's not easy putting yourself out there and suggesting change. For a community as old as ours (relatively speaking), change is often slow and meticulous. Yet I agree that sometimes we need to really take a look at ourselves and figure out how we can do things better. That has always been part of the attraction of Pokemon, that drive to grow, and should always be a part of the URPG. You, as the representatives of the community, have seen and defined much of who we are and where we're going. It is for that reason that I have always trusted you to work towards a better future. Many times, our members join as children, vulnerable and naive. Yet under your guidance, they are able to form lasting bonds and explore a community that is friendly and safe. I thank you for what you have done for those who need us most. I thank you for your ideas and your leadership.
643
644There are many points here that I agree with and I appreciate the discussion. What you've said has allowed us to explore various possibilities.
645
646
647Here are the ideas that I think we should implement:
648Allow members to apply for Official and Senior Profession positions
649Senior Profession positions will be decided by the Section Head
650Current Officials and Moderators can also nominate members for the positions of Official, Moderator, and/or Section Head
651Official, Moderator, and Section Head positions (promotions and demotions) will be discussed in a thread in the Staff Forum
652Official, Moderator, and Section Head positions will be decided by the Head and Second based on the discussion
653Conduct these Application Periods every 6 months
654Better define the roles of Staff and Professionals and post the descriptions publicly
655Create a form for anonymous complaints and suggestions (I'm thinking a Google form)
656We'll have to figure out a way for these forms to be posted to the Staff Forum
657Hold public meetings twice a year
658Scheduled 1 month in advance
659Log and Summary
660Voice allowed only for moderators, officials, and anyone on the pre-planned agenda
661Questions and comments may be submitted to a chat moderator who can filter them to be asked at the appropriate time
662Hold staff meetings twice a year
663Scheduled 1 month in advance
664Will be timed so that these meetings occur between the public meetings
665(For example: Jan. (Public) -> April (Staff) -> July (Public) -> October (Staff) -> Jan. (Public)
666Voice allowed for everyone, but will probably also use chat for anyone without a microphone
667
668Now I should probably address some of the other ideas. In regards to elections, I think this is an interesting idea, but not necessarily one that solves some of our problems. Our main goal, in regards to staff, is to have a group of active and capable leaders. I know we don't always do our best at the first item, but we're pretty good at the second. I think that instead of using an election system, we can resolve the first with more frequent and liberal promotions/demotions of staff. I know I'm a big problem in regards to demotion, so I can work with everyone to be better at removing inactive staff.
669
670But more to the point, elections run the risk of selecting someone who is popular, but not necessarily capable. We've had a few of members who were the alpha dogs among their friends, but weren't quite so hot when it came to leadership. Conversely, we've had many great leaders that I would never describe as popular. Had there been an election when Jack was replaced as Head, I suspect I probably would have lost to Dux. Elections are really good systems when it comes to critical positions. This is because it allows the community to examine and vet the candidates and see if there might be any problems or flaws. But when the position isn't critical or highly visible, then the community is less likely to put in effort to check if these candidates are actually qualified. Journalists dig deep into a person's history when they're running to represent a district, but we hardly have the same time, expertise, or even public access to do the same here. And many of us are private individuals that don't want to expose ourselves fully to the world. Without that check, we have a greater chance of electing someone problematic that could lead to severe issues down the road. If it can occur in real life, it could easily occur here.
671
672Secondly, elections have a weird way of politicizing the community. I'm not going to say we don't already have cliques in the URPG, but usually we aren't divided to the point where we can't get along. URPGers are united under one banner and one group and I'm happy that we haven't been victim to a lot of civil war type crisis since the Yahoo days. It's those conflicts that truly threaten what we've built here more than anything else I've seen since I've joined. I'm also not fond of the fact that candidates would have to use some of their time to campaign for their position instead of simply doing their job or, well, having fun. Elections make the URPG less of a hobby and more of a job.
673
674
675Finally, in regards to hierarchy, I'm still in favor of our current system. Namely:
676Head
677Second
678Moderators (Some of whom are Section Heads)
679Officials
680There has been a suggestion of a council, though I'm not quite sure if everyone agrees on the makeup or what the council would even do. For the record, I tried to have a council when I became Head of the URPG and it quickly fell apart because those in the council became inactive. I'm not saying it's a bad idea, but there is a lot of logistical issues that end up occurring when you require a certain amount of people to be on task at the same time. It's why I ultimately returned to the former system where the Head made most of the decisions regarding staff promotions. I've adapted some more open ideas in that time, namely the need to always have discussions and the inclusion of the Second in the process, but this system allows for the flexibility needed to run something that is both a community and a hobby. I know it's not the most ideal system in the real world, but for our cozy group, it has worked.
681
682If there is a concern that such a system might lead to a dictatorship, I suppose we can always draft rules for a recall. I put together the succession rules for when a Head is missing, so we can base it off that process.
683
684
685Regardless, I think that what is outlined above is the best way to address the issues brought forth. Obviously details can be debated and changed (that's what this thread is for), but I wanted to go ahead and post some thoughts.
686
687- 
688
689Ash: @ Anonymous complaints: Is it possible/a good idea to have it as a function of the Dicebot? I imagine it could take an input via DM and repost either in #staff or in a #reports channel or something, and avoids dealing with figuring out how to get something auto-posted to forums
690
691I pretty much agree with what HKim and Swift have said.
692
693- 
694
695HKim: Also, we do probably need a staff meeting.
696
697I'm thinking April 8 (Saturday) for US residents. That might be April 9 for Australians.
698
699Either 7:00 a.m. PST or 4:00 p.m. PST probably.
700
701Time Zone Converter – Time Difference Calculator (NEW)
702
703-
704
705Liam: HKim said: ↑
706: )
707I pretty much agree with/like all of this and swift's points as well.
708
709One thing I'd like to flesh out is where would be applications be posted? Public, or messaged privately to the appropriate person? Personally I do not think they should be public. Maybe the forum outlining what each staff role does, and the application forums be public, but not someone's personal application be public. I'd just like to avoid the possibility of someone applying and then the general pop. say "hey, when are you going to make so-and-so such-and-such". Like if someone really popular amongst the current population applies, but we as staff decide (or heads or whomever) that they don't meet enough qualifications, it could cause issues.
710
711Another thing I'd like to put out there is no Harry, I don't think you need/should step down. Being busy with life is understandable, but you're reachable and are able to make poignant posts like this. I don't feel we need a helicopter admin as I have faith in the higher staff, i.e.:
712
713swiftgallade46 said: ↑
714I don't think any of our current Staff need to be deposed at this time.
715; you guys (especially mods and heads of sections) do a ton of work and I appreciate the time and effort y'all put in and would be 100% opposed to disposing any of our staff but rather:
716
717Elysia said: ↑
718I'm not focusing on voting people out. I want people voted in.
719I hope y'all know you do a dandy o'l job here.
720
721#loveydoveybut #actuallyserious
722
723- 
724
725Elysia: I like the sentiments expressed above and think they're a step in the right direction. However, I think there are three key facts that we keep dancing around and need to address in order to make a functional staff system. I don't see much of it addressed above and all of it pertains to how we see and treat the community.
726
7271. We no longer trust our users. Sometimes it's not even their fault and we still find a way to pin blame and irresponsibility on them. We have somehow created a system where we act like we're herding children and everything is still their fault.
728not even just the repeated quotes in here that members "won't take voting seriously" or "will vote for the wrong reasons" and will instantly go down the slippery slopes of "mudslinging and volatility"
729here's a thread I made because we weren't doing our job correctly (inconsistencies in moderating chat language among the mod team). We promptly turn it back into "users need to understand etiquette."
730here's a time we condescend them and say they didn't get what they wanted because they didn't have a structured argument, even though they did and we just shat on them the first time
731I want to make this my sig quote because there's a fresh level of fucked-up irony every time I read through it:
732Everyone is dancing around the point - we are the staff and I'm sure we don't want to risk being voted out. So why would we ever agree to implement a system where we could be?
733when we don't do our jobs and people ask us about it (ie wages, tests), we get mad at them and then use their initial complaints about us not doing our job to justify us not doing our job:
734Spoiler
735
7362. We aren't using the role correctly. Closed doors are a place where we have focused conversations on subjects that are delicate/important/focused to people (ie discussing how bans/complaints), involve specific expertise that doesn't need to be circulated to the entire public, or doing cool surprise shit. Closed doors are not an invitation to shit on our users because they can't see us. Ideally, outside of very specific cases (aforementioned bans, promotions), we should at least keep a climate in here where anyone could read it and not see it as blatant hypocrisy or personal attacks.
737I initially compiled a list of quotes from this thread that would make users sad to see -- ie us talking about how we think they're incapable of voting, us dismissing legitimate complaints as whining, us not wanting to relinquish our power, us not thinking they could ever be good staff -- but I feel like this will only cause more drama and cause us to get wrapped up in personal attacks instead of the main, bolded, numbered points.
738the gist here -- we're using the private space of Staff not to talk about important issues, but to complain about users in much the same way we don't like them complaining about us. When it gets to the point that we use Staff to brag and joke about times that we've failed to help our memberbase, it's time to notice that there's a fundamental flaw in the way we're treating Staff discussions.
739
7403. Our failure to follow (1) and (2) isn't even something we're afraid of; we've made it into a running joke and are trying to force the community to laugh alongside us. They're not laughing. Joking about not doing our jobs doesn't excuse us from doing our jobs.
741here's the most recent time we addressed the conflict of interest in having a gym leader who is also a staff member not doing their job correctly
742here's the most recent time we made fun of ourselves for not keeping our central information updated
743here's another time we made fun of ourselves for not keeping our central information updated
744here's a time monbrey bragged about rising to power after sexually harassing an underage user and four of us liked his post. Here it is again in Discord form:
745Spoiler
746here's more Discord quotes of us joking about not doing our jobs, because there were actually too many to put in the first section about us blaming users for everything:
747Spoiler
748Getting the preliminary responses out of the way: all of this is a problem for all of us. It is a reflection on our actions, not on us as people. We can change what we do and we can do better. If I quoted something you said, it isn't because I have a hidden agenda to get you fired or I started a thread back in October with the end goal of ruining your life six months later or because I think you're a poopybuttface. It's because, in that one instance, you said or did something that doesn't fully align with our duties as Staff and I happened to remember it or it happened to come up when I fed 'quiz' into the staffchat search. I didn't even do a deep dig and this post is already exploding with shitty quotes. We are human, but we cannot overcome our weaknesses if we keep sticking our heads in the ground and saying that there is no problem.
749
750If it makes you feel better to find where I've fallen off the path for these three points, go for it and I'll edit it into my list. I own my shame and acknowledging it is the only way to move past it.
751
752Meanwhile, we can and need to make a system that helps us be better than this.
753
754- 
755
756Monbrey: I'm not going to dispute that we could all do our jobs better. I think we're all aware of that - and because I was made aware of that I made sure to do the ref wages this week. I appreciate that Ely and Dash offered, it's not a big deal that I did them and I'm not saying it in some kind of "I deserve a medal" way because you're right, I should have been doing them all along.
757
758Elysia said: ↑
7591. We no longer trust our users. Sometimes it's not even their fault and we still find a way to pin blame and irresponsibility on them. We have somehow created a system where we act like we're herding children and everything is still their fault.
760not even just the repeated quotes in here that members "won't take voting seriously" or "will vote for the wrong reasons" and will instantly go down the slippery slopes of "mudslinging and volatility"
761here's a thread I made because we weren't doing our job correctly (inconsistencies in moderating chat language among the mod team). We promptly turn it back into "users need to understand etiquette."
762here's a time we condescend them and say they didn't get what they wanted because they didn't have a structured argument, even though they did and we just shat on them the first time
763Click to expand...
764Yes, you're right. I don't trust all of our users. I hope I don't try to pin blame on them, because I also don't intend to put much responsibility on them unless they ask for it.
765Regarding Discord, if we want to consistently enforce a standard of moderation then we also need to define what it is and make people aware of it. Users do need to understand the etiquette so they understand what and why we're enforcing it.
766Regarding the original wages proposal, I'm not sure what you define as "shat on them". It was discussed at length with all the reasons I disagreed with it at the time - I thought quite respectfully. Since that post however, it's been nothing but complaining bitching and yet another running joke on Discord, and that's what I was referring to. Are you suggesting that any structured argument should be immediately approved and we aren't allowed to disagree?
767
768However this is also where, in my opinion, there is a minimum standard of responsibility placed on our users if they want to see a change happen. They should communicate it through the proper channels, which is what Fabled did. The first time when Seppe did, I decided against it. The second time, I decided to allow it.
769
770We now have a channel is Discord to further facilitate the raising of issues.
771
7722. We aren't using the role correctly. Closed doors are a place where we have focused conversations on subjects that are delicate/important/focused to people (ie discussing how bans/complaints), involve specific expertise that doesn't need to be circulated to the entire public, or doing cool surprise shit. Closed doors are not an invitation to shit on our users because they can't see us. Ideally, outside of very specific cases (aforementioned bans, promotions), we should at least keep a climate in here where anyone could read it and not see it as blatant hypocrisy or personal attacks.
773I initially compiled a list of quotes from this thread that would make users sad to see -- ie us talking about how we think they're incapable of voting, us dismissing legitimate complaints as whining, us not wanting to relinquish our power, us not thinking they could ever be good staff -- but I feel like this will only cause more drama and cause us to get wrapped up in personal attacks instead of the main, bolded, numbered points.
774the gist here -- we're using the private space of Staff not to talk about important issues, but to complain about users in much the same way we don't like them complaining about us. When it gets to the point that we use Staff to brag and joke about times that we've failed to help our memberbase, it's time to notice that there's a fundamental flaw in the way we're treating Staff discussions.
775Click to expand...
776I agree with this as I said originally. We can all be doing our jobs better. I don't think I have disagreed with that at any point in this thread.
777
7783. Our failure to follow (1) and (2) isn't even something we're afraid of; we've made it into a running joke and are trying to force the community to laugh alongside us. They're not laughing. Joking about not doing our jobs doesn't excuse us from doing our jobs.
779
780here's the most recent time we addressed the conflict of interest in having a gym leader who is also a staff member not doing their job correctly
781Am I not doing my job correctly? I defend my gym when I'm able to. I probably should update my region more consistently though.
782
783here's the most recent time we made fun of ourselves for not keeping our central information updated
784here's another time we made fun of ourselves for not keeping our central information updated
785We're poking a bit of fun at ourselves, but if you believe it is creating a bad impression of us to the users then we can definitely stop. And yes, we should keep our stuff updated.
786
787I built an entire website for the centralisation of our information AND THEN BUILT A SECOND ONE because the editor we were using was buggy and Wordpress could make it easier for us.
788The improved site would also allow us to continue to expand later, building our own game tools and whatever else we might want in the future.
789The response for migration of content to the improved Infohub was disappointing - perhaps I should have driven the migration harder.
790
791here's a time monbrey bragged about rising to power after sexually harassing an underage user and four of us liked his post.
792It would be stupid for me to argue this, nor do I have any reason to. I am sincerely sorry, glad you've made me aware of my behaviour, and will endeavour not to act like this.
793
794Getting the preliminary responses out of the way: all of this is a problem for all of us. It is a reflection on our actions, not on us as people. We can change what we do and we can do better. If I quoted something you said, it isn't because I have a hidden agenda to get you fired or I started a thread back in October with the end goal of ruining your life six months later or because I think you're a poopybuttface. It's because, in that one instance, you said or did something that doesn't fully align with our duties as Staff and I happened to remember it or it happened to come up when I fed 'quiz' into the staffchat search. I didn't even do a deep dig and this post is already exploding with shitty quotes. We are human, but we cannot overcome our weaknesses if we keep sticking our heads in the ground and saying that there is no problem.
795
796If it makes you feel better to find where I've fallen off the path for these three points, go for it and I'll edit it into my list. I own my shame and acknowledging it is the only way to move past it.
797
798Meanwhile, we can and need to make a system that helps us be better than this.
799Click to expand...
800I don't feel that anybody has at any point suggested that there is no problem, in our behaviour and in how consistently we perform our duties.
801
802"Meanwhile, we can and need to make a system that helps us be better than this."
803
804We clearly are never going to agree on what that system should be. You seem unwilling to vary from anything that you originally suggested, and I'm also not willing to compromise to that degree either.
805Your post here highlighting all of our issues is fantastic. It's what I and probably several others needed to see. It can and I certainly hope will drive some changes.
806
807We should open doors, we should allow applications, we should let people contribute more. I can agree to all of these points without thinking that elections are the correct way of doing so.
808
809And for the record, I'm not going to fire you, nor would I ever suggest that we should discuss it or vote for it. I consider you a valuable member of this team, and the same goes for every other active staff member.
810
811- 
812
813Swift: Elysia said: ↑
814I like the sentiments expressed above and think they're a step in the right direction. However, I think there are three key facts that we keep dancing around and need to address in order to make a functional staff system. I don't see much of it addressed above and all of it pertains to how we see and treat the community.
815
8161. We no longer trust our users. Sometimes it's not even their fault and we still find a way to pin blame and irresponsibility on them. We have somehow created a system where we act like we're herding children and everything is still their fault.
817not even just the repeated quotes in here that members "won't take voting seriously" or "will vote for the wrong reasons" and will instantly go down the slippery slopes of "mudslinging and volatility"
818here's a thread I made because we weren't doing our job correctly (inconsistencies in moderating chat language among the mod team). We promptly turn it back into "users need to understand etiquette."
819here's a time we condescend them and say they didn't get what they wanted because they didn't have a structured argument, even though they did and we just shat on them the first time
820I want to make this my sig quote because there's a fresh level of fucked-up irony every time I read through it:
821when we don't do our jobs and people ask us about it (ie wages, tests), we get mad at them and then use their initial complaints about us not doing our job to justify us not doing our job:
822
8232. We aren't using the role correctly. Closed doors are a place where we have focused conversations on subjects that are delicate/important/focused to people (ie discussing how bans/complaints), involve specific expertise that doesn't need to be circulated to the entire public, or doing cool surprise shit. Closed doors are not an invitation to shit on our users because they can't see us. Ideally, outside of very specific cases (aforementioned bans, promotions), we should at least keep a climate in here where anyone could read it and not see it as blatant hypocrisy or personal attacks.
824I initially compiled a list of quotes from this thread that would make users sad to see -- ie us talking about how we think they're incapable of voting, us dismissing legitimate complaints as whining, us not wanting to relinquish our power, us not thinking they could ever be good staff -- but I feel like this will only cause more drama and cause us to get wrapped up in personal attacks instead of the main, bolded, numbered points.
825the gist here -- we're using the private space of Staff not to talk about important issues, but to complain about users in much the same way we don't like them complaining about us. When it gets to the point that we use Staff to brag and joke about times that we've failed to help our memberbase, it's time to notice that there's a fundamental flaw in the way we're treating Staff discussions.
826
8273. Our failure to follow (1) and (2) isn't even something we're afraid of; we've made it into a running joke and are trying to force the community to laugh alongside us. They're not laughing. Joking about not doing our jobs doesn't excuse us from doing our jobs.
828here's the most recent time we addressed the conflict of interest in having a gym leader who is also a staff member not doing their job correctly
829here's the most recent time we made fun of ourselves for not keeping our central information updated
830here's another time we made fun of ourselves for not keeping our central information updated
831here's a time monbrey bragged about rising to power after sexually harassing an underage user and four of us liked his post. Here it is again in Discord form:
832Spoiler
833here's more Discord quotes of us joking about not doing our jobs, because there were actually too many to put in the first section about us blaming users for everything:
834
835Getting the preliminary responses out of the way: all of this is a problem for all of us. It is a reflection on our actions, not on us as people. We can change what we do and we can do better. If I quoted something you said, it isn't because I have a hidden agenda to get you fired or I started a thread back in October with the end goal of ruining your life six months later or because I think you're a poopybuttface. It's because, in that one instance, you said or did something that doesn't fully align with our duties as Staff and I happened to remember it or it happened to come up when I fed 'quiz' into the staffchat search. I didn't even do a deep dig and this post is already exploding with shitty quotes. We are human, but we cannot overcome our weaknesses if we keep sticking our heads in the ground and saying that there is no problem.
836
837If it makes you feel better to find where I've fallen off the path for these three points, go for it and I'll edit it into my list. I own my shame and acknowledging it is the only way to move past it.
838
839Meanwhile, we can and need to make a system that helps us be better than this.
840Click to expand...
841I fully sympathize and agree with the majority of this post. As Staff we are expected to hold ourselves to a higher standard, and we often are not held accountable when we fail to do so. Staff chat should not be used as a medium for gossip, I agree. I am guilty of this myself because often I find certain members that irk me very much and I guess I look to other Staff members for validation that I'm not the only one who is annoyed by this behavior. I will stop.
842
843I do, however, want to make 2 things very abundantly clear. This is not me preaching to Ely "but woe is me see my side!!" It is rather some things that I want, in general, to be known.
844
8451. Trust issues with our members: I believe I was the one who initially called attention to lack of trust we have in non-Staff. I have stated twice (maybe more) that I do, in fact, trust many non-Staff members and I appreciate what they do for our community. That being said, I do not trust a lot of other non-Staff with important, potentially game-changing and impactful decisions. Probably the majority of them. I have no issues with making this statement. It is perfectly reasonable and ethical to me to have that opinion. This is the internet. We are open to accepting anyone who knows how to make an account on a Pokemon forum. I don't know who most of these people are. What I do know is that many of them are minors, and many of them do not set good examples as we are expected to do. Now, if we're only talking about our active memberbase, that is a far smaller entity. Like I said before, I picked out a bunch of members who are currently active that I would trust with important URPG decisions. I have no issue with allowing anyone I didn't list to speak their minds and come up with ideas for URPG. They are more than welcome to reach out. But there are reasons I didn't include them on the list (unless I simply forgot someone), and for those reasons I would not trust them as Staff. If you really want to know why, you can ask me about each person individually.
846
8472. I am nobody's slave or doormat. This is a volunteer service that I dedicate my free time to do. I take issue with the notion that I am supposed to just let people demand things from me and treat me with disrespect or rush me to get things done just because I am Staff. Now it's one thing if I were getting friendly reminders or being asked nicely or something. I have no issue with that, and I'm always here to help. But if someone is making snide comments about me not ref testing them or being passive aggressive about it or if they have an issue with me in general and are being anything but respectful about it, I am not going to go out of my way to help them. Plain and simple. If I were volunteering in a soup kitchen and a homeless man spit in my face and told me to fill up his damn bowl, I would walk away and not serve him. And it has nothing to do with my position as Staff, it has to do with me being a person. If refusing to do my job (in this game) for people who disrespect me is not ok, then demote me right now cause I'm not having it. (Again, none of this is directed at you, Ely, and I also recognize that you didn't directly say anything that would otherwise contradict this point. I just wanted to put into words the reason that some Staff are reluctant to do their jobs for some people. This does not excuse any Staff member from neglecting to perform their duties for anyone who acted respectfully or at least reasonably either.). As a side note for wages specifically, I would never punish a group of people just because of one impatient and rude person. I could always just not pay that one person. It's been done before, I think. And when I say "punish" I dont mean as a parent or authority figure. I mean it as someone who is volunteering to provide a service.
848
849
850Sorry if this post is rather ranty. These are just sentiments that I felt needed to be put into words so we could better understand where some of us are coming from. I want to reiterate that for the most part I love our community and am happy to be a part of it.
851
852- 
853
854Smiles: Thank you so much, Harry, for that thoughtful and engaging response. I am excited to work on the application system and the calendar timeline for which to implement these promising new changes after we have this important discussion about values. This is the true heart of the conversation.
855
856Monbrey said: ↑
857We clearly are never going to agree on what that system should be. You seem unwilling to vary from anything that you originally suggested, and I'm also not willing to compromise to that degree either.
858Thank you for your recent post as well and for willing to interact with the different perspectives brought to the table. I think the real difficulty with this conversation is that it's not just about a different system. Honestly, I've always loved URPG conversations because I think we respect each other's viewpoints and do a phenomenal job of not only envisioning new events and initiatives but also enacting them.
859
860The trouble is not simply the system - that we can agree to disagree upon; the true problem is with our values. Community is the highest value I hold and for me to hear that some of you don't trust our members and don't find them capable of responsible, ethical leadership really strikes me. This is such a big moment and I am so disturbed by what to do about this; it's the equivalent of hearing, to me, that my close friend is homophobic - lgbtq+ people should be paid the same as everyone else for the same jobs, just don't employ them in my neighborhood; normal URPG members can lead events, but please don't let them ever touch these staff boards. This is so off chart from what I thought I knew of the core attitudes of people I cherish in these staff boards.
861
862swiftgallade46 said: ↑
863That being said, I do not trust a lot of other non-Staff with important, potentially game-changing and impactful decisions. Probably the majority of them.
864I fundamentally disagree with this as a core value we should uphold as a staff team. May I ask where your distrust stems from?
865
866I have always viewed leadership as not simply a position, but also a process; you help others become leaders.
867
868This is the internet. We are open to accepting anyone who knows how to make an account on a Pokemon forum. I don't know who most of these people are. What I do know is that many of them are minors, and many of them do not set good examples as we are expected to do.
869Does it make a difference if we know who people are behind the Internet? What aspect of "knowing" are you speaking to? Do you know me, and if so, in what way actually? I am so confused with the entire basis of this comment.
870
871One of the joys of this online game is the outlet through artistic creativity and expression - a lot of that is both personal and impersonal, and the concept of "knowing" any of us is such a delightful wonder. What does it take for members to build trust for you?
872
873What does it take for people to set a good example, and do you find yourself to be someone who sets that good example? If someone does not set a good example for other members, how do you regulate that?
874
875I take issue with the notion that I am supposed to just let people demand things from me and treat me with disrespect or rush me to get things done just because I am Staff.
876Part of this is an issue of personal self-regulation and conflict resolution. If someone makes multiple demands upon you, it's perfectly within your prerogative to call out their behavior, redirect it, and guide them towards more pro-social behavior. This is also part of leadership, and though it's not in the job role, conflict resolution is an essential skill of life in no matter what leadership position you adopt in your life. 
877
878Another part of this is our ability to institutionalize those guidelines - perhaps we write a thread outlining when the correct time to follow up with a test or wages will be, what members should expect, what members should do if they have an inquiry that's not answered (this can be the google form you brought up earlier, which is a good idea). 
879
880If I were volunteering in a soup kitchen and a homeless man spit in my face and told me to fill up his damn bowl, I would walk away and not serve him.
881I apologize that this happened to you, and I genuinely hope that incident has not crystallized your understanding of homeless populations in the United States. Often times, people end up in these situations because of a direct inaccess to psychiatric and physical health care that others are guaranteed in this country for a variety of reasons; I would love to have a longer conversation with you about this, but for right now I would hope that you'd re-evaluate that particular moment with members and reflect upon what you could have done better in that situation for all parties involved.
882
883Also want to add here that you do a great job in all you do, Swiftie; I'm just asking you in the above posts to delve deeper into how you can help lead others into becoming stronger members themselves. I'm trying to understand what our fundamental values are as a team, because I have always had high aspirations for us, have been so proud of us, and even though I feel shaken now about who we are, I have unending hope for this team.
884
885also major thanks for Ely's post as well <3 It's also so important for us to objectively imagine things and the evidence, and it takes a lot of vulnerability and bravery to acknowledge faults. I would hope more people would contribute to this shared conversation as well.
886
887
888- 
889
890Monbrey: Smiles said: ↑
891The trouble is not simply the system - that we can agree to disagree upon; the true problem is with our values. Community is the highest value I hold and for me to hear that some of you don't trust our members and don't find them capable of responsible, ethical leadership really strikes me. This is such a big moment and I am so disturbed by what to do about this; it's the equivalent of hearing, to me, that my close friend is homophobic - lgbtq+ people should be paid the same as everyone else for the same jobs, just don't employ them in my neighborhood; normal URPG members can lead events, but please don't let them ever touch these staff boards. This is so off chart from what I thought I knew of the core attitudes of people I cherish in these staff boards.
892
893I fundamentally disagree with this as a core value we should uphold as a staff team. May I ask where your distrust stems from?
894I have always viewed leadership as not simply a position, but also a process; you help others become leaders.
895If I thought our members weren't capable of responsible, ethical leadership because of their sexual preference, then I might accept you criticising my values, but this is a misrepresentation of my thoughts on the matter.
896Sexual preference has absolutely nothing to do with how qualified you are to perform a job. Unless maybe it's someone in the sex industry, then it might impact their performance in the workplace.
897
898My wife takes care of children under 2 years old, I am an analyst programmer at a University. The two of us are completely incapable of swapping roles, we are not qualified to do each others jobs and I know for a fact I do not have the kind nurturing nature required to do her job even if I took the time to learn how to do it.
899
900Swifty compiled a list of people that he believes are capable of being responsible ethical leaders and for the most part I share his sentiments on this list. Our belief is "some, not all", while you seem think, or at least treating as as if we are firmly "none". That's not the case. We can and should help these people to become leaders, and we can do that by collaborating with them and involving them in further discussions.
901
902
903
904
905I'm thinking it may be a good idea to open up the permissions on the #pseudostaff Discord channel so that any of us can add new members to it. I had always intended for that to be a way for us to collaborate with a much larger audience, but hadn't considered how fluid the membership would need to be in order to do so.
906
907I could also create another chat for staff or pseudostaff discussions which can be read by all users, but only a select few could talk. I don't know how practical it would be all the time, just a thought based on the "public meeting" idea.
908
909- 
910
911HKim: I do agree that, to a certain extent, we need to do a better job in regards to our humor and how we act. I know the URPG has always been more conducive towards silly antics and ridiculous images, and this certainly is part of who we are; I just believe that we can also be a bit more serious and respectful even during more private conversations. Of course, I don't think that we're demeaning the members most of the time. Sometimes the staff simply needs to vent frustration or stress and this is a safe place to do so because, well, we all have the same experience as being leaders in the URPG; some of the difficulties will be familiar to each of us. I mean, we all know that even if Ash was frustrated by something, he'd still do his job because that's the kind of person he is. As far as I know, he has always been a dependable leader since he joined our ranks. Of course, I can probably say that about everyone here.
912
913This is a volunteer hobby, not a job, and as such there is a certain leniency to our position. Obviously (and perhaps detrimentally), I consider inactivity to not be a critical mark against someone because life comes first. We are only human and there really is only a certain amount of time and energy we can devote to the URPG while still maintaining healthy lives. For that reason, I do agree we should be more liberal in who we allow into staff, and how we can better allow members to contribute. These actions will hopefully alleviate some of the burden required of each of us (delegation is a great concept). In the same vein, we must also be more forgiving of each other for any instances of failure. I'm not saying that means we're blameless, but we can be both accountable and compassionate. If Monbrey is late on paying wages, we can remind him, but we can also forgive him. It's his responsibility, yes, but he is still a volunteer and we can be kind about how we go about these things. I'm sure most of us don't mind these reminders and I know that we all care about each other. I certainly could use a lot of reminders, as you all know.
914
915- 
916
917Swift: Smiles said: ↑
918I fundamentally disagree with this as a core value we should uphold as a staff team. May I ask where your distrust stems from?
919I have always viewed leadership as not simply a position, but also a process; you help others become leaders.
920
921To be clear, this is my personal opinion; everyone is free to trust whom they want. More on where my distrust comes from below.
922
923Does it make a difference if we know who people are behind the Internet? What aspect of "knowing" are you speaking to? Do you know me, and if so, in what way actually? I am so confused with the entire basis of this comment.
924
925One of the joys of this online game is the outlet through artistic creativity and expression - a lot of that is both personal and impersonal, and the concept of "knowing" any of us is such a delightful wonder. What does it take for members to build trust for you?
926
927I think the discrepancy here lies in which members I am referring to. There are literally thousands of URPG member who hardly speak or participate at all, and there are many who have not participated in years. These are the members I do not know. To be fair (and this is a very small minority) we have even had active members in the past who have turned out to be dangerous individuals. It's not an irrational distrust, I don't think, when it comes to people I barely know. Of course I "know" our active members in terms of what they can and are willing to do in URPG and what their general attitudes are. I trust the members I listed previously, for example, because I "know" them insofar as to say that they have demonstrated initiative, critical thinking, level heads, and an overall desire to help URPG as a whole.
928
929Again, if there are individual active members that you'd like me to clarify my distrust with I can certainly explain to you why I dont trust them with handling a Staff position.
930
931What does it take for people to set a good example, and do you find yourself to be someone who sets that good example? If someone does not set a good example for other members, how do you regulate that?
932
933It means knowing when to joke and when to take things seriously. It means being able to practice what you preach. One of the major themes of this thread is that Staff is having trouble with these things lately, and I fear it would be far worse of an issue if certain other members were in our positions.
934
935Part of this is an issue of personal self-regulation and conflict resolution. If someone makes multiple demands upon you, it's perfectly within your prerogative to call out their behavior, redirect it, and guide them towards more pro-social behavior. This is also part of leadership, and though it's not in the job role, conflict resolution is an essential skill of life in no matter what leadership position you adopt in your life.
936
937I never hesitate to call people out on behavior that upsets me. I do occasionally offer people ways that they can better communicate (e.g. the other day I told Truly his point might get across better if he didn't curse at people as he tried to make it), but at some point it's not my job as a Staff member or as a person to lecture people on how to act. If they want to insist on acting that way, they will learn the hard way that it gets them nowhere.
938
939Another part of this is our ability to institutionalize those guidelines - perhaps we write a thread outlining when the correct time to follow up with a test or wages will be, what members should expect, what members should do if they have an inquiry that's not answered (this can be the google form you brought up earlier, which is a good idea).
940
941Absolutely, I totally agree! 
942
943I apologize that this happened to you, and I genuinely hope that incident has not crystallized your understanding of homeless populations in the United States. Often times, people end up in these situations because of a direct inaccess to psychiatric and physical health care that others are guaranteed in this country for a variety of reasons; I would love to have a longer conversation with you about this, but for right now I would hope that you'd re-evaluate that particular moment with members and reflect upon what you could have done better in that situation for all parties involved.
944
945Oh, this actually never happened to me lol I was simply using it as an analogy.
946
947Also want to add here that you do a great job in all you do, Swiftie; I'm just asking you in the above posts to delve deeper into how you can help lead others into becoming stronger members themselves. I'm trying to understand what our fundamental values are as a team, because I have always had high aspirations for us, have been so proud of us, and even though I feel shaken now about who we are, I have unending hope for this team.
948
949Of course, I never doubted your overall sentiments and goals in this thread. Maybe we differ slightly to what degree we should be helping our members better themselves and what we need to look past in the process, but I know we both have the same sentiments when it comes to URPG as a whole. And if it means anything or if it was ever called into question, I do highly appreciate what you bring to this community as well, Smiles. You contribute so much and I think you have a right to call attention to qualms you have with the values we hold as a collective Staff team.
950
951- 
952
953Elysia: personal/individual responses in spoilers because they need to be said/I should apologize, but this post is enormous:
954Spoiler
955main points:
956HUMOR AND JOKES
957We're poking a bit of fun at ourselves, but if you believe it is creating a bad impression of us to the users then we can definitely stop. And yes, we should keep our stuff updated.
958we talked about this over Discord, but because stuff gets buried there:
959Elysia said: ↑
960Joking about not doing our jobs doesn't excuse us from doing our jobs.
961The gist: I can joke about things AND do my job, or I can do my job, but I can't just joke about not doing my job. I'm all for cynical, black humor, but that can't be our only response to the situation.
962Unideal
963A: Help! My house got struck by lightning and is now on fire.
964B: Wow would you say that's really shocking?!
965
966Ideal
967A: Help! My house got struck by lightning and is now on fire.
968B: Wow would you say that's really shocking?! Okay I'm kidding; you call 911, I'll grab the fire hose, C will go get some buckets...
969
970OUR JOBS
971swiftgallade46 said: ↑
972I am nobody's slave or doormat. This is a volunteer service that I dedicate my free time to do.
973I, too, agree with this, although we clearly take this sentiment in wildly different directions.
974
975However. Harry's post touched on this, so I'll just reiterate real quick. Either we accept that this is a volunteer job that has no real requirements (aka we should relax our restrictions on who gets to contribute AND lessen what we expect those people to do), or we accept that this is an important task that only a specific few can fulfill (meaning we maintain rigid Staff selection AND need to hold ourselves to a higher standard). We don't really get to play by both definitions.
976
977THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM
978Monbrey said: ↑
979We clearly are never going to agree on what that system should be. You seem unwilling to vary from anything that you originally suggested, and I'm also not willing to compromise to that degree either.
980I personally think that elections are the cleanest way to guarantee that non-Staff get equal representation, but in the absense of that, I would still prefer a system that guarantee that non-Staff get sufficient representation, which I think contains these three elements:
981
9821. Yearly Staff Applications
9832. Yearly Staff Evaluations by Head of Section
9843. Continuous Venue for Anonymous Feedback. Google forms worked fine for the Library; I will personally go through and delete the troll posts if you would like.
985
986To break down why I focus on these specific aspects:
9871. Applications -- makes the path to having a voice in the room very clear to anyone; lets people pitch their strengths to us rather than us guessing
9882. Evaluations -- these don't even have to be that formal. Just a "do you think you're doing your job + how can we help you do your job + what are your plans for this position next year". This is important both for introspection (Staff reflecting on their performance in the past year) + making plans for the next year.
9893. Felly suggested this somewhere and I think we actually all agree on its usefulness.
990
991- 
992
993HKim: So there was a lot discussed at the meeting and I do think we made a lot of progress. Obviously there are a lot of opinions that we all have and it was good to share them with each other.
994
995I want to go ahead and apologize for my behavior during the meeting. I was stubborn, snarky, and rude and I apologize for that. That is not ideal behavior for any leader, least of all someone in my position. You all deserve better than that and I'm sorry you had to put up with me during that time. I'm sorry for not acting appropriately.
996
997There is a lot that we covered, but to get right to the point. I gave it some thought and I'm fine if we all want to go with the Applications-only system for all positions. In other words, if someone wants an open professional or leadership position, they need to apply for it. Afterwards, the applications will be considered and discussed (if they are for a staff position). Section Heads pick who they choose for their sections. Monbrey and I decide for the staff. I do final interviews based on this list (just as a final check) and then do promotions.
998
999I know this was the biggest point of disagreement and I think my statement should settle the issue.
1000
1001- 
1002
1003Elysia: thread draft. harry, change as much as you want/only use this to extract links if you want; I won't be offended. I kept the gifs to a minimum.
1004
1005as a note 'cause we're older, while it does feel like most of the bullets under "Application Guidelines" are pretty redundant and/or inherently self-explanatory for any application, bear in mind that a lot of our userbase are high schoolers for whom this may be their first application. source: have had to deal with lots of college freshman trying to apply for their first job and have seen literally all of these mistakes in action
1006---
1007
1008STAFF APPLICATIONS: MAY 2017
1009
1010As discussed as the recent URPG General Meeting, we are tweaking the Staff Application process in order to make the process more streamlined and transparent. Historically, being a member of URPG Staff is a position of responsibility and service, and we welcome all members to reflect on their experience in URPG as they consider applying for a higher position. Applications for each position are listed below; the application period begins today and will close in [2 weeks from thread creation].
1011
1012As always, please feel free to reach out to any member of URPG Staff if you have questions about a Staff role, a more detailed explanation of each position's responsibilities, or clarifications about the application. Bear in mind that we will not discuss specifics of your application with you until after the application deadline has passed.
1013
1014HOW IT WORKS
1015There are two types of applications: General Staff (i.e. Official or Mod) and Section Senior (i.e. Senior Ref, Lead Grader, etc.).
1016General Staff are responsible for URPG upkeep, including running recurring events such as gift stations and auctions, approving purchases across all sections, and being a liaison between the Staff team and the URPG community. Applications for General Staff will be reviewed by Harry and Monbrey.
1017Section Seniors have varying tasks depending on their section, but their role is to maintain and improve their sections. Applications for Section Seniors will be reviewed by their respective Section Heads.
1018
1019APPLICATION GUIDELINES
1020All members of URPG are welcome to apply. While we value and will strongly consider your past experience and contribution to the community, there is no specific age or experience requirement for any position.
1021While we are using Google Forms for convenience, you do not need to register for a Gmail account and we will not be gathering your email information from your application.
1022You may apply for as many positions as you think you can manage and are qualified for.
1023Be as specific as you need to be. While we know individual members, we may not be familiar with every detail of your URPG career; if there are events that you think are important to discuss in specific questions in your application, please do so.
1024Some sections will be taking multiple members, some will only take one, and some may take none at all. We encourage you to apply regardless, but we do not guarantee that there will be a promotion for every application.
1025Applications will be tri-annually, but if you miss this application period, we ask that you wait until the next period out of respect for your and our time.
1026
1027THE APPLICATIONS
1028General Staff Application
1029Senior Ref Application
1030Lead Grader Application
1031Elite Ranger Application
1032Senior Judge Application
1033Expert Curator Application
1034Ace Chronicler Application