Declined Trial-Admin

[Darthie 2.0 (:]

I think the ones that have just had the application forms accepted or just became an admin or whatever, Should become a Trial-Admin for 1 day-1 week

NOTE: this is just an idea, please do not get mad about me if you completely disagree

 

[DasMalzbier| Lazy Panda]

Timo? Is that you?
Jokes aside
The only reason against it that I found would be:
Who would overview the trial admin and say if he did good or bad?
Other than that, it doesen't seem that bad of an idea.
We had something like that back in OP and it was good.

 

[Darthie 2.0 (:]

Timo? Is that you?
Jokes aside
The only reason against it that I found would be:
Who would overview the trial admin and say if he did good or bad?
Other than that, it doesen't seem that bad of an idea.
We had something like that back in OP and it was good.

Im actually Darth Vadar, i just changed my name
and that animation is making me laugh so hard

 

[Noodl]

No point imo. Just another thing that needs monitoring. There'd be no difference permission wise, other than just having a different official name, so might as well just call them admins, and if they goof, demote.

The whole trial thing is just a bunch of unnecessary effort in my eyes.

 

[Melonious]

I think it would be a great idea for a mod instead. Let's say from now on. You apply, you can get mod. If you do great you might be able to apply again but for admin? It's just an idea however a mod would have less perms. Plus possibly be watched by admins.

 

[Noodl]

^Again, who's going to do the monitoring besides Ben? As 95% of the admins (5% given for benefit of the doubt) would just give positive feedback regardless, like in the applications where everyone gives positive votes all the time.

That's just adding tedium to the application system that plenty of people miraculously still seem to fail at.

Having less perms creates its own problems and undermines the role of being and admin. Does the mod have to go and bug an admin to ban someone? More beneficial to give them full rights and see if they use them properly.

 

[Melonious]

^Again, who's going to do the monitoring besides Ben? As 95% of the admins (5% given for benefit of the doubt) would just give positive feedback regardless, like in the applications where everyone gives positive votes all the time.

That's just adding tedium to the application system that plenty of people miraculously still seem to fail at.

Having less perms creates its own problems and undermines the role of being and admin. Does the mod have to go and bug an admin to ban someone? More beneficial to give them full rights and see if they use them properly.

Yes, I guess it doesn't happen that often to see a abuser. Still though, with full rights you can cause some serious damage that will be a bother to fix. Anyone can lie about their application.

 

[Noodl]

Yes, I guess it doesn't happen that often to see a abuser. Still though, with full rights you can cause some serious damage that will be a bother to fix. Anyone can lie about their application.

Even normal admins don't have access to anything that won't fix itself after a map change. That's the point of application threads, to see how discussion unravels. A lot can be perceived based on writing and response to criticism.

As I said before: it's more enlightening to give someone full rights and watch them abuse if, than to give them limited rights, then watch them abuse when they attain full rights. Assuming an irresponsible person abuses in the first place.

 

[Keiii]

I basically think trial admins or mods are a good thing as abusers won't be able to damage the community that bad.
Practically i probably had 1-2 admins that needed to get demoted and one banned. So trial is working, but practically if the sorting out of potential abusers work, inefficient. Just a second security.
Good to have, if you have the ressources to monitor, bad if you dont