In light of the lead admin, Char, stepping down from the throne and to the best of my knowledge a new one has yet to be chosen amongst the top dog Varka and the other admins, I was curious if voting amongst the members would be an option once the viable candidates are decided upon. Could make things fun... And its just a curiosity on if we should have any say at all on admin choice. Anyone have thoughts or insight?

No offence meant, but that's a horrible idea.
First it turns it into a popularity contest, not an objective assessment of skill/fairness.
Second is gives the potential for dislike of anyone who voted against the winner.

Hammie said:
No offence meant, but that's a horrible idea.
First it turns it into a popularity contest, not an objective assessment of skill/fairness.
Second is gives the potential for dislike of anyone who voted against the winner.

Good point, though if were mature enough to shrug off petty differences and disagreeances and keep it all vivil and fun I see no harm

IvoryWolf said:
Good point, though if were mature enough to shrug off petty differences and disagreeances and keep it all vivil and fun I see no harm

True, but sadly this is the internet, and expecting maturity out of anyone is unlikely.

This can only lead to a huge shitstorm of butthurt and drama.

Munkelzahn said:
This can only lead to a huge shitstorm of butthurt and drama.

One so big it may cause most people here to leave.

IvoryWolf said:
In light of the lead admin, Char, stepping down from the throne and to the best of my knowledge a new one has yet to be chosen amongst the top dog Varka and the other admins, I was curious if voting amongst the members would be an option once the viable candidates are decided upon. Could make things fun... And its just a curiosity on if we should have any say at all on admin choice. Anyone have thoughts or insight?

Fur affinity sorta does this.. it ends badly I assure you :3 Besides, there is already something in the works, I assure you.

Okay fair enough. Just figured I would throw the idea out there thats all :p

We did this for the site mascots a few years ago and it seemed to work. Then again, these are site administrators we'd be voting on. Is there a way that a public vote could factor into the admins' decision?

Furry_Fanatic said:
We did this for the site mascots a few years ago and it seemed to work. Then again, these are site administrators we'd be voting on. Is there a way that a public vote could factor into the admins' decision?

Cause we all know how democratic and successful the vote on the site mascots was.

*Looks at thread title*
Why are you suggesting that the site should be invaded by US army...
...oh wait, you're talking about other democracy. My mistake.

Gilda_The_Gryphon said:
*Looks at thread title*
Why are you suggesting that the site should be invaded by US army...
...oh wait, you're talking about other democracy. My mistake.

...

Rocket_Corgi said:
Cause we all know how democratic and successful the vote on the site mascots was.

Remember when I said the public anonymous polls would be hijacked? and then they posted the polls, and the polls got hijacked? ah yes.. good times.

This is why we can't have nice things D:

I would like some nice rings.

Nah dude, nah. Besides, I don't like choosing sides. Everyone is cool here

As long as we get to vote for people to make decisions in voting for us its k.

Even if we did a democratic election and and could manage some semblance of fairness and evade ballot-stuffing, a first-past-the-post election is a demonstrably poor choice. Just look at U.S. politics, and consider that you probably felt mandated to vote for either Obama or Romney, even if you didn't agree with either of them (or, more specifically, you probably felt that voting for any third option was an act akin to not voting).

Perhaps the Schulze method would be a better option?

But it's really an academic point. There'd be no real way to ensure any trace of fairness, except maybe to only allow voting by registered users in good standing, one vote per user, and only users registered before, say, yesterday (since someone might go on an account-registration spree today or tomorrow if they really wanted to tip the scales).

That's probably a lot of effort and development for something that only happens every few years.

ikdind said:
Even if we did a democratic election and and could manage some semblance of fairness and evade ballot-stuffing, a first-past-the-post election is a demonstrably poor choice. Just look at U.S. politics, and consider that you probably felt mandated to vote for either Obama or Romney, even if you didn't agree with either of them (or, more specifically, you probably felt that voting for any third option was an act akin to not voting).

Perhaps the Schulze method would be a better option?

But it's really an academic point. There'd be no real way to ensure any trace of fairness, except maybe to only allow voting by registered users in good standing, one vote per user, and only users registered before, say, yesterday (since someone might go on an account-registration spree today or tomorrow if they really wanted to tip the scales).

That's probably a lot of effort and development for something that only happens every few years.

That'd be better for posts that are in tagging disputes…

BARBADOS FOR LEAD ADMIN.

Or Ami...

Dragonfruit.
Lead admin in name alone, therefore, no argument about abuse of powers or the like.

This is only stated because I've never seen Fagondruit do anything.

Who will be the next lead admin? Who will moderate with iron fist?

Xch3l said:
Who will be the next lead admin? Who will moderate with iron fist?

Find out next time on, E6!!!!

No. I don't trust any of you.

Well to be fair, even if there is no point to trying to do an electoral system due to countless reasons, the lead admin position should likely be filled by seniority amongst staff and those most capable in every aspect of site management. I can think of two that fill all those areas.

IvoryWolf said:
Well to be fair, even if there is no point to trying to do an electoral system due to countless reasons, the lead admin position should likely be filled by seniority amongst staff and those most capable in every aspect of site management. I can think of two that fill all those areas.

Is one of those people that pig ball dude?

NotMeNotYou said:
Is one of those people that pig ball dude?

The one with the waggly tail. Actually the two that seem to fit the bill in my mind were tony and aurali... Since they can do everything the site would ever need and they are regularly active on it in some form or another. Not that other admins are not, but when it comes to the coding and stuff.... Im not sure who else can do it like those two can

IvoryWolf said:
aurali

Lolno. Tony would have my vote. He seems the most level-headed of the bunch, and his ideals regarding site management and the rules we have most match mine of any admin here. That, and he's not batshit crazy.

Aurali said:
Fur affinity sorta does this.. it ends badly I assure you :3 Besides, there is already something in the works, I assure you.

Um, yeah...no they don't. Of course, you've been gone for how many years, so I don't expect you to know that, let alone have any knowledge of the recruitment that went on last year.

Rocket_Corgi said:
Tony would have my vote. He seems the most level-headed of the bunch, and his ideals regarding site management and the rules we have most match mine of any admin here. That, and he's not batshit crazy.

being that Tony's been on the site for over 4 years and has been a major part of changes that have been made over the years, he seems to be the most sensible choice for the job. Dedication, involvement, and seniority all point to Tony.

Ippiki I feel is too nice to be lead admin (that doesn't mean he couldn't do it though)

Rocket_Corgi said:
Lolno. Tony would have my vote. He seems the most level-headed of the bunch, and his ideals regarding site management and the rules we have most match mine of any admin here. That, and he's not batshit crazy.

I already declined it. I don't need to run the server and the website, that's too much. Besides.. what's more crazy.. me? or

PheagleAdler said:
Um, yeah...no they don't. Of course, you've been gone for how many years, so I don't expect you to know that, let alone have any knowledge of the recruitment that went on last year.

expecting this to ever change.

Aurali said:
expecting this to ever change.

I'm not going to go back and forth with you about this, but there was no voting last year during the recruitment, so I don't know what you're getting at. I'm not looking to sway your opinion of a site you'd like to keep in your past, but I would like to make sure what has been said is accurate and not just speculation.

You mean that one time thing a few months ago? they still put up their forum mods into admin positions.. but only after they get voted into forum modhood :p

This hasn't changed.

Aurali said:
You mean that one time thing a few months ago? they still put up their forum mods into admin positions.. but only after they get voted into forum modhood :p

This hasn't changed.

huh...well i haven't voted, and I wasn't even aware there was a vote. But regardless, I'm more active on the main site than the forums so perhaps that's understandable.

Aurali said:
I already declined it. I don't need to run the server and the website, that's too much. Besides.. what's more crazy.. me? or
expecting this to ever change.

Lol I love you <3

=^_^=

IvoryWolf said:
Lol I love you <3

<3

Kiparis said:
Dragonfruit.
Lead admin in name alone, therefore, no argument about abuse of powers or the like.

This is only stated because I've never seen Fagondruit do anything.

that account's a way to access the admin API for the company, we are implimenting a This text has been redacted, please go back to your day

Aurali said:
that account's a way to access the admin API for the company, we are implementing a Turtleduck server.