Potential admin app. process modification

[Blank]

ZM/SG has experienced tremendous growth in the past few months. When I first applied for admin in February, there was about 30 admins, now there is over 60. That translates to a growth of over 100% in the last three months. As we grow, we need to adapt to the challenges that accompany our increase in size. I believe we may be approaching a critical mass with our present configuration. The one I would like to address first is the admin approval process.

I like the rule concerning our minimum age requirement of 16. Like all rules, there are exceptions. Tcp-Kill, Bill Smauz, and Solanum, are good examples of individual who are below this requirement, but are still good admins. I think admins apps. from people who are younger just require extra scrutiny.

I think the first thing we need to do is restrict the admin application process a bit. I have noticed a lot of the admin apps are mostly approved by admins who have been with us for less than a month. Although these approvals are essential to the continued growth of our community, I think that approvals from admins who have been with us for a longer duration should carry more weight.

Hence, I would like to suggest a point system for future admin apps based off approvals from members of 1 month, 3 months, and more then 6 months. Minimum approval should be the attainment of 30 to 40 points to become admin.

• Approval from Regular Player(member less than 1 month): 1 point.
• Approval from Admin (less than 1 month): 2 points.
  
  
• Approval from Regular Player (member for 3 to 6 months): 2 points.
• Approval from Admins (3 to 6 months): 4 points.
  
  
• Approval from Regular Player (member for more than 6 months): 4 points.
• Approval from Admin (more than 6 months): 8 points.
  
  
• Approval from AO: 10 points.
• Approval from BD or Higher: No point requirement. (lets face it, they make the rules.)

• As an after thought, maybe there should be a deduction of points (maybe 5 to 10) for posting an admin app with less then 10 posts or being a forum member for less then 2 weeks.

The numbers I have posted are just preliminary. I researched previous admin apps to see which have resulted in good admins and these numbers seem to have some validity, but adjustments may be necessary.

This does directly translate to more work for our Executives, but I think this may be a good adjustment to our current model. I am posting this in the public area because I appreciate the feedback from all of our members to see if anyone thinks this is a good idea.

Other suggestions to this process are appreciated as well.

Your buddy,

Blank

[Red Tampon]

Actually approval from regular admins already = 0 points.

The only approval that actually means anything is one from a BD or Haggard/Zero001.

Approvals from regular admins are just help us get an idea of what an applicant is like; are they a good person, good personality, helpful etc etc.

As can be seen in Vicious' application, I approved after just 2 replies because I know he's a good regular.

Someone may get 20 good approvals from normal admins but unless a BD or higher says so they won't formally be approved.

If anything maybe regular admins shouldn't say "I approve" but rather "I support" this person.

[Blank]

Roger that, just a thought.

[Jaffa]

I definatly think that there does need ot be some discussion on the admin application process.

Unfortunaly, it hink your system seem sto much like collecting points, rather than an application that can be carefully weighed through opinion. I think the points thing just seems irrelavant, and won't really affect applications, as, at the end of the day, it is the responsibility of the hgiher admins to give the final approval/rejection. The points just seems to take this responsibility away from them.

[Blank]

I was trying to devise a method to increase the validity of the admin app process. I understand that BD's will ultimately decide the fate, I just wanted a system to provide more information to help aid this decision. My thinking was that if the minimum points were attained, a BD would then make a decision as to whether or not an appllication would reach formal approval.

I can see how the point system may not be the best, but it was the first method I thought of. I'll do some research to see if I can develope a better system.

[Jaffa]

maybe, as part of the application, have a few questions about what they would do in certain situations, so can possibly get an idea of how they would react to different things

[Bill Smauz]

I like this idea. But heres my idea:

Regular:
2-Either BD or AO
4-SA
4-Regulars

Donator:
1-BD or AO
2-SA

and if you get 3 disapprovals you get rejected.

[Vicious]

bill no offense, but worst idea ever. seeing as how we have a few admins cough tcp cough who will vouch for ANYONE! i do think that Blank has a good idea here, i think we need to make it a rule to get on Ventrillo and talk to us so we get to know people better. i myself only had 4 posts but i communicated on vent everyday w/ the higher admins and played in very small games w/ them so we got to know eachother. in truth there is no perfect system, and i feel soo very out of place in saying this but there was a post i had read that said we were cracking down and making it harder to get admin, however alot of us still feel nothing has changed and its still too easy.

[Blank]

I don't want to make the admin application harder, I just want the process to be quantitative. This is why I initially went with the point system.

I think my system may still have merit. New admins approving more new admins may lead to a vicious cycle.

[broncoty]

I don't want to make the admin application harder, I just want the process to be quantitative. This is why I initially went with the point system.

I think my system may still have merit. New admins approving more new admins may lead to a vicious cycle.

These are very good points in my opinion blank thanks for bringing them up.


red tampon, even though what you say is true, will not what you do now stunt the growth, or even cause bad admins to be admitted because

1. execs will either deny a good admin because they do not know them, or

2. allow a bad one because they feel pressure from other admins approving?