Suggestion: How about Democracy?

[Alexander Nicholi]

I always thought Democracy was a forum plugin that allowed everyone to change each others avatars. I guess I was wrong. Nonetheless, a sadly dysfunctional idea. :(

 

[Star-Lord]

What it boils down to is ultimately staff members have an understanding of their job better than a normal member, so it makes sense for them to be the ones who choose who they want on staff.

It's honestly that simple we don't need huge tl;dr explanations on it.

 

[Patatas Fritas]

I personally think this isn't a good idea however if ever such an idea was implemented there is a way I feel it could work, of course the difficulty is it would obviously be a popularity contest, and that's not how you want a moderator to be picked.

But! If it was; a fun idea would be for there to be all the motions of picking a mod with the h-staff, they could create a shortlist and then users could vote for who they think would be most suitable, that way it would still be people who are active and contributing to that section!

Obviously though, I don't think it's a good idea, the system we have now is fine, but if we ever did...
Not to mention the disappointment if you're shortlisted and lose, at least if you're under consideration you don't know about it so can't be upset if you don't get to be a mod.

 

[Gexeys]

Basically it's a lovely theory that works great in real life but when it comes to a Pokemon forum? Simply not needed, it's not like the staff have a hard time picking good moderators, all the mods are great in what they do and deserve the position that they have earned. Someone who has their name around that section a lot might no be the best mod ultimately. The admin have years of experience plucking out the correct members.
I mean it would be a cool concept to have in place and it would be neat to see the results but some people just aren't mod material.

 

[Nah]

Why is everyone thinking i want to become a mod or unhappy with the current staff. I mean its just a suggestion and wanna ask your opinion on this. I don't have any problem with current staff.

I don't think that everyone here thinks that you are unhappy with the current mod situation and/or wanna become a mod (probably). Many of the posts in this thread are more directed at what Introvert said.

 

[Nick]

I'd be lying if I said I'd hate to be the bearer of this bad news, but most of the memberbase doesn't know what's right for the forum, so I really wouldn't feel comfortable with them making such large decisions.

 

[Xander Olivieri]

Democracy, in today's society, is, and most likely will always be a popularity contest. It can work in a real world society because the person you are going to vote for is not the true person always running the show. They are just the representative put in the place to take the gratitude or the punishment of society for all the good and bad that happens.

On the internet and smaller communities, this is not something that works as a practical means. Its a glorified popularity contest. You don't have to do the right things, you don't have to show exceptional skills or judgment, all you need is for people to like you. The more people that like you, the better chances you have at winning.

This is also true in real world use, slander campaigns used by opponents attempt to lower the view on the target so that people like the other person. Promises are made that are never kept just to gain the love and adoration of the people whom they want the votes from. When you have a smaller community, this turns from a glorified popularity contest, into a full popularity contest. There isn't an accurate portrayal of what would be good and what would be bad.

In essence, using current real world examples, we could vote someone in who really won't give a damn about the forum in which they preside. They'll make bad decisions just to keep face and show that they are active in an area they wouldn't want to be, or could earnestly be super involved in that area, but make bad decisions on what to do with the area that they kinda kill off the discussions in their sections.

Any case where popularity or majority vote comes into play with small communities, you are asking to play with fire. It can work, it can cause a lot of trouble, it can utterly destroy what section the voted member is in charge of.

The easiest way to use Democracy on community forms is usually by community announcements to see the reaction and make decisions based on that, or polls to see what others would like. While this has its own problems, its more effective than open voting for adding people. Let those in charge make the decision and then let the people take their time and view/review what has gone on and make their decisions later. Not everyone will be liked, but you can get better results towards what's best for the community this way.

(I hate pink...wish we would have put this up to vote >.>)

 

[Demon Wolf]

Democracy, in today's society, is, and most likely will always be a popularity contest. It can work in a real world society because the person you are going to vote for is not the true person always running the show. They are just the representative put in the place to take the gratitude or the punishment of society for all the good and bad that happens.

On the internet and smaller communities, this is not something that works as a practical means. Its a glorified popularity contest. You don't have to do the right things, you don't have to show exceptional skills or judgment, all you need is for people to like you. The more people that like you, the better chances you have at winning.

This is also true in real world use, slander campaigns used by opponents attempt to lower the view on the target so that people like the other person. Promises are made that are never kept just to gain the love and adoration of the people whom they want the votes from. When you have a smaller community, this turns from a glorified popularity contest, into a full popularity contest. There isn't an accurate portrayal of what would be good and what would be bad.

In essence, using current real world examples, we could vote someone in who really won't give a damn about the forum in which they preside. They'll make bad decisions just to keep face and show that they are active in an area they wouldn't want to be, or could earnestly be super involved in that area, but make bad decisions on what to do with the area that they kinda kill off the discussions in their sections.

Any case where popularity or majority vote comes into play with small communities, you are asking to play with fire. It can work, it can cause a lot of trouble, it can utterly destroy what section the voted member is in charge of.

The easiest way to use Democracy on community forms is usually by community announcements to see the reaction and make decisions based on that, or polls to see what others would like. While this has its own problems, its more effective than open voting for adding people. Let those in charge make the decision and then let the people take their time and view/review what has gone on and make their decisions later. Not everyone will be liked, but you can get better results towards what's best for the community this way.

(I hate pink...wish we would have put this up to vote >.>)

i think we should have democracy here it will work better we should do a 30 day trial to see how it works start off with an election but if it is bad then put the old mods back asap if it doesn't work

 

[Honest]

Can you explain why it'll work? Cause Khrysta's argument is pretty much spot on as to why it wouldn't work.

 

[antemortem]

Along with Khrysta's statement, I'd like to reiterate Moogles in saying that moderators tend to know the workings of the job far better than members do, and even moreso the higher staff members who are the ones that do the decision making regarding promotions. A member doesn't see how often someone else reports, how often they're private messaging their concerns to moderators, how often they privately handle any of their discretions in order to mitigate disasters that are bringing it up in the section (see: common X/Y forum fiascos, jesus christ). Not only is it a popularity contest - can we come up with a different term, maybe? - but the real reasons for promoting someone would be completely lost behind the illusion of 'wow they post a lot and seem cool.'

I don't like shooting down ideas as fast I seem to be, but this has been brought up countless times before and not only on this site. There are various reasons as to why it would not work, and the cons far and away outweigh the pros.

 

[Sopheria]

It sounds like a really really good idea in concept, but I think Khrysta's post says everything that could be said about this idea.

 

[Melody]

I've been a member of this forum for 10 years strong, and as much as I would dearly love to see some shift towards democracy in this forum, it simply is not going to happen anytime soon.

The reasons outlined by Zach, Finnick Odair, stranger and Krhysta are all very valid and real reasons.

I however would personally like to see a little more transparency in the staff selection process but that's probably not something they wish to grant either, most likely because too many people get butthurt when they/their friend isn't picked anyways. Even I'm guilty of this, and I've been here for ages.

TL;DR summary as I see it:

---

• This community cannot even have a simple Member Of The (Month/Year/Quarter/Season) without massive backlash and butthurt from some of our users who simply do not win.
  
• This community was built on the system we are using today and it has served us very well, with minimal significant drama and minimal impact of said drama when it does happen.
  
• This community does not have the capability to choose it's own leadership as a whole since a large portion of it's member base is not very experienced. (This isn't a knock on anybody, it's just the truth)
  
• Staff have always been fairly effective at selecting staff. This has never been proven untrue, and most likely never will be.
  
• Yes it's true that a lot of very good candidates do get looked over every time under the current system, but the staff chooses the best match. The community would just pick the one who is most liked, and that may not be the best match for a particular section.

 

[Absol]

Vote for me and I'll give you a shiny Mew!!


If this is allowed it'll end up a popularity contest no matter what you do. There will also be bribing going on. It will happen and you can't stop it. Sorry for ruining your idea, but I don't want PokeCommunity to be like the U.S. Government. If someone really wants to become a mod then they'll have to work for it like all of the current mods have. If mods are elected you can have someone who literally does nothing for the section be voted for mod over someone who has been there for ages and contributing. People won't be able to help voting for their friends and newcomers will just vote for those who are popular. It's how it's always happened in elections.

 

[Rukario]

we could bring back the PokéCommunity President (and I suppose Vice-President) if you all want to vote on something other than MOTY/M/etc.

 

[Nolafus]

we could bring back the PokéCommunity President (and I suppose Vice-President) if you all want to vote on something other than MOTY/M/etc.

Can someone fill me in on what this was?

 

[Honest]

we could bring back the PokéCommunity President (and I suppose Vice-President) if you all want to vote on something other than MOTY/M/etc.

Or more importantly why it was taken down. Assuming the position held any actual power over the forum, I'm willing to bet it was removed for the exact reasons anyone opposed to the democracy idea have pointed out. If it doesn't hold any power, than no still, cause it's just MotY renamed. And one popularity contest is more than enough.

 

[acatfrommars]

Can someone fill me in on what this was?

Same here, I'm curious too. :3

If it woe cause any kind of flaming I'm still against it though it would be cool to hold elections a for fun. Wolf for Pc prez!!

 

[Melody]

we could bring back the PokéCommunity President (and I suppose Vice-President) if you all want to vote on something other than MOTY/M/etc.

I'd rather not, I have particularly bad memories of this, and it ostensibly caused us to lose some very valuable and amazing members while it ran, and caused drama overall. Unless Staff intervened and picked the Candidates themselves, I really don't see any way this could ever be a help to the community, because all this would do is put our popular members in a spotlight and not all of them would react to that properly.

I recall it causing more drama than it helped people, though admittedly this was/is from my perspective as a member, if there are any staff/former staff who remember how it went, I would like to hear their side.

All of that being said, if it were brought back from the grave and improved upon, I wouldn't be able to resist running for it, time and situation permitting.

I was also thinking we could have a member cabinet, as in a group of experienced members some voted in and some picked to weigh in on things.

Can someone fill me in on what this was?

It was simply an election where members were choosen to be president. I don't think it did much but get a differently colored username perk and perhaps a priority communication channel to the staff.

It was certainly a popularity contest worse than MOTM was/is today.

 

[Nick]

I don't get this popularity contest argument people keep throwing out. This comes out whenever we talk about anything that a member vote is called for. I'm pretty indifferent toward PC President, but popular members get popular for a reason. Its because they're good members who are regulars in various forums and who contribute to the best of their ability as well as take the time to get to know people. Unsurprisingly, most popular members eventually make it to the staff. I'd rather someone like that be rewarded than someone I've barely seen on the forums before. Wouldn't all of you?

 

[Honest]

I don't get this popularity contest argument people keep throwing out. This comes out whenever we talk about anything that a member vote is called for. I'm pretty indifferent toward PC President, but popular members get popular for a reason. Its because they're good members who are regulars in various forums and who contribute to the best of their ability as well as take the time to get to know people. Unsurprisingly, most popular members eventually make it to the staff. I'd rather someone like that be rewarded than someone I've barely seen on the forums before. Wouldn't all of you?

Is that always true, though? You're thinking of it one way, when you can see it in a multitude of ways. Someone who simply VMs everyone would be popular, but with zero posts, he's got no experience in the actual forum. Yet, his popularity would definitely work in his favor. That's a really tame example, but I think it shows my point.