Staff Members: Election by Senior Members and Above

[Zachariah]

Originally Posted by MPDev

I would suggest that elections would open up a whole new can of worms, but thats just my opinion. I would say that you could make recommendations in private, but decisions on how a site is run should fall to the owners.

I would simply ask all of you who own sites consider if these types of policies would be acceptible to your forums.

When I hire employees for my companies, I don't mind letting them get interviewed by their peers who will be working with them and getting feedback, but I make the final call on who gets hired and its not open for a vote.

(Edit: I'm not knocking your idea, maybe just an issue of choice of words is all.)

I do not see a problem either.

In any company:

- you hire people you can trust that will uphold company values.
- you hire people you can work with
- you hire people you can communicate with
- you hire people that can fill a need in the companies missions and goals.
- you hire people that can be trained
- you hire people that replace the leter "I" with the word "TEAM"

100’s of other reasons.

I got to go back to code ... All this talk and nothing is getting done.

[akanevsky]

Originally Posted by MPDev

I would suggest that elections would open up a whole new can of worms, but thats just my opinion. I would say that you could make recommendations in private, but decisions on how a site is run should fall to the owners.

That is exactly what I meant, with the exception that I think that in a community of coders/designers, there should be some input allowed from the public as to whether a certain individual should be elected or not. Of course, the final decision is the staff's, but often staff may not know about others who may be better qualified (example: Zachery, in the beginning of this thread). Input by members would create a better, fuller picture.

I would simply ask all of you who own sites consider if these types of policies would be acceptible to your forums.

If I was running a coding community, I would certainly allow members to vote for new staff members when these new staff members were actually required. That would allow me to know about people whom I might have not known about previously. Of course, I wouldn't just take in people who I know nothing about. I'd do some research. Or ask for more information to be provided. That's would not be a problem as long as they would be willing to cooperate.

[MJM]

What makes it a little different here is that it is the members, not the company, who are providing the product and support.
Without contributing coders this site would be history.

The ideal situation would be for everyone to show that they can work together on solving issues, whatever they be.

[Gio~Logist]

Originally Posted by MPDev

In difference to everything else that has been said, I fully support a site owners right to pick whomever they please to represent and moderate their site. The people who pay the bills are not accountible to anyone here, IMO; so hire who you think will do the best job and I'll continue to contribute in a meaningful way.

You can't please everyone here, so pick a path and follow it.

Jelsoft pays the bills.

[Zachariah]

Originally Posted by MJM

What makes it a little different here is that it is the members, not the company, who are providing the product and support.
Without contributing coders this site would be history.

The ideal situation would be for everyone to show that they can work together on solving issues, whatever they be.

Company is not a big word to hang on. In any organization or “community” there are leaders who take responsibility and make the decisions. Good, bad, or whatever. It is always a growing experience. I am glad to be part of it and will miss it when it is gone.

Yes, the ideal situation would be for everyone to show that they can work together on solving issues, whatever they be

[Gio~Logist]

Originally Posted by Boofo

Without the builders, where would the architect be? They both are equally important and need one another.

That's not the point. The point is that the builders and the architect are not the same people. The importance was not being argued.

[Boofo]

Originally Posted by gio~logist

That's not the point. The point is that the builders and the architect are not the same people. The importance was not being argued.

According to Dean it was. And I stand by my statement, anyway.

[smacklan]

Wow...nine pages of this already in 4 1/2 hours. I'm sorry, but all this boils down to is there are some here bound and determined to force their opinions and ego's on everyone else who uses/visits this site. They don't have the influence they want/feel owed or whatever. This stuff is really getting old...do you folks not have real lives?

[Boofo]

Originally Posted by smacklan

do you folks not have real lives?

I used to once, a very, very long time ago.

[MJM]

Originally Posted by Zachariah

... In any organization or ?community? there are leaders who take responsibility and make the decisions.

Yep, there is a reason why some buttons have only enough room for one finger to push

Suggestions, comments, polls, surveys and feedback are invaluable to anyone landed with the responsibility to make final decisions.

But the last thing any decision maker needs to deal with is bickering and hostilities derived from strongly opposing opinions, or repetitive beating of the dead horse. It's too draining.