Recruitment

[Revöker 656]

14 hours ago, Swed said:

I wasn't particularly involved in either of naufrage's applications prior to his most recent successful once, so I hope you'd be more wary in making accusations without proof.

 

Ya sorry, I didn't really want to throw your name out there but, idk IT WAS SOMEONE!  Reason I did think it was either you or vex is because I remember ppl more based on their profile picture and the accused person I believe had a gril profile pic (which im sure @vexer used to have, right?)

 

NOTE: Since I remember ppl based more on their profile picture; that is the reason when you guys change your picture I forget who you are.  Which is why @Beerman is one of the most memorable people on here because of his long standing steam profile pic and name.

 

I guess what I'm more sure of is the person wanted me to vote yes on Nau, and when I said no they got all pissy

 

Mimic: "I do not believe he has the capacity to not be an ass..."

[Rayne 4478]

On 2/22/2019 at 10:18 PM, Nau said:

 

So we're decided then. Back to the old voting system. Hoorah.

 

Make sure you all ignore the "actual process" when voting and use the old format.

 

Good thread guys. 

[Nau 739]

5 minutes ago, Rayne said:

So we're decided then. Back to the old voting system. Hoorah.

 

Make sure you all ignore the "actual process" when voting and use the old format.

 

Good thread guys. 

Why am I quoted in your post?

[Rayne 4478]

1 minute ago, Nau said:

Why am I quoted in your post?

It wouldn't let me delete it, tried reloading the page a hundred times... Gave up in the end. 

[Nau 739]

Just now, Rayne said:

It wouldn't let me delete it, tried reloading the page a hundred times... Gave up in the end. 

Ahh okay I was like ???

[trav 6834]

29 minutes ago, Rayne said:

It wouldn't let me delete it, tried reloading the page a hundred times... Gave up in the end. 

 

If you run into that problem again:

 

Refresh the page

Open up a reply

At the bottom of it should say, 'Clear Editor'

If you click that, it should remove it

[Sean 3760]

Or you just select the quote and hit delete

[Rayne 4478]

14 hours ago, Travesty said:

 

If you run into that problem again:

 

Refresh the page

Open up a reply

At the bottom of it should say, 'Clear Editor'

If you click that, it should remove it

 

13 hours ago, Sean said:

Or you just select the quote and hit delete

 

Did both of these, several times. Gave up in the end. 

[Tortoise 2791]

so are we actually going back to the old system?

 

I'm honestly conflicted on the whole thing. Voting on new recruits was always a thing I enjoyed doing while I was still very active in the community. It made me feel like even as just an L1, it mattered what I thought of a specific person and if that person was a good fit for the community.

 

That being said, the new system of essentially "yes" votes in the form of referrals is not a bad system, given that 30 is needed besides 3 staff. I honestly think that staff requirements should be doubled, but that's not the discussion. 30 referrals is, at least I think, a better system, because it prevents shitheads from vote-bombing someones app just because they wanted to be a cunt, and puts a bit of work on the recruit to go and make a positive impression on members. 

 

Case in point is a recent app i was looking at earlier. the guy is banned now, but no one wanted to ref him. Dude was a cunt, and he was summarily denied entry into the community.

I'm certain he would have been denied in voting as well, but that's not really the point, nor was it necessary. 

 

I certainly agree with Rayne's OP that the community involvement on the forums has died away considerably, so maybe bringing back recruitment voting will boost forum usage, but I don't believe it is necessary in a recruitment standpoint.

 

Either way, that's how I feel on the situation. 

[Dakota 4722]

No. Nothing is changing. This is a show. 

[Rayne 4478]

I'm genuinely shocked this hasn't sparked some sort of "re-imagining" of our process, 70% of the active community have asked for a change and yet it's swept under the carpet. And we wonder why long standing members lose interest and turn a blind eye to this place.

 

One person's opinion standing above all elses... 

 

Guess we better change our tags to SS instead of sG. 

[trav 6834]

3 minutes ago, Rayne said:

I'm genuinely shocked this has just been completely ignored

 

[Rayne 4478]

4 minutes ago, Travesty said:

 

Fixed. 

[trav 6834]

On 2/22/2019 at 12:30 PM, Travesty said:

Just because members want to vote no on recruits doesn't mean it's the best decision to do so.

 

[Rayne 4478]

Just now, Travesty said:

 

Just because you don't want to vote on recruits doesn't mean it's the best decision not to.

 

Says 70% of the public.

[trav 6834]

I have yet to hear a convincing argument as to why we should.

 

Edit:

 

Sorry I have heard one:

 

'Some people were more active in the recruitment process when they could vote on recruits.'

 

[Rayne 4478]

Since when were you the person we needed to justify our opinions to? 

 

Many people have given different reasons in here, I haven't circle jerked people to respond and write their bits.

 

You have 43 members of this community voting for something else and you continue to fight.

[trav 6834]

8 minutes ago, Rayne said:

Since when were you the person we needed to justify our opinions to? 

 

 

25/??

 

Yes: (+43)

No: (-18)

[MistaChang 2023]

Do you think sG is just going to start trolling recruitment just because we would have the ability to vote no? We don't even have the ability to retract our votes if we made an early decision. Voting was such a huge thing here and brought a lot of activity and it also made recruitment feel like you had to be on your best behaviour. For a long time this way reffing people into sG, has the same power to be circle jerked as the no vote because no one here really has an opinion on who gets in, it's just impress 20 - 30 people and by the end of the month people just pitty ref people that they haven't even had an interaction with all month. Thus, a recruit can shit on people in sG but still suck enough dick to get in; sure you can argue that you can post your interaction on their app, but it would be better just to hit them with that no and get it over with. Then just go to the whole, "if they're toxic we can just kick them out if the time comes". Why use that mentality? We have a community full of people who genuinely care about this place, and if some shitstain is just voting no on recruits to vote no because they got that l2 flex, infract them. 

[Rayne 4478]

23 minutes ago, Travesty said:

 

 

25/??

 

Yes: (+43)

No: (-18)

 

What was it you said when this first came up, directly to me?

 

"If 30 people want something then I'm convinced" (something along those lines) you were referring to referrals, yes but the point still stands.

 

Stop thinking you know best and listen to the community, for once.

[trav 6834]

2 minutes ago, Rayne said:

What was it you said when this first came up, directly to me?

 

"If 30 people want something then I'm convinced" (something along those lines) you were referring to referrals, yes but the point still stands.

 

Stop thinking you know best and listen to the community, for once.

 

So you're saying we should use the referral system? 

[Rayne 4478]

24 minutes ago, Travesty said:

 

So you're saying we should use the referral system? 

You're too adorable to be mad at, that face of yours!

 

Seriously though, give it up now and let's talk about a compromise to the old system. 

 

If it's any consolation, I didn't think the poll would go so heavily this way. 

[trav 6834]

Just now, Rayne said:

Seriously though, give it up now and let's talk about a compromise to the old system. 

 

What kind of compromise would you consider?

[Rayne 4478]

35 minutes ago, Travesty said:

 

What kind of compromise would you consider?

You're the one that won't budge, why not start the bidding?

 

You already know what the community have raised their hands for. It's not about what I want. 

 

 

[Retuzy 35]

This is still going jeezers