Denied Position Terms

[Walnut]

What does this suggestion change/add/remove?​

• Create a system of terms for all positions that are considered 'senior' level 4 and above. (SA/SC/Dpt. Chief/MTF COM)
  • Applications for these positions will give you the positions for a guaranteed (asides from valid removal) 2 months, after which a member will reapply
• Applications will be posted on the CN forums where community feedback is provided
  • Members will be allowed to apply against a member currently holding the position when their term ends, even if they intend to apply again
• Current holders will be grandfathered in and their terms beginning on the date of this being implemented if it were to be accepted
• When terms end the user would go back to whatever position they were before until they reapply and get accepted or denied

-​

Possible Positives of the suggestion​

• More competition for positions which will lead to more quality members obtaining positions​
• Prevents people from obtaining a position, doing a lot for it in their first weeks and then becoming essentially a seat warmer by giving a deadline for their place​
• Allows community feedback to be provided on RP leadership constantly via constant applications​

-​

Possible Negatives of the suggestion​

• Strain on SL/NL to create regulations and policy
• People might like being able to be in a position permanently
• Radical policy change that people would have to get used to

-​

Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted?​

I truly do believe that these changes will create a more positive loop in the leadership by forcing members to be thoughtful and create meaningful change to their departments at the risk of not getting the position in 2 months. The positives heavily outweigh the negatives and although many current leadership would dislike it, it creates an opportunity for new leaders of RP to introduce themselves.

 

[Walnut]

This would also apply to CI COM and UNGOC GEN, forgot to add them

 

[Slater]

+support This is very much needed. There is timed terms on pretty much every other actual RP server. Allowing people to sit in positions forever just causes issues.

 

[Ramuh]

+/- Neutral
- Term lengths are good
- Creates more competition & helps prevent people from sitting & doing absolutely nothing
- Positions that aren't application based, such as MTF COM & UNGOC GEN, should not have terms, at most I'd say a performance review every X amount of time.
- Term limits are goofy, if we get an O5-1 that does great for 2 terms, they wouldn't be able to apply for a third.

 

[Claire!]

-Support.
If a great person wants to be -1 and they do good for there terms, and deserve it, let them keep it.

 

[Generic]

Just allow for people to do an unlimited amount of terms, if they do a bad job in their previous term then people will -support their application. If there is a better candidate then SL will select that person instead.

 

[Walnut]

Changes to my suggestion following initial feedback

No term limits or consecutive limits

O5-1 and Chairman are voted on the forums, but also go through their internal 'election' so to speak

 

[Cloak]

We did this on MilitaryRP and it was a complete flop, just fyi

 

[SamPaval]

As cloak said

Its good on paper but in use it was very bad

So -

 

[Darren]

massive -support this should not be added at all costs it takes people months to earn goc gen / ci com it took the currrenty ci com since godamn june or some shit to get com and to remove it so suddenly there is also sometimes no other members competant enough to take over

IE a new commander is chosen and is at the end of his term and there is no viable candidates that are suited to take over the position and bam hes gone with no possible new candidates in sight leaving the reg in shambles this has already happened a fuck ton and if someone is veyr skilled at their job they shouldnt be removed cause of a term

also bias reviews on re applications IE a new ci com has been doing great his raids for the regiment have been outstanding and ci is completely steam rolling mtf well his term has ended and hes reapplying guess what those mtf mains will raid that application

hell that already happens with some mtf tryna get ci command removed cause of successfull raids this should not at all be implemented

 

[SamPaval]

massive -support this should not be added at all costs it takes people months to earn goc gen / ci com it took the currrenty ci com since godamn june or some shit to get com and to remove it so suddenly there is also sometimes no other members competant enough to take over

IE a new commander is chosen and is at the end of his term and there is no viable candidates that are suited to take over the position and bam hes gone with no possible new candidates in sight leaving the reg in shambles this has already happened a fuck ton and if someone is veyr skilled at their job they shouldnt be removed cause of a term

also bias reviews on re applications IE a new ci com has been doing great his raids for the regiment have been outstanding and ci is completely steam rolling mtf well his term has ended and hes reapplying guess what those mtf mains will raid that application

hell that already happens with some mtf tryna get ci command removed cause of successfull raids this should not at all be implemented

For once I'm agreeing with darren.

Why should we remove are commanders 05 and SA cause there term has ended.

This will cause untold chaos if no good members are here putting a burden on everyone.

This can lead to the downfall of many departments and regiments.

I understand u probably want a chance at being in the SR cl4 slots but at the cost of doing this fucks everyone else up.

 

[Rev. Doofster Runner]

I see where your coming from but it's still a - Support.

With the decrease of O5 and Ethics, for some to have "terms" would be nice so that those who become unpopular or don't do their job can be removed, but those who do a good job have to constantly worry about a popularity contest of getting back in.

It's a nice idea but unfortunately wouldn't work well without heaps of regulation which would make it a nightmare

 

[Asp]

+Support

As long as it is implemented correctly and doesn't flop like it did on MRP, I think this would be a very good change, as well as benefit the server.

 

[Stabby]

+Support, but...
- I believe this should only apply to application based roles
- I believe you should have the chance to apply again after your term
- I believe what was a flop on MRP could be learned from to create a better player environment

 

[RoxieCat2003]

-support

 

[TeKz]

+Support
This would bring in less bias towards regiments and stop people from essentially locking down a regiment. If it did fail before, it wasn't implemented right as this system would only bring in benefits. From removing large friend groups from power to creating a more competitive environment with applications. Obviously some jobs should not have terms, however, most high ranking ones should.

 

[Chad]

+support MRP AND SCP RP are 2 different things please add. This works perfectly fine on other servers and would work fine on here for certain positions like O5 and ethics.

-Support.
If a great person wants to be -1 and they do good for there terms, and deserve it, let them keep it.

Almost like if they're doing bad nothing happens to them and they can still keep it .

 

[Monker]

+ support

 

[Claire!]

+support MRP AND SCP RP are 2 different things please add. This works perfectly fine on other servers and would work fine on here for certain positions like O5 and ethics.

Almost like if they're doing bad nothing happens to them and they can still keep it .

SL Can remove them.

 

[John Iceland]

-Support
Would make this feel like Icefuse P2, Of which im not a fan of the term system considering I have had no issues, as of late with position openings, if someone does their job well in a position why force remove them just because they ran out of terms