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.

 

[Earnhardt Zimmel]

+Support​

I Think this would cause a lot less stagnation of Leadership positions and cause people to actually do their jobs​

If someone truly was a great -1 or Chairman, They could just reapply and (likely) win ​

This should only apply to application based positions though​

​

If it works in real life I see no reason why it wouldn't work here (MRP excluded cause it wasn't handled the best it could've been)​

 

[Darren]

this was only suggested cause bro wants SA or SC position just wait

 

[xCore]

HUGE - SUPPORT
-flopped on MRP (From whats been said)
-People may do well in the position and want to hold it for longer
-Why would people apply for a position they can only hold for 2 months
-would make LOA really annoying as people could have to spend weeks of their term dealing with personal stuff and then not be able to play
-There would be so many personnel this applies for (assuming you count all of SA and all Dpt Leads and SC are full that totals to 30 ppl: 5 for MTF COMS, 10 for DPT leads, 8 for SC and 7 for SA which includes all roles)

 

[PhoenixHeanix]

-Support
Enough said.

 

[Renolk]

-Support

As someone who encountered this in MRP, it is a very bad idea, and just causes unnecessary work for NL, SL and everyone.

 

[SamPaval]

almost like SL don't because theres no way to give feedback thats mind blowing!!!

Brudda if I record -1 breaking massive amounts of rules he'd insta removed.

 

[GMAN0289]

-support

 

[TeKz]

-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

If people are doing good, they can just rerun?

 

[Darren]

If people are doing good, they can just rerun?

small amount of cough cough bias that people wont want it this is a dumb idea

 

[Connor | FUDGESICLE]

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

-Support

As Cloak said this was used on MRP for 2 terms and was proven to not work.

 

[John Iceland]

If people are doing good, they can just rerun?

If its implemented with infinite limits, Sure its different, even then no issue shows itself right now, if an issue is had with current people theres always people above them, As -1 has been saying. Communicate. Just no need to change it

 

[Lee Falzone]

-Support

Its a video game not a chore. CN tries to be more simple with this stuff compared to other servers and we should keep it that way.

 

[legionnaires6]

-support
But this does bring up the fact that we need a performance review.

 

[Kw1ll]

I think all high command roles should be done via a democratic vote

 

["Wick"]

-Support
and i thought that the suggestions i see on this forum couldn't get bad enough

 

[Deleted member 55]

It's definitely worth considering that having a term system for senior positions might encourage more competition and attract higher quality players. But we can't forget that there are some potential downsides to think about too.

For one, SL would need to come up with new policies and rules to manage the whole reapplication process, which might take a while and could get a bit confusing. Which isn't necessarily a big problem.

Plus, having leaders switch out every couple of months might cause a bit of a shake-up in departments, especially if the new folks in charge have totally different ideas or ways of doing things.

And we can't ignore the possibility that this competition for the limited leadership spots might stir up some drama and tension among the community. SL wouldn't want people to get so caught up in trying to win these positions that they lose sight of what really matters – contributing to the server as a whole.

These are just some simple downsides I listed quickly, there are many more.

- Support

 

[Evil]

When the server slowly becomes America
-support

 

[Yeke]

Suggestion Denied​

---

Hi @Walnut ,

Thanks for taking the time to make a server suggestion.

After discussion with the Superadmin Team, we have come to the agreement that this would not benefit the health of the server in any meaningful way and also cause issues whereby people speedrun to make an impact which will directly impact the quality of roleplay for the server, as seen on MRP, this did not work and we do not feel this would work here, although we understand the reasons presented, however this is a case of looking good on paper but in practice would be rather difficult to manage.

Your suggestion will now be locked and marked as denied.​