VC Staff becoming more accountable

[Brutalfive (OP)]

VillageCraft is an amazing server, that we can all agree. VC declares itself to be a server for the players, ran by the players, but I would like to question this.

While it is true that in theory any player could become staff, under the current system, this is unfortunately not true ):. This is because, how the staff system currently works, staff alone appoint, promote, demote and dismiss staff. Now while I recognise and respect that most staff members are knowledgeable in areas to do with the server, and are therefore beneficial (the best eg is Luis who is a clear example of how most staff are beneficial), it can be (and has been) argued that there are staff members who are not beneficial to the community.

Being on the server for 5 years, and speaking to players and staff, I have found myself to come to three functions that determine if a staff is 'good' or 'bad'. They are as followed:
1) Friendliness and approachability - This simply means are they approachable and, friendly. This does NOT mean they have to be friends with everyone on the server, but an all around, GENERAL positive attitude, vibe and presentation of themselves is what the community looks for.
2) Knowledge, skill and ability - How knowledgeable a staff member is in relation to basic knowledge of the server, and more importantly their staff perms. Although I myself have not experienced this, I have heard from a range of players say that some staff are unable to do half of their perms or they just don't know how to use the perms they were given. Now I for one am absolutely ok with new staff or recently promoted staff not knowing what or how to use their new perms, but when a staff member has had those perms for a while, and still hasn't bothered to learn how to use them, I question why they have been given such abilities when they choose not to use them when someone else in their position would - eg Cyphur and Legend learnt how to use their perms and appropriately. When they were unsure on something perm related, they checked with other staff (this is how all staff should be).
3) Dedication to the server and community - I remember multiple times being told by some of the most senior staff members that being staff meant you serve the server, and effectively, the players. Unfortunately, there are staff members who do not offer much for the community, or the server, and many more who seem undedicated which is shown through consistent inactivity. I would like to clarify that I am fully aware that staff sometimes need a break, in fact I support that! But it is taking it a bit too far when staff have been inactive or barely on for months on end, as they, by default, are not serving the community if they are not in the community - for example although Luis is not online as often as other staff such as Yvette, he is still very much involved, behind the scenes, in the Forums and in the discord chat, showing his dedication.

Some staff members are observed as insufficient by many in the community. As it stands, the current system for staff creates a sort of 'elite' as it is staff who pick who joins them, allowing bias to take place and possible cliques to form (by staff members prioritising those they personally get along with over those who they personally dislike), rather than following the voice and opinion of the players within the community.

This is why I suggest a new, more democratic system.
- Every 6 months, all staff members are subject to an anonymous vote by all VC players (staff and non-staff alike). Players will be able to pick from three      options on all staff members individually - good/effective staff member, bad/insufficient staff member/ abstain. In addition there should be a option box where players can anonymously explain why they voted in such a way, giving further clarification as to the overall results.
- If a staff member receives a specific percentage of negative votes (eg 60-70%, but this can be decided at a later stage), they are either demoted or dismissed based on the feedback given by the players, this choice is up to the staff members to decide.
- If a staff member receives a specific percentage of positive votes (eg 60-70%, but this too can be decided at a later stage), they are considered for promotion where possible (eg if already an admin or if the position above is already full, then no promotion is required)
- 6 months, is the perfect length of time, as it allows staff to take breaks for a few weeks without fear of being dismissed, it also is more than enough time to show how dedicated and approachable a staff member is, and their ability to use their powers. However, it is not overly long to prevent insufficient staff from continuing to benefit from a position they do not deserve.

In the same way, when staff are looking to promote other staff, they can use the voting results to rank all staff in order of popularity and look to promote the most favoured staff members in the community. Similarly, when looking for new staff, a public vote should take place, like for CM, except staff will have the final say in all decisions, as they are as a group, more knowledgeable about the server. This means that staff do not have to pick the most popular candidates, but at least a candidate of mid to high popularity, as it is clear the community trust them with more responsibility.

This transparency will allow us to hold staff accountable and keep VC a server ran by the players, while ensuring that staff who, as a collective, are most knowledgeable about the server, can make a final verdict. I know for some, they might argue this becomes a popularity contest, but when it comes to staff, candidates who are popular are the ones who do their job and are good representatives of VC and the entire VC community, so popularity is somewhat important.

Therefore, by making VC staff more accountable through half-yearly staff revue by all VC players and transparency, we can assure that VillageCraft is a server ran by the players.

If anyone has any questions or comments please go ahead, this is simply a suggestion. Warning I'm not as good at writing my explanations as I am explaining over voice chat, so again, apologies for anything that does not make sense.

[Shensley]

Definitely an interesting idea.

[OctoGamer]

yea, or we can keep the system that's been working? we've done "reviews" before, nothing really happens. you can't really call the staffing process biased when you haven't been apart of it, and don't know the ins and outs of it. honestly. also, I  haven't really heard too many complaints about the staff except for a few personal beefs between a few specific players and staff members. and being staff isnt really that special, its a job with some perks, like any job. Just on Minecraft. and why would we wanna rank staff in order of popularity?  promoting and demoting happen as they need too, not when a staff member is disliked by players or its time for "someone elses turn" This isn't how we keep an informed, able to help team. it's how you have an untrained team of people who just want a tag to brag. Mods have all their perms, as do SM's so I'm not really sure what perms people are missing that make it so they can't do their jobs? Promotions are given out as seen fit, and has been that way forever... If a mod wants to take over SM duties all they honestly have to do is ask and show interest.

[Yvette]

I agree with the principle of wanting a more democratic Staff process but I also really disagree with having reviews every 6 months, which I feel would devolve merely into popularity contests, as I feel most players wouldn't truly vote/rank based on job performance, but on personal opinion. To be totally honest, I have no input on what else could be done, other than a recent discussion w Ako and I in which the issue was raised that I don't want Staff to have a Veto over issues put forth in Parliament.

[OctoGamer]

I agree with the notion of have a more democratic process. This is something I been wanting for the longest time. The way we get there can be different. Octo does have a point that we don't know how the staff inner circle is run. This is exactly why we need to either make that process more transparent or replace it with something driven by the players as a whole.

Edit: And I will stay the system is broken. I would say part of the problem we have had with the server- stagnation and the like- is partly due to the staff. Which is thankfully being fixed. No part from the staff only from the players pushing for reforms to be made. And the issues of staff not knowing what to do or being just generally toxic is an issue as well since that can turn off new players as well as just bring up the unanswerable question if why they are still a staff if they can't do their job and don't play on the server anymore. Is it just merely out of seniority? Or is it just nepotism. I don't know at this point. And I am sorry if I'm talking like this is some big rung up thing. Your guys aren't bad its such this closed staff group has become so stagnant I feel that something does need to change. Brutal thank you for being this up.

Sounds to me like you want any chance you can get at staff. How close am I to being correct? eh?

[Akomine]

While it is true that in theory any player could become staff, under the current system, this is unfortunately not true ):.

In theory, it is true. Why wouldn't it be true? We've had all sorts of players join staff.

This is because, how the staff system currently works, staff alone appoint, promote, demote and dismiss staff.

I mean, yes, this is exactly the reality.

For pretty much as long as the server has been public, I've thought of ways to make it more and more democratic, especially as old founders left. This is largely because I'm an anarchist and simply believe in democracy. Democracy is tricky on a public internet server. I recognized the problem early on that Staff needed their own democratic process separate from the playerbase overall. As for the playerbase's democracy - the Parliament - well that needs some restrictions too. Obviously any rando coming in all of a sudden probably shouldn't be making decisions for the future of the server, let alone who becomes staff, so there should be some threshold.

The restriction for voting in parl is very soft, but for staff to be able to function, staff need to be able to deliberate within our own team. We also vote on the future of our own team. And I want to be clear, basically all we do is have fun on the server and figure out ways to make it more fun for everyone else. If ever it becomes clear that a staff member is trying to harm the community, we notice, and if needed we act.

Some staff members are observed as insufficient by many in the community. As it stands, the current system for staff creates a sort of 'elite' as it is staff who pick who joins them, allowing bias to take place and possible cliques to form (by staff members prioritising those they personally get along with over those who they personally dislike), rather than following the voice and opinion of the players within the community.

Alright, it takes courage to say this, and I'll of course leave it up to every individual to have their own thoughts on which staff they deep sufficient or not. However, this "elite" status you speak of is bizarre to me. Listen, if a staff member is abusing their role, speak up immediately. Otherwise, please recognize that being staff is more of a responsibility than it is an elite power club. Are people being neglected somehow? You can speak up about that too.

This is why I suggest a new, more democratic system.
- Every 6 months, all staff members are subject to an anonymous vote by all VC players (staff and non-staff alike). ...
- If a staff member receives a specific percentage of negative votes ... they are either demoted or dismissed ...
- If a staff member receives a specific percentage of positive votes ... they are considered for promotion where possible ...

We HAVE done staff performance surveys, and we can do more, but we should avoid players promoting or demoting staff. The surveys shouldn't have binding results. Staff promotions and demotions are largely that individual staff member choosing to take on more or less responsibility. Beyond experience and expertise, it's barely a hierarchy, we're all volunteers. Though I may have higher than average influence, I still only get 1 vote.

In the same way, when staff are looking to promote other staff, they can use the voting results to rank all staff in order of popularity and look to promote the most favoured staff members in the community. Similarly, when looking for new staff, a public vote should take place, like for CM, except staff will have the final say in all decisions, as they are as a group, more knowledgeable about the server. This means that staff do not have to pick the most popular candidates, but at least a candidate of mid to high popularity, as it is clear the community trust them with more responsibility.

It's not a popularity contest. We choose staff members for different reasons. People fill different roles. With very specific exceptions, "higher up" staff do not "promote" "lower down" staff. I've already explained that it's an individual decision, and I don't think I need to explain further why it shouldn't be the public voting on it. It isn't even the staff voting on it in this case.

This transparency will allow us to hold staff accountable and keep VC a server ran by the players, while ensuring that staff who, as a collective, are most knowledgeable about the server, can make a final verdict. I know for some, they might argue this becomes a popularity contest, but when it comes to staff, candidates who are popular are the ones who do their job and are good representatives of VC and the entire VC community, so popularity is somewhat important.

Therefore, by making VC staff more accountable through half-yearly staff revue by all VC players and transparency, we can assure that VillageCraft is a server ran by the players.

If anyone has any questions or comments please go ahead, this is simply a suggestion. Warning I'm not as good at writing my explanations as I am explaining over voice chat, so again, apologies for anything that does not make sense.

Hey, thanks for typing up these thoughts. It's a conversation worth having. If at any point I sounded harsh in my reply I apologize. I think it took some balls to post this, so I appreciate you doing it. If you want more transparency about how the staff operates, please ask and I will try to answer. If you and others think a staff performance survey happening again is a good idea, then I think so too and I'm down for that. It can be anonymous. It should not be binding.



-------

I agree with the notion of have a more democratic process. This is something I been wanting for the longest time. The way we get there can be different. Octo does have a point that we don't know how the staff inner circle is run. This is exactly why we need to either make that process more transparent or replace it with something driven by the players as a whole.

A week or so ago you asked me about the process by which we add new staff and I answered. Is there something else you would like to know? Feel free to ask.

Edit: And I will stay the system is broken.

Which system exactly? And how is it broken?

I would say part of the problem we have had with the server- stagnation and the like- is partly due to the staff.

Sure

Which is thankfully being fixed. No part from the staff only from the players pushing for reforms to be made.

Are you seriously saying that the staff have had NO part in improving the server? Are you fucking kidding me, asshole? Please tell me I've misread this. This is incredibly rude, and demonstrably untrue.

I just wanna thank all the awesome staff who have contributed to VC lately; you're bringing the server back from a lull and you are totally appreciated. You have absolutely played a part in improving the server. Thank you.

And the issues of staff not knowing what to do or being just generally toxic is an issue as well since that can turn off new players as well as just bring up the unanswerable question if why they are still a staff if they can't do their job and don't play on the server anymore.

What? Yes shitty staff members can turn off new players, and if a staff member is being shitty you can speak up if you feel you need to. We can and do remove staff members sometimes, you know this.

Is it just merely out of seniority? Or is it just nepotism. I don't know at this point. And I am sorry if I'm talking like this is some big rung up thing. Your guys aren't bad its such this closed staff group has become so stagnant I feel that something does need to change. Brutal thank you for being this up.

Is WHAT out of seniority? Is what nepotism? What are you getting at? What do you mean this "closed staff group"? What do you mean by "stagnant" in this case? I'm not understanding what you're trying to get at.

You seem to have some confusion about staff, and you seem to want clarification on some things. Please ask me and I can give you some clarity. Cheers.

[Theologist_Green]

I removed my post. I realized when I wrote it I wasn't completely true in what I said. But my main points still stand.

[Yvette]

We have voted to remove 4 staff members and add two in the last month. Really failing to see the stagnant point.

And Ako is right. The claim that staff have had no part in bringing the server back is both laughable and insulting.

I think there is a valid point about reviews, but I think Ako made a perfect point when he said it shouldn't be binding. I think non binding player reviews could really be helpful in opening up discussions about these sorts of things.

[gerrit70]

Staff performance is a very abstract idea, if we have bi-yearly votes on 'How staff are doing' It would be nothing but an opportunity to express personal grudges and unjustly pressure the staff to change their behavior, possibly not for the better. I think things are fine as they are now, if you want to be staff just don't do dumb shit I guess, simple enough.

We have to remember that staff are volunteers and do a lot for us, this would just put undue scrutiny on them.

[Brutalfive (OP)]

Thank you all for your comments.

I would like to clarify my position as it does need clarification.

I understand that there is concern over a player vote being binding for staff, and while as I re-read my post it definitely comes across like that. However, I would like to clarify that while I stand by what I have said, for example if the popularity of a staff member is very, very low something needs to be done, I am aware that sometimes staff may be leading or partaking in important projects for the server, unknown to the players. It is because of this that I would want staff to have a final say. Through a voting system staff can clearly see how the community view them (which is very important) and more importantly (through the option of a box where a player can add more detail explaining why they voted in such a way) why staff members received such results. In addition it also allows transparency, which can re-assure our community that the players voices are heard at all times. If staff were to act against the voice of the players, it would be an opportunity for the staff team to explain why, which would give more players an insight into the workings of staff, and with a response as to why staff went against the players vote, would once again showing staff are actively keeping the community in their mind during every decision.

Whether or not staff do decide that this is the way forward, regular and frequent community anonymous voting and suggestions must take place in order for staff to truly understand the wants, needs and concerns of the community (without drama being caused due to naming the author of the complaint).

[OctoGamer]

Staff performance is a very abstract idea, if we have bi-yearly votes on 'How staff are doing' It would be nothing but an opportunity to express personal grudges and unjustly pressure the staff to change their behavior, possibly not for the better. I think things are fine as they are now, if you want to be staff just don't do dumb shit I guess, simple enough.

We have to remember that staff are volunteers and do a lot for us, this would just put undue scrutiny on them.

legit all you need to do to "become" a vc staff member is be a stand up player, show initiative and theirs honestly a decent chance your name gets brought up when we do new staff discussions. theirs actually quite a few more votes for staff than you guys even really know about because not all of them have passed.

[Brutalfive (OP)]

Staff performance is a very abstract idea, if we have bi-yearly votes on 'How staff are doing' It would be nothing but an opportunity to express personal grudges and unjustly pressure the staff to change their behavior, possibly not for the better. I think things are fine as they are now, if you want to be staff just don't do dumb shit I guess, simple enough.

We have to remember that staff are volunteers and do a lot for us, this would just put undue scrutiny on them.

legit all you need to do to "become" a vc staff member is be a stand up player, show initiative and theirs honestly a decent chance your name gets brought up when we do new staff discussions. theirs actually quite a few more votes for staff than you guys even really know about because not all of them have passed.

I completely understand and respect this, and I think if more transparency was available, it would really help player-staff relations.

[Shensley]

If you were to ask any staff member they would give you the same tips to become staff as Octo just gave. There really isn't any more transparency we can give, we will not be informing you when your name is being brought up because i guarantee anyone who is informed that will start to be a major suck up or begin thinking higher of themselves. Being staff has its perks but its not as great as you think. Currently most of the things to work on with the server has to do with backend things that really only luis understands and that I wouldn't even try to figure out. Im a horrible builder, and all the projects we have are outdated so my hands are somewhat tied right now as to what I can do as staff except help players and do basic moderator actions and I don't think im the only one who feels like this.

[Akomine]

I removed my post. I realized when I wrote it I wasn't completely true in what I said. But my main points still stand.

Okay. What are your main points that still stand?


-------

Thank you all for your comments.

I would like to clarify my position as it does need clarification.

I understand that there is concern over a player vote being binding for staff, and while as I re-read my post it definitely comes across like that. However, I would like to clarify that while I stand by what I have said, for example if the popularity of a staff member is very, very low something needs to be done, I am aware that sometimes staff may be leading or partaking in important projects for the server, unknown to the players. It is because of this that I would want staff to have a final say. Through a voting system staff can clearly see how the community view them (which is very important) and more importantly (through the option of a box where a player can add more detail explaining why they voted in such a way) why staff members received such results. In addition it also allows transparency, which can re-assure our community that the players voices are heard at all times. If staff were to act against the voice of the players, it would be an opportunity for the staff team to explain why, which would give more players an insight into the workings of staff, and with a response as to why staff went against the players vote, would once again showing staff are actively keeping the community in their mind during every decision.

Whether or not staff do decide that this is the way forward, regular and frequent community anonymous voting and suggestions must take place in order for staff to truly understand the wants, needs and concerns of the community (without drama being caused due to naming the author of the complaint).

How do you feel about a survey that players can answer, optionally anonymously, about each staff member where they can write a feedback comment? Players can give positive, negative, or general constructive feedback, or abstain. Staff can choose to read the feedback they recieved.

Furthermore, we're talking about getting a staff Trello going again to organize and track staffwork and server projects. I've suggested making it visible to the playerbase for good transparency. Does that sound good?

[Brutalfive (OP)]

How do you feel about a survey that players can answer, optionally anonymously, about each staff member where they can write a feedback comment? Players can give positive, negative, or general constructive feedback, or abstain. Staff can choose to read the feedback they recieved.

I think this is an amazing idea, especially the option for it to be anonymous. I would want this to be done somewhat frequently, maybe once every several months, this can be decided at a latter stage - maybe something like every 3 months as it will not be binding and optional for staff to read, allowing for more detailed and regular feedback.

Furthermore, we're talking about getting a staff Trello going again to organize and track staffwork and server projects. I've suggested making it visible to the playerbase for good transparency. Does that sound good?

This also sounds amazing, this would help with player assurance, which many would agree, as of late, as become a bit of a hot topic. I also like the idea as it talks about the positive work done, and would have a more positive feel than ranking staff, which should prevent hard working staff feel underappreciated by being ranked lowly. The community would strongly support this as it brings more positivity to the server, as well as giving hard working staff the recognition they deserve - for example, I have been made aware that staff, such as yourself and Luis, are doing many projects and leading discussions to improve the server, listing all the work you are doing will hopefully help players understand why you cant do things immediately a you are spread across multiple areas.

[TheLegend12369]

I've been watching where this discussion goes, and from the perspective of a new staff member that just went through the process, would like to address the topics. First, seniority, then bias and public representation.

The idea that seniority dictates how staff operates and decisions that are made on the server is rather false. I just came back onto the server about seven months ago, and in that time have been able to work with staff and other active members to help suggest and implement change into the server. If i felt that my voice wasn't being heard by a particular staff member, I would let other staff know and work with them to address the issue. Ako has worked hard to make sure that even staff only have one vote when it comes to parliament vote and contentious issues, that's the way it's always been. It's important to remember that just because a particular staff member doesn't agree with someone else's ideas, they don't represent every staff member, and they are a player on the server just the same as everyone else. Everyone deserves to state their opinion, even staff.

Secondly, I'd like to address the topic of bias in the staff. With everyone that is on staff, and the wide range of connections each staff member has with the community, it is once again hard to declare the whole staff bias. Sure, individual staff members might be bias toward one thing or another, but all official actions taken by the staff are decided as a whole, meaning everyone gets to state their opinion. In this way, arguing that staff as a whole is bias is like arguing that the parliament as a whole is bias, which is a hard argument to support. Decisions about new staff is always made as a group.

Lastly, I'd like to address representation toward staff. If anyone is feeling under-represented, I have a solution that is already in place that is largely anonymous. The CM is elected not only to host events, which is what most people see the CM as, but also to represent the public in Parliament. The title "Community Minister" inherently implies that they represent community members. Thus, if anyone has a problem that they are uncomfortable bringing up or they feel like their voice isn't being heard, speak with the CM. The CM can then bring it to the attention of staff, thus removing any barrier that a community member may feel they have to face. It is my aim as CM and as a staff member to bring about the changes that the public wants to see, and if anyone isn't feeling properly represented by me, please message me and let me know what you would like to see happen. Everyone deserves a voice.