/tg/Station 13

I'm giving the playerbase the power to determine my future involvement with server policy.

If I'm voted out of a policymaking position, I will handoff all policy decisions to the three head admins.

I haven't ever seen you abuse your power, and you opinions shouldn't be thrown out just because you happen to host the server.

25-1 vote so far.
As it should be.

Could we have wizard back though?

Absalom wrote:Could we have wizard back though?

It'll happen pending a couple of changes to how survivor works.

Its not gone for good, don't worry.

I think that since Scaredy pays, he should be able to pretty much do whatever the fuck he wants.
He keeps these servers alive, and no matter how much some of us like to laugh at the mere amount of money it takes to keep them up, I don't see any willing to do that but Scaredy.

Of course, I'm pissed about the changes that Scaredy has supported like no murderboning or no ERP; I don't ERP or murderbone, but it pisses me off in a secondhand sort of way because it limits the players options in such an open ended game. I'm hoping SoS just wanted to try these changes to see if it would improve our community, but I still think he should be able to do pretty much whatever. (save for the abrupt policy changes that exclude the community's opinion in general)

Well then, this poll seems to be a close one.

The fact that he repealed that policy after seeing community response is very solid proof that he is quite capable of helping decide policies. It is the kind of leadership we need.

It's true, it matters a lot that that got repealed.

You should be involved in policy as little as possible while still being involved, acting as a safety valve for emergencies, or should dive in and be very active so that you can actively guide the general direction of the station as it moves. Either way you should be around.

I don't think a Yes/No thing is fair at all for this, definitely should be involved but the level should be worked out better.

Basically what dezzmont said.

Since this is your server your word is law, but at the same time you are a human starting gun. From the word 'go' your decisions can affect everything about the way this game is played on multiple servers, negative or positive. Your involvement in banning certain players carries more weight because of this, the same for policy making too.

I'm fine with your involvement in future policy changes but please be careful.

callanrockslol wrote:I don't think a Yes/No thing is fair at all for this, definitely should be involved but the level should be worked out better.

Basically what dezzmont said.

This pretty much. Feel free to suggest changes depending on vote, just don't play dictator changing stuff without consulting the players first.

Cannot speak for everyone, but i am totally fine with SoS being involved with policy changes, just so long as its actually discussed with the other headmins/admins and even the community if necessary.

I always assumed server policy is like good ol democracy, el presidente Scardy gets to set the rules but the 3 headmin can veto his ruling. Also shouldnt this be in the policy forums?

Yes 61 - No 12

Perma ban the 12? XD

I like the vision SoS has for the server and game so I'm 100% in favor of him making decisions and shit.

You seem to be more active now so I would say yes you should be involved.

But if you go back to before where you only came on to update then you shouldn't be.

Edit: The fact that you are putting this up for a vote shows how amazing you are.

When push comes to shove, SoS owns the server and he can do anything he wants regarding how its used. I fully respect his right to him using his private property in whatever way he sees fit.

However, that does not mean I think he should be making mandates. If he is using his server for the community, than the community should decide what the community wants. If he wanted to respect the /tg/station community, than he would not interfere with policy in such a way that locks out conflicting opinions. In other words, just because someone owns the ballot box doesn't mean they decide who wins the election. I respect scaredys opinion on matters of policy a great deal more than other peoples, but as far as I see it he should still limit himself to the power of one vote, just like everyone else.

Of course thats assuming this is a democracy. If scaredy wants to be the dictator of the community, that is perfectly understandable and his claim to it is legitimate. He does pay the bills after all. If he wants to call the shots on things, I respect his authority to do so.