/tg/Station 13

This was always meant to be revisited, so I'm opening the floor.

What do people think about term limits and lengths? Right now, as it was agreed upon by the playerbase in a vote, admins serve 6 month terms. There were rumors and grumblings of term limits, but this was never voted on.

BEGIN THE DISCUSSION.

We will have a vote if want for one comes about.

A leadership position like this needs stability not just competence. I think 6 months is perfectly fin as a mid ground between (potentially) constantly changing leadership/worrying about votes, and long term stability, which lets headmins get shit done.

The only issue is if the headmins themselves burn out too much from 6 months - in which case I'd be fine with shorter.

Edit: I don't really see a point in limiting terms - if a headmin starts becoming shit, they're not going to stay in power, since I can't image any of the three voter pools are completely composed of drooling idiots.. If they're popular/successful enough to stay in power, good for them, and probably good for the server.

I concur, six months is a comfortable medium between too much and too little time. I would also support term limits, as after holding a position for too long the incumbent becomes practically impervious.

I think recent circumstances have shown that a 6 month term is juuuuuuust about right.

I know that even without the flare-ups the three of us were getting ready to settle back down and hand things over to new admins. I was not planning on running again. 6 months of juggling policy, handling bans, and overseeing admins new and old was a lot of work and I'm pretty sure all of us were ready for a break.

I hope that going forward things will be a bit easier for our incoming headmins as I'll be taking a more active role in admin oversight as host, so they'll be more free to focus just on those other things. Their workload should get a little lighter than what we were facing.

I don't think term limits should be a real problem here. If the community really likes someone's work in a headmin position enough to want to vote for them again (and again, and again) then they really are doing something magical. It's a very difficult and polarizing role. In the (albeit very short) history of elections only one person has ever been elected twice. I don't really see this being a problem because I can't imagine someone maintaining enough public opinion AND energy to continue to run and win over and over.

If you're really giving it your all and doing it well enough that people want you to keep at it, you're probably going to need a break. If you're skating by and doing the bare minimum people likely will stop voting for you.

Okay I never really understood headmins. There are three of them, right? And one is an adminbus rep voted by admins, one is a coderbus rep voted by coders, and one is a player rep voted by players? If it's not that then I think it should be.

That's basically it yes.

I do not think term limits are really needed. If someone is doing a good enough job to be reelected and wants to do it, more power to em. Democracy deals with the shitters

Player democracy deals with the shitters. We all know admins and coders are eldritch beings that circlejerk each other to power.

Man_Shroom wrote:Okay I never really understood headmins. There are three of them, right? And one is an adminbus rep voted by admins, one is a coderbus rep voted by coders, and one is a player rep voted by players? If it's not that then I think it should be.

No. The previous three headmins were all already admins. It is not specifically a player voted by the players.

Can we please get this thread back on topic?

I think 6 months is perfect. Its long enough to make decent changes and see there effects. But its not too long to completely destroy the person.

I also think its short enough to make sure people don't have that weird "lull" in activity that a lot of real governments have once they've secured their position before ramping it up again when the vote comes back around.

What do we think for term limits?

None?

If people keep voting for them, and they're still willing to do the job, they must be doing something right.
If you try to inflict term limits then we'll run out of willing people eventually. Not everybody wants to be a headmin.

yeah this isn't the presidency i don't really see why it matters

Saegrimr wrote:None?

If people keep voting for them, and they're still willing to do the job, they must be doing something right.
If you try to inflict term limits then we'll run out of willing people eventually. Not everybody wants to be a headmin.

We're already running out of serious candidates and we've only had one election

oranges wrote:

Saegrimr wrote:None?

If people keep voting for them, and they're still willing to do the job, they must be doing something right.
If you try to inflict term limits then we'll run out of willing people eventually. Not everybody wants to be a headmin.

We're already running out of serious candidates and we've only had one election

The pool is fairly limited.