JCF Proposal

Good evening my fellow JCFers. Recently, and idea came into my head and I thought that, if devised well and thoroughly, it may work well. The following is in no way intended of offending or opposing the current layout of the JCFs, it is nothing more than a mere idea.

I have been pondering the processes of choosing and promoting moderators to assist in controlling the corresponding forum. I am well aware of the popular phrase "If it ain't broke, don't fix it," however I partially disagree with it, for I feel that anything can be improved. That is what I aim for with this.

Rather than having the current administrators choose who to become moderator, I was thinking that maybe there could be designated elections held, where the JCFs loyal users could vote on who they wanted to become the next moderator. Perhaps every one or two years, an election could be held between anywhere from two to five candidates in the Communications Forum, where users could submit their votes to the administrators.

Now I know that there are some trolls and some not so mature users out there that can vote for their sock or their good friend who is also a member on the board that is not deserving of the title. This is why I think that the candidates should be chosen by the moderators of the designated forum, or the highest ranking administrators.

I am also aware of new users (such as myself), that don't fully know and understand the moderating process and their way around the boards (to a certain extent). Perhaps there could be a certain date that could be the line between users who can vote and users who cannot, such as May of 2005 or somewhere along those lines.

There are a myriad of forums that inhabit these boards, and I know that it would prove quite difficult to organize voting for all of them at one time. I know that there are some small boards, such as the FanForce forums, that don't require elections to choose their moderators. But prodigious boards, such as the JCC, could have separate times for elections. For instance, after a month after the elections of one board, elections of another one could begin, and so on until all of the boards that have elections are accounted for, and then the next date for a new election will be awaited.

Perhaps the most important part is that the current moderators would be competing in the elections as well, and are declared candidates no matter what, along with anywhere from one to four new candidates to "oppose" them.

The voting could last for between two to three weeks, which then all votes would be tallied and the results would be announced, thus allowing the winner to become the next moderator.

Again, this is just an idea from my head, and I hope that you, the mods, will take it into consideration. If you think it needs more, please do not hesitate to add to it.

 

Old idea, and there are several existing threads in Communications that detail why it won't ever happen. Also, please see "Election Game, JC".

 

Yeah, we tried this a couple years ago, or some variation of it. It didn't work out.

Moderators don't generally choose moderators exclusively. They take into affect who in their forums exhibit the best qualities, and contrary to what most people think, it's more than a clean user history or being a helpy helper. We look from those who exhibit both of these along with true leadership skills and an honest desire to make the boards a better place. Their available time also has to match up with what we're looking for. We also have users submit who they think would be good candidates. If these people exhibit the qualities I just named, they will be put into consideration also. Then the entire MS votes. It's been a good process, not to say we haven't had some less than stellar results, but all in all one or two good candidates at least can be found in each forum.

And KW is right, we have a thread on this here.