Board Thread:Community Discussions/@comment-5643582-20160304182106/@comment-5369341-20160305024418

Alemas2005 wrote: ZXSpidermanXZ wrote:

Alemas2005 wrote:

ZXSpidermanXZ wrote:

Alemas2005 wrote: "If a vote has at least 75% majority approval or opposition. And has gone 96 hours without a vote. It may be closed." Commas, Spider. Use them.

"Otherwise we must wait until all administrators have voted, and majority rules." I'd rewrite it to "Otherwise the administrators must wait until everyone has voted", to keep the tone in line with the rest of the policy.

"However, if an administrator fails to respond to a discussion within 48 hours of the other administrators having come to a consensus, his vote is forfeited." That can be removed, I think.

"NOTE: The sections on demotions should be considered guidelines. The administrators do not have to follow these policies if they believe a speedier or slower process is in order." Uh, I'd rather have the stuff on demotions as a proper policy, actually. "Rough draft" Ale. Sue me. :P I literally did that while I was in bed. xD

And on demotions I am strongly opposed to us having a policy on that. That is never a good idea no matter where you administrate. We'll have to hold like a mini vote on that or something. Eeeh, I'm not a fan on not having a policy on demotions, not one at all. Could lead to rushed decisions and actions.

At the very least make it simply a guideline for CM demotions, but not admin ones... I disagree. I don't think things will be too rushed cause we'll still need a majority rules vote on any demotion. It's not like one admin can say another needs to be demoted and then they're demoted. Everyone gets a say and if the person shouldn't be demoted I doubt the vote will ever pass. "The administrators do not have to follow these policies if they believe a speedier or slower process is in order." Well, that says they don't have to follow the rules. So in theory, one could demote the other on the spot...

In theory, yes, but then that person will recieve a lot of backlash, which I believe cancels out that risk.