Forum: Index > Administrator Discussions > Administration Job Descriptions
Note: This topic has been unedited for 407 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

So, as most of you know I promised I would do this a while ago, and I believe it's currently the final thing keeping me from dropping my B-crat permissions. So, that being said I've been putting a lot of thought into it, and wanted additional inputs.

I took what was said in the previous discussion (here) and wrote it up into a general idea of how the admin team should work (DAW:AJD). It needs to be an approved policy, but I wanted to get everyone in the admin team's eyes on it first, and see what needed changed. Obviously it's still a Work In Progress, and needs some spelling checked and such, and possibly a list of responsibilities for each one, but reading the overall ideas in the summary and for each position, what's you're thoughts? Do you think I'm on track, or way off? I want this policy to define each role in the Admin team, and enable those who are in it to do their jobs here, and still have fun. Does it do that? This forum will be the discussion for anything written there, and I'll consider anything put here (reguardless of how abstract or different) for putting into the final policy. So, when you get the change, look at the new policy in progress (again (DAW:AJD) and please put any thoughts, comments, complaints or question here so they can be discussed. I promise you won't hurt my feelings if you hate it, and I'll consider all input, so feel free to put your real thoughts and concerns here so we can all agree on how this should work. Bond_em7 (Owl Me) 15:06, December 5, 2014 (UTC)


I think that the only part of that whole page ( DAW:AJD ) that I didn't like the was possibility of giving Headmaster (or something similar) to an RB, simply because we've had so many RBs come and go with inactivity. What happens if an RB gets Headmaster (or something similar) and after a month and a half, goes inactive? I wouldn't bring this up as an issue if I hadn't seen it so many times before. Obviously that isn't a present issue, and I highly doubt Lyss is going anywhere, but it was there, so I thought I'd offer my comments. Everything else I thought was clear, concise and I had absolutely no problems with it. The course of true love never did run smooth 16:09, December 5, 2014 (UTC)

My thought was that I don't have an issue with RBs having those types of positions as long as they've been proven to be active and committed. In the last discussion it was mentioned that those sort of positions shouldn't be limited just to Bcrats and Admins...and I agree. If a RB wanted to run their character for Minister that's long as they've been proven to be active and that they won't just disappear. I agree historically it's been a problematic issue amoung RBs...but that being said there's also some RBs that have been here forever and are trusted members of the community. I just think that as part of the admin team they should also have that ability. Those are my thoughts...but I would love to get some other opinions on this. Anyone, thoughts? Bond_em7 (Owl Me) 16:16, December 5, 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, I agree with Bond, because I do feel that while there is a stigma to RB's 'coming and going' when in actuality there are some that have been B-crats and back like myself and echo. Not that I want to be Headmaster (or similar) but if the question boiled down to it, I'd be heavily ticked off if me or Echo didn't get it soley on the fact that we're RB - especially considering that we've been here for such a long time, and that we've also been b-crats and admins. But that's just from the point of a RB who has ascended and descended the ranks. I'm sure Echo would agree. (Also long-serving RB's like Kibble and Ellie and Liv as well, I'd say they've been here long enough without going inactive, which kinda shows they can take the role). But yeah thats my two-cents in the matter. Is this America's Next Top Model? Imageedit 3 5390623584 ~SoA

I can say nothing more than this does look good in general, however, I must agree with what has been said above. I'm having difficulty even teaching right now, and when it comes to me holding a high position, it's just a no go. Not that I couldn't agree more, but it's just... not as easy finding time to spend around. (No, I'm not suggesting to get demoted, cause I'm rather poor when it comes to activity.) Eva McKenna ~ Slytherin Quidditch Beater & Captain, Auror, The Girl With No Mistakes, The Lorell Corsair, The Golden Lady, Editor for the Daily Prophet, The Little Troublemaker

The one thing that seems a bit off to me is that departments aren't really mentioned. Being part of a specific department will give you certain extra duties... but there's a bit of a conflict with RBs helping out new users and being a part of the User Relations department, which is essentially the same thing. What is the difference then?
Also, to respond to SoA, of course I'd be annoyed if RBs weren't chosen for a role simply because we're RBs. But RBs stay RBs for a number of reasons. We might not be active enough or we may not be qualified enough for that specific duty... but we also might not want the extra responsibility, or we just like being RBs. Often a RB doesn't want a huge leadership role. So I guess my two-cents is that it is really important to hand willing RBs a few leadership roles- and if it goes well, I know it can often lead to promotion anyway. :P Echostar 15:29, December 9, 2014 (UTC)
My view on it is that it's not just RBs that go inactive and whose activity fluctuates; real life comes before the wiki, and no one can tell when RL is going to interfere with the wiki or who is going to be affected. Admins and crats can go inactive just as suddenly as RBs. Of course, most crats and admins have more responsibilites and are more depended upon. I agree with Echo that some RBs like being and staying RBs, despite deserving to be promoted. But surely, another factor of why RBs aren't promoted is because we have a limit to how many crats and admins there are? I mean, I've only ever seen 4 admins and 4 crats on here, no more, no less. We do have RBs like Echo and Kibe and SoA (in my opinion) who deserve to be promoted, but a) there's no space and b) there's no reason to demote any of our current admins, because they're all doing great jobs. The curves of your lips rewrite history.
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.