ESB:Proposals/Chat moderator appointments (part 3)

Open Proposal The following is an ongoing proposal. Please feel free to voice your opinion, but be sure to follow the rules. How proposals work Concerns stage Someone brings up a topic for a proposal. The community discusses that topic. Voting stage The proposal is brought to a vote, taking into account any changes discussed by the community. The community votes. You can use any of the following prior to your comments to show your opinion. {{Support}} • {{Neutral}} • {{Oppose}} • {{Change}} • {{Comment}} • {{Reply}} • {{Question}} Neutral votes do not count in determining the outcome percentage.

Introduction

After a discussion in chat, we have come up with a way to best deal with chat moderator appointments. Just to make things official, here is the proposal. — AMK152 (Wall • Contrib) 21:45, August 3, 2014 (UTC)

Proposal

The proposal is as follows:

• A. Chat moderator appointments

• 1. Anyone who wishes to request an appointment as a chat moderator must make it known to the host of the chat meetings.
• 2. All chat moderator appointments will be discussed in the chat meetings before appointment.
• 3. Only bureaucrats can appoint chat moderators, if their request is accepted at the meeting.
• 4. Anyone who is appointed to chat moderator outside of these guidelines will be immediately demoted until the appointment can be discussed.

This discussion will end on Sunday, August 10, 2014 at 6 p.m., eastern time. — AMK152 (Wall • Contrib) 21:45, August 3, 2014 (UTC)

I am going to extend this another week. If we don't have a consensus by then, we will discuss an alternative policy at the next meet. This discussion will end on Sunday, August 17, 2014 at 6 p.m., eastern time. — AMK152 (Wall • Contrib) 23:03, August 10, 2014 (UTC)

Discussion

Support

• Template:Extremely Strong Support Yes!! It's about time we do this. Joey ^(talk)
• Support - ^  ^{03:29,8/4/2014 Muchacha (W•_C)OVERTIME?!!!} 

• Weak Support - Per below, I'm not sure if this'll make meetings too long. Perhaps it would be more productive if we just allowed bureaucrats to promote a mod without discussion. If an Admin has a suggestion for someone who should be a Mod, just message a bureaucrat who can make a decision. Otherwise, all is good. --Spongebob456 ^talk 08:44, August 4, 2014 (UTC)
• Template:Extremely Strong Support --Jezz55 (talk) 21:52, August 5, 2014 (UTC)
• Support - Me lieks it. Ωniθηζ ~ [Talk] 18:07, August 11, 2014 (UTC)

Oppose

• Oppose - I have changed my mind. The meetings tend to get very long. Having chat mod appointments during meetings would just make the meetings longer. Also, I don't like the fact that only bureaucrats can grant chat mod rights.
   Nicko756 ^{(M•C•E) Sign!}  07:00, August 4, 2014 (UTC) 

• Chat moderator discussions at meetings would only take about 5 minutes. Most weeks there may not even be such a discussion. — AMK152 (Wall • Contrib) 13:41, August 5, 2014 (UTC)
  • Per Muchacha - "... what's the point in the Apply Chat Mod Status for we administrators if this proposal passes?"  Nicko756 ^{(M•C•E) Sign!}  21:47, August 5, 2014 (UTC) 

• Strong Oppose - I don't like how only bureaucrats can do it either. That's why I changed my vote. We could still have discussions about it, but what's the point in the Apply Chat Mod Status for we administrators if this proposal passes?  ^{13:47,8/5/2014 Muchacha (W•_C)OVERTIME?!!!} 

Neutral

• Neutral -  Nicko756 ^{(M•C•E) Sign!}  21:47, August 3, 2014 (UTC) 
• Template:Neutral towards OpposeThe last point sounds like it will affect existing chat mods. Until i know for sure that current chat mods (including myself) will be unaffected by this i'm going to go towards oppose.

Auron May the odds be ever in your favor!   02:38,8/23/2015 

• Neutral -  —Flame Shadow1 • W • C • B

No, all current moderators will remain in their positions. — AMK152 (Wall • Contrib) 13:41, August 5, 2014 (UTC)