Forum:New ET members

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > New ET members
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 13 March 2011 by Tienjt0.

A few months ago it was decided that we should create an events team to improve our in-game community. The Events Team was formed and the basic foundations for any group were made. However, we never really decided how new members were chosen if we were overworked or were a (wo)man down. This discussion came up in the IRC today and none of us were sure what the actual policy was, so I'm going to propose a few options.

  1. Set up an RfET, like we did to find the initial members, and let the community decide
  2. Let the ET decide on their new member
  3. Allow users to nominate themselves and let the ET decide the best candidate
  4. Let the ET write up a shortlist of potential ET members, then bring them forward to do community to go through a RfET process

This is just so we know what to do, we're not actually looking for new members at this moment.   Swizz Talk   Events!   19:50, February 22, 2011 (UTC)


  • Oppose 1 - This was good for deciding the initial members, but giving the ET little choice in who becomes the newest member could mean people who don't get along would be forced to work together.
  • Oppose 2 - Although I trust each of my fellow ET members (apart from Pharos, noob) this may lead to bias decisions, I'd also like the community to have some say in the process
  • Support 3 - Someone who is preferred by both group will be accepted.
  • Support 4 - Only people who are supported by both the community and the Events Team will get the role, ideal.   Swizz Talk   Events!   19:50, February 22, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose 1/2, Support 3/4 - 1) Having a continually running RfET will result in the same kind of chaos we get with the RfRanks. Not only that, but having too many active members of the ET at once will defeat the purpose, as too many cooks spoil the broth. I'm not sure I agree with Swiz's comment about "people who don't get along being forced to work together." While that could be a problem, it's not fair for qualified individuals seeking ET membership to be shot down because they have issues with one of the current members. 2) Per Swiz (except the part about Pharos). 3/4) This way, the number of ET members will stay under control, as the number will not fluctuate unless the ET members at that time see a need. Magic-icon.pngStelercusIlluminated Book of Balance.png 20:04, February 22, 2011 (UTC) too many cooks spoil the broth. IS THAT A SHOT AT ME?!?! {{Fool}} ʞooɔ 09:40, February 23, 2011 (UTC)

4 - If RfRs are anything to go by, when RfETs are open there'll be a flood of people who have never been seen before. And having the ET decide their own future members denies the community their say, which is a tiny bit too close to breaking RS:SOW - "We're on the ET, you're not, so we choose our members. Not you". 3 sounds quite similar to 2, with the only difference being that users can put themselves forward, and the borderline SOW violation is still there. I think that the community should be allowed to cast their views, but I dislike the prospect of having another place for new users to misunderstand (we already have RfA and, when they're open, RfR) so 4 sounds like the best option - the original ET has been elected because they have experience in the matters, so I trust them with knowing what to look for in a potential ET member, plus it ultimately lets the community decide who gets on the team. That's my 2 cents. Real Nub 20:42, February 22, 2011 (UTC)

4 - 2 and 3 are biased, neutral on 1, 4 simply works. bad_fetustalk 20:49, February 22, 2011 (UTC)

Support 4 - I like it; it allows the needs of the Events Team to be met and allows the community a fair say in the decision process.

On a related note, what are we doing about turnover in the ET? I should say that I'm very happy with the way the ET/events are going, since the events we've had were all pretty successful. But, the question will come up eventually. Ideally, each member of the ET will realize when his (or her) activity level drops below what is needed for a successful event, and will resign from the ET accordingly. But, what if he or she doesn't, or if someone else wants to come join the ET? We do need to have some kind of guideline on what the tenure of an ET member is.

The ET is one of the few things that I believe we need to have some kind of turnover process for, since unlike sysop/bureaucrat, we only have six ET members, and unlike sysop/bureaucrat, the nature of the job needs an active user to fill it. We could have one person go up for a reelection of sorts every few months, say, or we can limit ET members to one term, or we can simply let them set up their own retirement options.

Whatever the solution is, though, we should decide it now, when all of the ET members are active, and not later, when the issue may need to be dealt with in a swift manner. --LiquidTalk 22:53, February 22, 2011 (UTC)

I trust each and every member to step down when they know they aren't working to their full potential. If, however, they don't realise it's time to call it a day, we'll cal a group meeting in the IRC to address the matter.   Swizz Talk   Events!   11:33, February 23, 2011 (UTC)

Support 2 - Yay for cabals! Actually, support 4, imo it would work best. Ajraddatz 23:40, February 22, 2011 (UTC)

No body on this wiki should be self-selecting. Full stop. The community is perfectly capable of both nominating and voting in new members of the team. Hold a specific election every time there is a vacancy. Nothing more is needed. (wszx) 01:57, February 23, 2011 (UTC)

Let the community nominate themselves, and let the ET select from the final shortlist - 222 talk 05:20, February 23, 2011 (UTC)

Support 1 - If the Et says how many new members are needed and then the RfET would make it work alright. Support 4 with condition - Say that requests are going to be opened and make a page where people can write there name and then have the ET make a shortlist from that. Then the community votes on them. Oppose 2 and 3 - The community should be able to have a say in it. Hunter cape (t).png Sentra246Blue hallowe'en mask.png 05:29, February 23, 2011 (UTC)

Support 1, wouldn't mind 4 - RfET worked fine before and I just think that the community should be the ones to select new members. It's not like it needs to be a fast process, we're quite well equipped to plan events on time, even with a member missing. Just a bit less smoothly - [Pharos] iPhone Edit 11:15, February 23, 2011 (UTC)

Support 1, ok then 4, oppose 2/3 - For the first, the community has as much weight in the discussion as the ET members, so that seems the best to me. Also, I don't see any possible ET candidates that have had problems with current ET members, so I don't really see why you would want 4. And even if there are going to be people the ET members can't work together with, they should just say it in the RfET and then I trust the community to respect that. This is just to keep weight in the discussion equal for everyone. That said, at the 2nd/3rd it's quite obvious I oppose them for letting everyone have an equal weight in the discussion. JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 14:27, February 23, 2011 (UTC)

Comment - Why not let any relatively established editor join? These options all sound like too much bureaucracy for what the events team is. If too many people join, and/or members become inactive then the system can be reworked. But for now, it should be kept simple and should not become an exclusive cabal. Dtm142 19:31, February 26, 2011 (UTC)

"If too many people join [...] then the system can be reworked." Let's not go there unless we know what we will be reworking it to beforehand. Magic-icon.pngStelercusIlluminated Book of Balance.png 20:03, February 26, 2011 (UTC)

3 - Chicken7 >talk 06:01, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

4 - It's critical that the current ET members like the user that will be joining their team. They also know better than anyone what it takes to be a member of the ET. --Aburnett(Talk) 21:38, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

This request for closure is complete A user has requested closure for New ET members. Request complete. The reason given was: complete
Discussion has died and we're pretty eager to get this settled. 4 seems to be the favourite.   Swizz Talk   Events!   19:51, March 13, 2011 (UTC)

Closed - Both the ET and the community will have a say in the recruitment of future ET members.  Tien  23:19, March 13, 2011 (UTC)