Edit ownership policy to allow ops

Object for section 1. I cant possibly see how we prevent alternative accounts if we allow this.

Vouch for section 2. These just make sense.

Regarding "To apply, you must not have reinstated recently (1 month) within the applications opening."
This should already be a thing kinda.
According to the application/promotion process "Reinstatement's no longer guarantee you your original rank. If your application is approved, you will start at Moderator. If you were removed in the past 6 months for inactivity, you will be guaranteed your original rank but will still have to reapply and be approved."

this means that ex-seniors who have not been an admin for longer than 6 months, they would not be eligible for owner as you need to be a senior to actually apply.

This was either not transferred over or just removed (which doesn't make sense because its not really a policy, its just how the process works.)

Heres the thread on the old proboard forums - https://totalfreedom.boards.net/thread/65916/a…process-updated

@Luke#147 you're highly underestimating how easy it is to obtain premium mc accounts.

and yes people will go through this trouble for literally the most important position on the server

@zeseryu#145 The re-instatement policy currently on this forum is the one that was on MyBB. If it was changed on Flarum and someone can give me a solid copy of it I'll go and edit it to overwrite it, but it looks like your changes for the time box restrictions were removed when it got moved to MyBB I'm guessing.

@wild1145#151 yeah im not actually sure who moved it over to the mybb or flarum forums as i was not the person assigned to transfer over anything

@zeseryu#152 I'm not sure, I've just put on here what I was given! Given it was on MyBB when it was archived I'm assuming it was either transferred and updated or intentionally changed. It's not likely to have bought over an "old" version of a proboards thread given I don't think you can view history...

I doubt we can currently implement suggestions for the ownership policy because we are about to invoke it. Making changes so soon before the vote makes it very likely that someone will challenge the outcome. That does not help with the stability of the community, especially since this is about the owner position, not just any admin.

Now the ownership policy has been executed, it feels like a good time while it's fresh in peoples minds to cover off this suggestion and others like it.

Regarding the first point for OP voting, I agree it would be good to have a way to enable OP's to vote, but I've yet to think of a reliable way to do it. The best I can really come up with is deciding on a set number of hours the player has to have played in game and then we develop some way to link their in game profile with their forum profile, but where we draw that line and the technical implications of doing that need to be thought through, and we also need to consider that it would exclude those members of the community who don't play a lot in game but whom may be active elsewhere in the community.

Regarding the second point, I think given you have to have access to the senior lounge, those requirements in theory should be covered off by the relevant application / re-instatement policies (Though fionn / elmon should be able to confirm hopefully?) - I'm not sure it's worth going through the trouble of updating the ownership policy where those requirements should be picked up elsewhere if that's the rule for reinstating / similar?

Quote

@wild1145#996 Regarding the second point, I think given you have to have access to the senior lounge, those requirements in theory should be covered off by the relevant application / re-instatement policies (Though @fionn / @elmon should be able to confirm hopefully?) - I'm not sure it's worth going through the trouble of updating the ownership policy where those requirements should be picked up elsewhere if that's the rule for reinstating / similar?

Doing that implies that it is desirable for the Owner position to have the same requirements as the Senior position, which is not necessarily the case. We currently do not strictly require Seniors to have a Discord account, and as for the recent reinstatement rule, it would make no sense to wait a month before giving reinstated Seniors access to the Senior Lounge just in case we are electing a new Owner.

vouch for section 2 and for admins to be able to apply for owner in the policy too

Given the thread ended up having 2 suggestions in 1 I am going to decline and close this thread, and will split these out into two seperate suggestion threads.

I'm not sure there is a good way to enable OP voting if I'm honest, and I'm not sure that baking the requirements into the owner policy is the best idea rather than updating our application requirements, but feel it makes more sense to discuss these in isolation rather than confusing things here.