Put in place a trial period for admins that are reinstating

  • The suggestion is to put in a trial period for admins that have not been in service for more than a year. The ideal trial period would be a month. If this trial period is unsuccessful for the admin reinstating, they will either be retrained or expected to re-apply for admin.

    Thoughts? This suggestion is extremely loose and I would like more ideas really, so this is more of an open discussion thread.

  • While I don't object, I don't think if we did something like this it would make sense to limit it to just reinstatements. I think a generic probationary period for all promotions, appointments and reinstatements would make more sense imho

    Wild1145

    Network Owner at TotalFreedom

    Managing Director at ATLAS Media Group Ltd.

    Founder & Owner at MastodonApp.UK

  • A more organised approach to admin training will surely improve the whole issue. I'm neutral about the need for a trial period during (re)training but I agree that it should be applied to all cases.

    For senior admins, I've dropped a new idea in the relevant thread

    TotalFreedom's Executive Community & Marketing Manager

  • Semi-vouch, Ryan and Tizz have valid points.

    Not so sure it should be a "trial period", and more a "Re-Training/Bringing up to speed" period, especially for re-instatements.

    I realize I'm not sure how it works for new Admins, but I assume there is some version of a formal or informal training period, as no way could someone instantly learn all the commands, especially with TFs more unique commands and methods; Formalizing this, and making it for all new appointments would be the best idea imo.

    "Dude, my screen is completely purple, I see Barney and I still die" - ExtesyyTV, 2022

  • I object. This seems like a good idea at first, but the issue I have with it is that it diminishes the opinions of the voters - especially OPs - for any given admin application. It gives the unknown person/group who controls the training process too much power in deciding whether the applicant gets the position.

  • I object. This seems like a good idea at first, but the issue I have with it is that it diminishes the opinions of the voters - especially OPs - for any given admin application. It gives the unknown person/group who controls the training process too much power in deciding whether the applicant gets the position.

    as far as I know, the current system allows ex-admins to reinstate without any vote or trial, as votes are only for admin applications and not reinstatements, so the enforcement of a trial system in reinstatements would not take away (or diminish) any power from OPs that they currently have, perhaps you confused reinstatements with admin applications?

    >w< pat me pleasee pat mee pleaseeeeee

  • I object. This seems like a good idea at first, but the issue I have with it is that it diminishes the opinions of the voters - especially OPs - for any given admin application. It gives the unknown person/group who controls the training process too much power in deciding whether the applicant gets the position.

    this is for reinstatement, not people freshly applying for admin, so this isn't diminishing anyone's opinions n such on those.

    1gaah.png

  • as far as I know, the current system allows ex-admins to reinstate without any vote or trial, as votes are only for admin applications and not reinstatements, so the enforcement of a trial system in reinstatements would not take away (or diminish) any power from OPs that they currently have, perhaps you confused reinstatements with admin applications?

    this is for reinstatement, not people freshly applying for admin, so this isn't diminishing anyone's opinions n such on those.

    Even then, I still don't think this is a great idea. The votes I was talking about are the votes that resulted in the original admin promotion, even if the application is for a reinstatement. There's already systems in place that should require admins to meet standards after reinstating, and if those aren't working, the issue could be resolved by enforcing current policy with less leniency rather than having an unspecified group determine the outcome of a probationary period.