Serious discussion - BCMD term limitation

[Rohan]

Discussion thread. Just wanna hear what you guys have to say about this.
Recommended you read it all before you reply to this.

So, I originally come from a server that never utilized the "After x amount of time your term will expire, and you will have to re-apply to keep your position"-system. Instead when someone applied for the equivalent of a BCMD they kept that position, if accepted, untill they resigned or stepped down. With that coming a 60 day period in which, if accepted, you resign, you would be blacklisted to apply for x amount of time. 

Now I was wondering "Why does Synergy have a term limit? It limits maybe a great commander to a set amount of time." So I asked a certain individual who has been with the community for a while and got the following response: "Sparks the guy that was a founder here was Wolffe for like 10 months and was inactive for 3 months but the battalion loved him so much and when he wasn't on the actual server. The battalion would never report him for inactivity" & "and then when someone external put up a CMD report, they would mass dumb it and tell people that he's active". So with this in mind, I am wondering how we could maybe improve it, and possibly have a suggestion. However, I know it'd get mass dumbed as either: 1. The community is used to this and doesn't want change, or 2. The argument of someone creating like a dictatorship can be brought up. 

How would this work as a concept?

Allright, so first of all, application process would be the same, the interview process would be the same (maybe change some questions lol, kinda of been the same for a while now), however change the term limit to "None". Now, yes, this could end up in someone being in a BCMD spot for over a year, but it also brings their innovative behaviour and what not continiously to the battalion. Something I have noticed, and you can see back in my Rex application as I am not an exception of this, is the constant change. Every BCMD has one or two things in applications put up their predecessor also changed. Having a fluid system that will be perfected and used for a longer times would be one thing coming with this change, rather than having changes every single term on the same system that was implemented last term. 

How would a BCMD be moved down?

1. They step down, or resign
2. Evalutaion system done by a third party member, and the battalion.
    2.1 Evaluations would be hosted once per 45 days, by an external member of the party. 
    2. 2 Questions would be asked about performance for said BCMD.
    2.3 Evaluations would be based on well... the questions answered by the WO-XO of the battalion.

Gives HC something extra to do ? ^ 

Don't be toxic, genuine question. Spoke to one RCMD about it who said he wouldn't mind. You know who you are :)

[Comics]

I mean. I like the idea of not having to have people re-apply but what if one commander is decent but one guy is a million times better. The better guy will never have a chance to run as the incumbent BCMD can cling onto it without being contested. 

Term limits ensure new blood can take over a battalion and so we all don't end up with an Egg

[Rohan]

5 minutes ago, Comics said:

I mean. I like the idea of not having to have people re-apply but what if one commander is decent but one guy is a million times better. The better guy will never have a chance to run as the incumbent BCMD can cling onto it without being contested. 

Term limits ensure new blood can take over a battalion and so we all don't end up with an Egg

I believe that if an individual is better they can always rise up the ranks in the battalion. From there forward their ideas, implementations and voice their concerns, like they should be already doing. You don't have to be a BCMD to be recognized or make bigger changes. I see it in this way right now: Even as BCMD you shouldn't make every decision on your own. I.E. Forseen always refers back to the battalion HC for decisions, Enzyme did so too. Making use of your assets within your group/unit/"gang" (/me throws up gang sign) can build up a way better structure. 

Now I can feel the question "What if they don't utilize their assets within a battalion enough?". In this case it would come down to the evaluation, when people are honest, it will be adressed as an issue and taken into account by the party doing the evaluations. My explanation might be a little rough at this time, but I hope to have adressed this possible concern if this was ever put up.

[Smeck]

I'm actually down for that tbh. If nothing else but the term limit changes I would be fine with it. We've had people like Egg who was a BCMD for longer than I go afk for, but every time he re-applied there was someone else running against him. Those people had a chance to be BCMD but lost fairly to the better candidate. If someone is good enough to run a battalion for such a long time and is willing to do so, they should be given the chance.

[Mitchell]

I come from a community that didn't have term limits, having them is so much nicer than not having it.
Term limits eliminate problems of BCMDs who stay in their positions for too long and hurt the battalion by the end of their time as BCMD.

Not having term limits or using your idea won't fix any issues that you addressed either.

99% of bad BCMDs are due to the directors / high command being ignorant of their ability / not paying attention to the battalions they are in control over.

[Gadget]

Doing this won't prevent a stale BCMD just existing on the job for join just enough.

 

Like its a novel idea but will be difficult to manage.

[Jax]

38 minutes ago, Rohan said:

How would a BCMD be moved down?

1. They step down, or resign
2. Evalutaion system done by a third party member, and the battalion.
    2.1 Evaluations would be hosted once per 45 days, by an external member of the party. 
    2. 2 Questions would be asked about performance for said BCMD.
    2.3 Evaluations would be based on well... the questions answered by the WO-XO of the battalion.

Gives HC something extra to do ? ^ 

Don't be toxic, genuine question. Spoke to one RCMD about it who said he wouldn't mind. You know who you are :)

heres my bored lurker opinion

Community opinion at the end of a term through an application is just the best way so that there is many voices. Evaluations weigh too much on the evaulators not being pussys/favoritizing/not trying to upset anymore. Which I can't say that historically that the majority of people in positions like that are willing to swing the sword. Theres a lot of people in the past (and currently probably) who just sit on positions and you shouldn't depend on most of the resigning out of goodwill.

Cool idea on paper imo, but it falls apart because it usually enables poor performing leaders to stay in their positions more than terms.

Heres an example for around 2-3 years ago from my time in HC. All of HC unanimously  voted to remove a commander due to clear violations and multiple warnings. However, when the person we placed to demote went to do it they backed at the last second and gave them another pass (most likely due to their friendship). 

Edited June 17, 2020 by Jax

[Rohan]

12 minutes ago, Jax said:

Cool idea on paper imo, but it falls apart because it usually enables poor performing leaders to stay in their positions more than terms.

I can 100% agree with you on this, thank you for the sort of feedback anyways

[Dax]

I have to agree with most people here. Term limits are good for a battalion and if there is someone who truly needs/deserves another term theres no rule against that they just have to reapply. In which case it comes down to the community as a whole. It'd be really easy for a shitty BCMD to keep his position due to being popular with the people asked to evaluate him. Its a lot easier to get 10 people on your side than 50.

[JBFox]

I'm glad this is a discussion and not a suggestion. If it ain't broke don't fix it. A lot of people on the server recently seem to want change just for the sake of change, and I don't see that as necessarily a good thing. Term limits have been around since the start of the server and were a thing on Icefuse before Synergy was created. It's a tried and true tested system and I don't see any reason to make any changes except for maybe lowering the term limit.

[Ratio]

I mean I'd be more worried about people getting a BCMD and not be willing to leave it when they're clearly burnt the fuck out, scraping by with the bare minimum. The idea is kinda gay.

I knew this one server where a Commander is a *tryout*. Probably had advanced climbswep like 90% of the other tryouts did in that community, smh.

[Forseen]

Whilst I see a lot of posts on here regarding BCMD's that are barely scraping by (as put by @Ratio as I liked the way he put it best) and not stepping out of the position on their own, this is where our High Command would be more involved. It would then become the job of a Regimental Commander or Marshall Commander to be constantly evaluating the progress of the Battalion Commander and their influence, reliability & activity within the battalion. Then the Marshall Commander would also be constantly evaluating the Regimental Commanders and ensuring they are keeping up with their BCMDs and working hard. Finally, the Directors then are constantly evaluating the MCMD and Yoda to ensure their standards are also kept high.

This peer-evaluation process is one that is also tried and tested in many aspects of the real world, for example, your manager at work?

I know for a few people, by having term limits they plan based off of how long they will be in the position with the plan to resign at the end of the term before they even get the position, which then creates a large amount of work towards the start of somebodies term, and usually a large period of roughly a month where nothing really happens due to them being so burnt out from the start of the term. By eliminating term limits, we would eliminate that stigma and the pressure of completing X amount of tasks before your term is up and the process of reapplication can also be a tedious one, when instead a simple interview checkup to see how the person is going could substitute this process.

If the battalion feels as though the person in the BCMD spot isn't pulling their weight anymore, we always have the Commander Report section of the forums that is mostly unused. Creating a Google Form similar to Jedi Reports that will go to the Directors that people can fill out to anonymously bring up issues with anyone in an applicable position. Having a forum section that is a monthly BCMD evaluation post for each BCMD where people post their thoughts on if the person is doing a good job and should continue in the position or not, without requiring it to be an application process?

 

I feel this would elevate a lot of pressure on all the people in applicable positions to make sure they "do enough" within the time that they have and usually tend to rush into a lot of things without proper thought or evaluation as if they don't they may be seen as not doing enough. As stated, there are other ways to evaluate these positions. If someone is doing a great job in a BCMD position, I say let them stay in it. If someone could do better, they can always speak up!

[Fizzik]

Another thing however random and vain it may seem, I know that a lot of BCMDs/Ex-BCMDs (including myself) take pride in the amount of terms they've served. It's a nice stat to have.

[Forseen]

2 minutes ago, Fizzik said:

Another thing however random and vain it may seem, I know that a lot of BCMDs/Ex-BCMDs (including myself) take pride in the amount of terms they've served. It's a nice stat to have.

That's a good point but can also be substituted for "I served 6 months" vs "I served 2 terms". Rather say 8 months :)

[Matt-Matthos]

I see the issues with people saying well BCMDs can just be in there role for ever. That why there would be evals. In all I like this of course its a sensitive topic about not a fixed term limit maybe its something that can be explored in the future?

[Fizzik]

20 minutes ago, Forseen said:

That's a good point but can also be substituted for "I served 6 months" vs "I served 2 terms". Rather say 8 months :)

People always round up with terms lmao.

[Foxey]

I never particularly liked the terms- not because of re-application but because when you applied to serve a three month term as BCMD you were expected to meet that mark, and I'm the type of guy who usually wanted to move onto something different after about 2 months. Happened with Yularen, happened with Wolffe, but that's just me. 

On paper this idea is interesting but I believe terms provide more positives than they do negatives.