Board Thread:Plants vs. Zombies Wiki discussion/@comment-3474455-20160414234254

This thread was made in light of ThisUserLikesOreo's promotion thread, and the difficulties that arose from the event. Specifically, some users are attempting to oppose the candidate due to a block in the distant past for a rather trivial reason. This discovery has also put ShroomstagramUser, another long-time administrator into danger of unfairly losing his position, as he has also received a block in the past.

As stated in the Promotion Rules, candidates for staff position must have not been blocked for a certain amount of time. While the requirements for lower positions may be hard but achieveable, some of the higher ones prove to be much more unreasonable. For example: "You must never been blocked or banned from chat for more than three days."

- Requirements of being administrator

This raises questions about the nature of the blocking rules:
 * Do the penalties in the past (as long as they are not too heavy) necessarily reflect the user in the present? We all know TULO and Shroom have been upstanding members of the community, and the blocks in the past have not prevented them from contributing to the community. My way of thinking is, if someone got blocked in the past yet has risen enough to become trustworthy of staff membership, the person is even more trustworthy as the past block actively reflects their attempt at improving themselves.
 * Is the requirement unreasonably hard to satisfy? Requirements for lower positions are possible to achieve because they only have a time limit. This is not true however for admistrators and bureaucrats, as the rules ask for total amount of lifetime blocks. Because of this, if you do even a single misstep in the past, you are instantly disqualified for your dream position in the future.

So in my opinion, the blocking requirements are currently too harsh, and should be reworked. Here are the options:

 