Board Thread:Internal management/@comment-5079138-20170807134618/@comment-26470588-20170807165348

Drek&#039;TharSuperSword wrote: Teacup Terry wrote: -snip- 1. You keep saying "oh, but what if people make sock puppets or whatever?" Well, that hasn't happened, has it? And we'll be able to tell if a million different new users immediately leave a ton of random reviews. 2. "Bias" and "drama" are a non-factor in this. I've been in a lot of drama, but I'm not getting phenomenally low scores on the SEFs. Even Camwood, the person who I had insane amounts of drama with still gave me a decent score. 3. "No matter how hard you try to make it half-decent, it can still be exploited." I think that's your weakest sentence in your entire rebuttal. You give no proof whatsoever for why that's true (because it isn't). You don't give possible solutions and why they wouldn't work. You don't do any of that. It's a weak argument you have. And that's your weakest sentence. The staff evaluation forms have few flaws, and those flaws can be fixed. 4. "You might try fixing it, but seriously, why bother if the whole thing is catastrophic anyway?" Nevermind. That is your weakest sentence. How is it catastrophic? Is it cause you're going to be demoted? Cause I think that's why you're opposing. Also, you literally restated the same point you just said. 5. Once again, you repeated your argument. Your argument is that the SEFs can be easily abused by socks. The system isn't going to be exploited because we're going to notice if a bunch of people who just joined the wiki make the exact same edit to the SEFs. That's a really weak argument. 6. "Really, but I think it's BS (obligatory no offense)." Mate, 2/3 of your entire rebuttal is either "No offense, i'm sorry" or "Really?" "Seriously?" and "*sigh*". Oh wait, an explanation. "If we do these kinda things, we're just gonna confuse more and more people by having multiple standards that one of them can be taken away, so please, one standard is enough." You think that nobody's going to be able to understand having multiple standards? I'm not sure if you think the IQ of the average staff is 2 or what, but I know that pretty much all staff can follow more than literally one standard. Come on. 7. "I DIDN'T make this thread due to the low score." Your rebuttal makes it blindingly obvious that you did. You repeat the same weak argument over and over again, and I can tell that not even you really believe in it. The reason you don't want the staff evaluation forms to pass is because you're going to get demoted. In which case, I present to you the following statement from : ''"...if this is voted to be removed...it should be removed after the upcoming deliberation period, so that way staff that were rated bad...are demoted." This way, you'll get your goal, but you'll be demoted as well. Are you happy with this? Note: I'm sorry to keep returning to drek's score on the SEFs but I thought it could shed some light on why exactly he wants to remove this.