Forum:Site Leader

I know I keep bringing this up, but I think this site needs a real leader who has the final say in certain things. If you look it up, things go better if there is a trusted and responsible leader in charge. Just having a group of people making the rules and guidelines can get slow, complicated, and a bit insulting if an administrator feels like he's being reprimanded like a child by a fellow admin. And when I say "in charge", I don't mean he's the big king Cahuna who can do whatever he wants. He'd have to follow rules set by the other admins (These "rules" would just be a list that explains how much power the leader has). But, he also sets the rules for the other admins (Which he'd also have to follow). The leader (I think he'd be called a Turaga) would be an administrator who's been chosen by the other admins to take up leadership status for a set amount of time. After that time period is up, it would be decided if the admins were to keep the leader, or if a new one should be promoted. If, for any reason, the admin does not act the way he should, a vote may be held by the entire B-pedia community to decide if the leader should lose his status. The leader can do nothing about this vote, but if all the other administrators agree that this vote is bogus, or fixed, it can be voided. A leader can also never go without editing for more then five days, he must show that he really cares about this site and would not become leader simply for the sake of becoming leader. A Turaga would have the final say in anything related to outside websites (like BS01, BZP, MoD, etc). He's be fully responsible for anything related to this wiki, and would also help do any and/or all current Lego Bionicle:Wiki Jobs. Anyway, I spent a long time writing this, so I'll call it a night and see what you guys think in the morning. Please read it all carefully, I don't want anything I said to be misunderstood. I realise how importent what I'm saying can be. Panaka lego  02:57, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * ...I'll agree to it if I can be the first site leader.


 * XD Nah, I'm kidding. But this does sound like a good idea... We were talking about the other day having an admin who keeps the others in check--this would be the guy to do it if we were going to have such a job. But I think I'd like to see all of the admins agree on this before I say "Yes, let's do it". For the record, I support the idea, but I won't say yes unless everyone else does. ToaAuserv ? ...BPAdmin 16:10, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Glad to know I finally get a resonse... I'm kidding. xD


 * I'm glad you like my idea, Auserv. = ) --I haven't used that smiley in months Panaka  lego  18:41, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * We could recycle leaders every one or two months. Someone different each time. I would not mind that. Racht  18:56, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * That's not what I said. We shouldn't be in a position where a good, level-headed leader has to give up status just because it's a rule. This is so that we have a leader, a good one. Not so that all the admins can eventually say "I'm in charge?! Sweet!" Panaka  lego  19:29, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I know that is not what you said. I am just giving another idea. Racht  19:46, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

(undent) Ah, I get it, I'm dumb, but I get it. Panaka lego  20:12, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I will only accept it if all the other admins can override his decision if 2/3 majority vote to do so. The MarioGalaxy2433g5  { talk /contribs/Logs} 21:07, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I like that idea. Racht  21:16, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Geez, I got edit conflicts 2 times trying to edit in my response XD Anyway, yeah, I'd agree with MG, that seems fair. Also, as for the whole "recycling leaders" idea Racht proposed, I would do it this way: We give the leader 6 months for their maximum "term"... Then after 3 months we can vote if we want them to fulfill their full term or if we want to elect a new admin right away, and if not, then they stay for the full 6 months, at the end of which they must give up their position to another admin. That combines Racht's and PL's ideas, and hopefully isn't too confusing. (Oh, and of course, they could be "impeached" if they weren't doing their job well enough either, and they could resign as well.) ToaAuserv ? ...BPAdmin 21:19, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * My apologies, ToaAuserv. Your idea is better now, but to be clear, the leader can be "impeached", if you will, at any time, provided that there are legitimate reasons to back up the claim. Racht  21:26, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm glad my idea for a leader is actually getting excepted. But the hard part will be choosing the "Turaga". How would we go about that? Have a poll with all the admins listed and see which one gets the most votes? I'm kidding. IPs can vote on polls, too. Should we all (I mean every single admin and maybe a user or two) get on Gabbly or MSN and talk it over like a responsible administration should? Or do we beat each other up untill someone says stop and we follow him? xD Panaka  lego  23:15, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * If we are going to work together responsibly, then we must act like responsible administrators. Gabbly, it should be. Racht  23:30, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Okay, how's this sound? Every year (six months?), we have elections for head admin. General poll, operated by the Vote Operator, which I'll get to later. Not to be confused with the Poll Operator, who controls the question poll. The Turaga then gets executive powers. But there's a balance of power. We've got the Vote Operator, who gets to decide when the vote closes, and can throw out votes that they deem unacceptable (like new users or users that just show up to vote). And then, there's the Bureaucrat. To spread out powers, the Bureaucrat, who's in charge of promotion and stuff, cannot be the Turaga. Ideally, the Bureaucrat doesn't change, since that makes it harder on the oh-so-helpful Wikia staff. It's a system still fairly dependent on trust not to abuse power, but it's split among three different users. Your thoughts? - Daiku { Whine Here } { Look what I did! } 03:26, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I like that idea. But we's also have to elect a vote operator too. Wouldn't we? My original idea was to get some order in here, not form a government. I still wanted this to be a team effort, just with a leader to, well, lead.  Panaka  lego  04:33, 16 December 2008 (UTC)