Precious

And so instead of trying to create a thoughtful discussion about toxicity and how to fix it, you become part of the problem.
The first step to curing AIDS is identifying the cause. I spy one of them.

If you have a problem you need to give detail behind it instead of making a shitpost insulting the community and expect anyone to know what you have an issue with.

And so instead of trying to create a thoughtful discussion about toxicity and how to fix it, you become part of the problem.
The first step to curing AIDS is identifying the cause. I spy one of them.

And so instead of trying to create a thoughtful discussion about toxicity and how to fix it, you become part of the problem.
The first step to curing AIDS is identifying the cause. I spy one of them.

And so instead of trying to create a thoughtful discussion about toxicity and how to fix it, you become part of the problem.
The first step to curing AIDS is identifying the cause. I spy one of them.

bye

Can we?
Plz?

That was completely unnecessary.
This post provided literally nothing. No ideas to help better the community, no specific people who you want to change, just you coming back to be randomly toxic about the entire community because of some small beef you had.
Try that again but with actual meaning this time if you want to actually change something.

one person being mean to you once does not mean the entire clan is aids but you’re nearly there on that hunch

Oh boy, here we go. 
For starters, I would like to mention that just like you, staff are not perfect. We all can make mistakes and bad calls from time to time, but we usually learn from them and improve. That being said, I know that there have been times where some actions and mutes can seem questionable. However, I believe most of that has died down, and staff have become a lot less strict about that stuff. People aren't muted because of a "roll of the dice", we have specific rules on what is and isn't allowed on mic and in chat. And while some staff are a bit more strict about it than others, I believe for the most part, we have enforced these rules the fairest we can. If you disagree, you can always record and submit proof of someone abusing their power.
I'd say the same about the arguing thing. From what I've seen, most staff are pretty chill about arguments and discussions. Unless things get really heated or they start breaking rules with their argument, I've rarely seen anyone get muted for arguing. At most, we usually have to step in and break it up, because it's getting annoying for everyone to listen to. But hey, that's just what I've seen. 
I have no idea what you're talking about with the "admins commonly abuse power". In my entire time being a staff member, I've only seen a few cases of people abusing their power in malicious ways. Again, if you disagree, you can always record it going on and submit proof of it happening, so it can be dealt with. Ranting about it with no proof only makes you look bad and won't change anything.
I also don't even know why you're mentioning the spray thing. That happened many months ago, you even say yourself that "this is less of a problem now", so I don't know why you're bringing this up unless you're trying to stir up old drama. Yes, there have been problems with sprays over time, but for the most part, things have been more clarified and everyone is on the same page on what is and isn't allowed in a spray. Don't blame current staff for something that happened a while ago.
No offense, but you're really grasping for straws if you think staff not having tags in their name is a serious problem. Besides the fact that sometimes staff have to remove their tags to deal with a calladmin, staff members not having tags in their name has been extremely rare. And even if it wasn't, I don't see how that's a big problem. It's a simple fix and not that confusing.
Also, I'd like to talk about the problem of "bias" and "favoritism". These terms get thrown around almost every time some kind of drama involving staff pops up. I don't know if you guys realize this, but no human can be 100% unbiased. Despite this, I believe the current staff are good at maintaining a middle ground and not picking favorites, so that things can be resolved fairly. And as said before, if you witness someone making an obviously biased choice or feel like you have been discriminated against, then you should gather evidence and make a report about it.
In conclusion, I'd like to say I'm sorry that you have problems with xG. Again, we aren't a perfect clan, there is no such thing. But I like to think that we all try our best to keep the servers and forums in good shape. I disagree with you on many of your beliefs about staff and such, but we are both entitled to our own opinions, and I am an Admin myself after all, so maybe I am a little biased. In the future, I would recommend that if you have a problem with something like staff abuse, record it or gather evidence, then take it up with higher ups. Otherwise, nothing will change, and it will just seem like you're trying rustle people up and start drama. And lord knows we have enough of that here nowadays. 
But anyways, I wish you the best of luck on whatever you do next. While I may have sounded critical here, I do genuinely hope you come back. -Precious

Oh boy, here we go. 
For starters, I would like to mention that just like you, staff are not perfect. We all can make mistakes and bad calls from time to time, but we usually learn from them and improve. That being said, I know that there have been times where some actions and mutes can seem questionable. However, I believe most of that has died down, and staff have become a lot less strict about that stuff. People aren't muted because of a "roll of the dice", we have specific rules on what is and isn't allowed on mic and in chat. And while some staff are a bit more strict about it than others, I believe for the most part, we have enforced these rules the fairest we can. If you disagree, you can always record and submit proof of someone abusing their power.
I'd say the same about the arguing thing. From what I've seen, most staff are pretty chill about arguments and discussions. Unless things get really heated or they start breaking rules with their argument, I've rarely seen anyone get muted for arguing. At most, we usually have to step in and break it up, because it's getting annoying for everyone to listen to. But hey, that's just what I've seen. 
I have no idea what you're talking about with the "admins commonly abuse power". In my entire time being a staff member, I've only seen a few cases of people abusing their power in malicious ways. Again, if you disagree, you can always record it going on and submit proof of it happening, so it can be dealt with. Ranting about it with no proof only makes you look bad and won't change anything.
I also don't even know why you're mentioning the spray thing. That happened many months ago, you even say yourself that "this is less of a problem now", so I don't know why you're bringing this up unless you're trying to stir up old drama. Yes, there have been problems with sprays over time, but for the most part, things have been more clarified and everyone is on the same page on what is and isn't allowed in a spray. Don't blame current staff for something that happened a while ago.
No offense, but you're really grasping for straws if you think staff not having tags in their name is a serious problem. Besides the fact that sometimes staff have to remove their tags to deal with a calladmin, staff members not having tags in their name has been extremely rare. And even if it wasn't, I don't see how that's a big problem. It's a simple fix and not that confusing.
Also, I'd like to talk about the problem of "bias" and "favoritism". These terms get thrown around almost every time some kind of drama involving staff pops up. I don't know if you guys realize this, but no human can be 100% unbiased. Despite this, I believe the current staff are good at maintaining a middle ground and not picking favorites, so that things can be resolved fairly. And as said before, if you witness someone making an obviously biased choice or feel like you have been discriminated against, then you should gather evidence and make a report about it.
In conclusion, I'd like to say I'm sorry that you have problems with xG. Again, we aren't a perfect clan, there is no such thing. But I like to think that we all try our best to keep the servers and forums in good shape. I disagree with you on many of your beliefs about staff and such, but we are both entitled to our own opinions, and I am an Admin myself after all, so maybe I am a little biased. In the future, I would recommend that if you have a problem with something like staff abuse, record it or gather evidence, then take it up with higher ups. Otherwise, nothing will change, and it will just seem like you're trying rustle people up and start drama. And lord knows we have enough of that here nowadays. 
But anyways, I wish you the best of luck on whatever you do next. While I may have sounded critical here, I do genuinely hope you come back. -Precious

All though I am a higher-up, I feel/felt the same way. I was not the child of an invisible promo but I have never seen the issue with them unless the community as a whole is finding an issue with it. I think its kind of like a see-saw. The higher-ups make a call and the community checks it, or the community makes the call and the higher-ups check it. I trust the other higher-ups and I trust the community. But @Ms.Spooks has just as valid a point about favoritism. Ultimately - personally, I feel silent promotions are an issue, but only if you don't have faith in the higher-ups to make the right call. 

Yeah no this is just going to be #shitposting all over again. You guys do realize that if you want to do things you aren't allowed to do in xG, you can always like, you know, make your own Discord, right? 
-1

i don't really care much for this subject, those who deserve admin deserve it, those who don't, don't.
no one cares about me?
 

I think you make a great point. I won't name anyone, but there has definitely been a few staff members in the history here that have been extremely questionable and with community input it is very likely that they wouldn't have gotten staff in the first place. A requirement to make a staff submission would ensure that the community has an input as well and would very likely result in us having the best staff roster to date.
However, there are specific rules towards applying for staff which would result in there being fewer people available for staff. Here is the link to the staff submission guide:
For one, it states you must be 14 or over to apply. There has been a staff member or two who at least got staff whilst being under 14. One I can name is @Segal. If you had to apply for staff rather than getting "invisibly promoted", Segal would've not gotten staff.
Secondly, (this only applies for TF2) you must have at least 50 forum posts. I'm sure there have been MULTIPLE staff members in the past that have had pretty much one forum post when they got it, that post being their member submission.
 
If these restrictions were altered, I think it would be fantastic to have a community input onto who gets staff. However, I feel as though the Division Leaders and Managers should still get final say as to whether the member gets staff or not, rather than a +1 and -1 system like we have with the member submissions.
Remember guys, whilst saying your thoughts may or may not affect the overall outcome, there is no harm in getting a community input and should only aide the higherups in making their decision.

I kind of agree with tatost, but for the most part even if I don't think someone has what it takes for mod I don't post anything negative on their application unless I have a a particularly egregious example. I don't know if that's the case for anyone else, but that essentially means I just use standard staff protest procedure anyway. 
I do think people should be able to protest someone being staff ultimately, even if they don't have hard evidence of abuse or whatever. It allows people to get worries off their chests and forces potential staff to reconcile with past mistakes. 

Having people apply for staff is the better move here.

Making people fill out an application gives everyone the better idea that someone wants to become staff. Everyone can share their input over the applicant and give a better idea to the higher-ups if the person is truly qualified (i.e. not toxic, active, etc.).
Applications create more transparency in the community as well. Let's say that Tatost applies for staff (lol) and Bagel isn't too fond of the idea. Bagel has had issues with Tatost in the past or they just have beef with each other, we can deal with the issue right then are there basically.

If we set it to only applications, obviously the requirements would change. Less forum posts needed.

Also, why the hell do we let people under 14-years-old get the slide by for staff if they don't apply? If the application says that you need to be a certain age, why isn't it the same for invisible promotions?

Personally I'm in the boat that silent member to staff promotions are a bad thing. It opens the doors for favoritism and  closes the door for people to say why said people shouldn't be staff. While I can understand the ease of process(as my first time getting staff was silent and when I came back from my break was also silent) It does prevent the discussion from being had of why someone is not optimal for their position. I'm all for reducing personal bias in the application process. It's too easy for someone to be chummy with higher ups and ask for staff i m o. I am also not looking to shit on current staff who have been silent promoted or the higherups who have employed it. I do think that having the opportunity to dispute the promotion with a -1  is a good thing. At the end of the day a -1 can be dismissed if the reasoning isn't clear or accurate but someone who already gets promoted is just going to stir more internal drama from the people who did want them in. All in all though higherups do have the final say.
Overall I think that promotions should be handled clearly and well defined so people aren't suddenly surprised that someone else got staff just because they chill in a discord with a higherup. In my opinion the times that silent promotions end up being abused are few and far between. The potential for the worst is still present. ideally bad staff should eventually be siphoned out before they're a problem. However, there are times that moderators who have been silent promoted have gone untouched because either favoritism or not enough evidence of poor performance were provided.
I say silent promotions shouldn't be a thing even in the case of returning staff. While it's easy to point out what staff were good previously and they SHOULD be good again it doesn't mean their circumstance hasn't changed. The time away from being staff does affect how the community perceives them. It should be a matter of consistency as essentially they're trying to be staff from member again. Case by case can be more extreme from silent leaving to toxicity or whatnot. Opening a window to air the shit so to speak is a good way to get certain distrusts out of the way. If there are no problems then it shouldn't affect the staff returning negatively. The most that'd be asked of them is just to sum up why they want to be staff again.
I'm all for keeping things out from closed doors so to speak. Openness and clarity should be what the community deserves. I think the application process is a good way to provide that outlet. I'm not exactly the most passionate about the subject but I want to throw my two cents in since this ended up getting thrown on my "Hello again." thread in regards to me. That told me a couple things. 1 is that not everyone is happy about how I left and they want to make it clear and 2 It's easy to pass favoritism when you're on the receiving end. I don't care much to stir bad blood, however I don't think they should be denied voicing their complaints (as long as it's within the community guidelines.)
Tl;dr
That's a no from me.

I'll give you guys my reasoning for "invisible promotions".
People don't need to apply to be a good candidate for being a staff member. You guys have to remember that higher-ups are the position that they are because we have a lot of trust in them. We believe in their judgement, and they have experienced through a ton of good and bad staff throughout their time in xG. They take time to discuss if a member who hasn't applied deserves to be staff, and they always reach a consensus before doing so. Of course, we have changed it so we ask the individual if they want staff or not before the promotion takes place. The higher-ups also talk to their fellow staff / friends to get more input, so it's not 1 person who single handedly promotes a member to staff.
People can easily get demoted if they don't deserve staff. Please do not confuse member protests with admin abuse threads. Staff do get a few chances as human error is bound to happen, but people can make mistakes even if they had everyone +1 them. There are also multiple instances where admin abuse threads popped up on people that only had one side of the story, where the accusers were hiding the information to make the staff look bad. If someone is caught Slay All or other abusing instances, they can get demoted if it's a problem. 
People under 14 can still get staff. This is rare, but is always on a case-by-case basis. You can think of it in the real world as someone who gets a job offer without filling the requirements. That is also why (at least in CS:GO) we sometimes allow people to post a mod app without getting 50 posts on the forums. If we feel like we need more input on if someone should get staff, letting them apply doesn't hurt. 
These discussions never hurt, and I'm happy to improve a system if you guys feel it is broken. From the staff we have promoted that haven't applied themselves so far in recent memory, at least to the best of my knowledge, none of them have had a negative impact on our community. After a while, you  get a good idea if someone would be a good staff member or not just from interacting with them.
If anyone has anything that they feel contradicts any of my statements, I'm happy to read it so I'll keep this thread open.

I don't think it'd really would change anything since like the whole decision is entirely up to the higher ups anyway, so if people are given an invisible promotion that most likely means the highers ups have gotten to know them very well and have asked people around in community what their thoughts on the person ( which I have seen before) and trust the person so much so that they believe they should be made staff, so it wouldn't really change anything if they made a submission thread or not. So as long as the highers up look into the person carefully before doing an invisible promotion, then it should be fine to stay as is imo.

It doesn't matter that much imo, staff submissions only serve as big bright lights saying "I want to be staff" to higherups.

Yeah no this is just going to be #shitposting all over again. You guys do realize that if you want to do things you aren't allowed to do in xG, you can always like, you know, make your own Discord, right? 
-1

Yeah no this is just going to be #shitposting all over again. You guys do realize that if you want to do things you aren't allowed to do in xG, you can always like, you know, make your own Discord, right? 
-1

Yeah no this is just going to be #shitposting all over again. You guys do realize that if you want to do things you aren't allowed to do in xG, you can always like, you know, make your own Discord, right? 
-1

Yeah no this is just going to be #shitposting all over again. You guys do realize that if you want to do things you aren't allowed to do in xG, you can always like, you know, make your own Discord, right? 
-1