A while back I made a discussion thread about making Staff Inactivity Requirements more concrete and better stated, but it got sidetracked from my original vision of the thread. If anyone wants to read the original thread
I want to bring that discussion back.
First and foremost, my proposal is not in respect to activity level within a team, and only applies to staff at the Operational Staff and Moderator level. As Admins are basically legacy positions, they would be exempt from these standards. Please keep your discussion on team activity out of this thread.
I would like to propose that we use promotion votes as the most basic measurement of a person's activity. If a person posts in a promotion thread, even a total abstention, they will be considered active. If they do not respond, they are moved down an activity tier on the staff list. Once a person who is already marked as inactive fails to post on the promotions thread, whoever does this activity check will inform that staff member's captains and ask them to do an activity audit on the staff member. If the captains respond that the staff member has not been active, the staff member will be removed from the staff list and will be considered "Absentee Staff". Absentee Staff can't act as staff but are still officially part of the staff team. If they resume activity, an unofficial/impromptu vote can be held in staffchat to re-add the person to the staff list so they can resume staff duties.
Basically, the person is still officially staff, but should check with actually active staff before resuming staff duties. This is not a punishment, but simply a way to easier see who is active or recently active as staff.
As promotions only happen once every three to four months and promotion threads typically last around two weeks and these threads typically have all our active staff weighing in, I feel this is not a bad metric on testing a person's activity level because staff should be trying to pay attention to 05 or general staff matters. If they fail to check 05 for 4+ months, I think their activity can and should be called into question.
That said, if someone was just busy and missed the thread, they will still be free to raise or lower their own activity levels like normal.
This is simply a proposal to help us filter out the people who have literally been inactive for months to years but are still listed as staff, and also creating a fourth tier of activity that we can use to define these people.
That said all staff teams should have their own metrics for activity, and we should do everything we can to try to keep this from happening to staff. But I feel we need the most basic form of accountability for staff.
If we decide to adapt this, we will also have to come up with more defined rules for activity, but I just want us to discuss creating this most basic expectations for activity in staff. The rest can come later.
(account deleted)