I think this is a great idea, but will require the staff members of the team to be familiar with what would make a good staff member for each respective team, even if they don’t have much personal experience with that team.

incorrect! though we will have to ask team sub/captains some questions they want filled out by applicants, PT will not be judging candidates themselves. the only ones members of the team have power to veto outright are applicants with less than 100 days as members of the site.

About the actual proposal:

I think this is a great idea, but will require the staff members of the team to be familiar with what would make a good staff member for each respective team, even if they don’t have much personal experience with that team. The clarifications given have pretty much eased my concerns.

I'm in support of this idea overall though for sure

Point 2

yeah, definitely. it's not perfect, but you are able to use google to search a specific site: more info here. there is also the fact that disc cases nowadays are mostly handled on discord, though visible only to OS+. i think this team will likely have to consist of mostly OS+, with some jstaff reporting to OS in times of doubt to check for disc cases. aht, however, remains a blackbox and i have no interest in poking that bear, so we will have to rely on the aht log.

(unofficial) Point 4

honestly, this is probably just because its easier to announce candidates on discord than O5. i think we should keep it to discord so that whoever is on O5 updating can see that and handle it when they have a second.

im glad i was able to sway your outlook on this team towards the positive!

what would be the parameters to choice a new JS?

this is up to team sub/captains, same as always.

Will be there a coordination between PT and the Team/Subteam Captain to check if there is a concrete need for new members before admitting them?

If a team sub/captain wants to pause recruitment, they coukd always tell us and we will staff post the thread.

My main concern is that there may be a boom of new JS in teams/subteams where, even if the current number of staffers is apparently low, the tasks are run without any issue or overworking, leading to a number of forcedly inactive staffers due to lack of work; with the same ending, there's also the scenario where users request to join (and are admitted to ) what are considered the "easiest" teams like Tagging, which is already a 12 members-subteam.

On point 2, it is access to that disc and AHT history that would be important. Not necessarily the details of any case, but being able to know that such exists and if either team has stated that they believe that any previous disc/AHT history is no longer representative of the user and their ability to engage with the community and therefore staff. The 05 command search doesn't work so it's certainly hard to navigate when trying to find any disciplinary threads

On point 3, as you say select OS are allowed to oversee the acceptance of new jstaff, namely captains and vice captains (I think? I would assume so anyways). Allowing further OS to recruit new team members would be, on reflection, just introducing more vice and co captains into the mix, which may be wise on certain teams if bus factor on recruitment is a major issue.

Another point I want to bring up too is the announcement of jstaff recruitments on 05. This is the only thread that I believe does so and it has not been updated since August of last year (my own jstaff appointment was not announced here). Would keeping track of this be under the purview of the promotions team?

Overall I'm definitely more optimistic on the team with these clarifications

How much will active recruiting play into this? Will the Promo Team advertise recruitment drives? Will the Promo Team suggest that certain teams recruit more?

1. i hadnt considered active recruiting, but i can add that to the scope.
2. we can easily advertise in 19cord's #wiki-talk channel or if youre feeling spicy, #plugging.
3. only if certain teams feel the need to state they need more bodies. for example, licensing always needs fresh bodies, as im sure MAST does too. we can bring that up in our advertising.

I share similar concerns with Data that the promotions team would muddy the waters. Will there be any mechanisms in place to alleviate this as much as it can be alleviated?

see response to bad data above, point 2 1.

While this should serve to lessen the current bottleneck of promotions, but it does also mean promotions are at the mercy of how active the Promotions Team would be at any given time. If they team slows down, then so do promotions and that would place us where we are now, but with an extra team that's not performing its role to full capacity. What will be done to keep the team active to avoid something like this occurring?

the ideal is to have a team full of people so that we are up to date with the threads most of the time. obviously, we are all human, and we are also volunteers, so we may not be perfect, but will idea be doing well enough to justify the new team. as for capital P Promotions (as in jstaff to opstaff, etc.) Bread, the person who has been in charge of running promotions for the past half decade, has agreed to come onboard to continue doing so, and they have additionally agreed to cede the power from MAST to PT, in the event this team comes to fruition.

This policy proposal covers recruiting JStaff, but what about inter-team recruitment? We need to be careful we're not stretching any staff too thin, but sometimes the best candidate is someone from another team. Would the Promotion Team have the ability to seek new members for a team from within staff? And, could staff go to the Promotion Team is they'd like to join another team or would they still go to the captain of the team(s) they're interested in?

this team's scope is jstaff and promotions, not inter-team recruitment. i dont think it would be a good idea to increase the team's scope to that. besides, if a member of CO wants to join Discord Crit, they can always just reach out to the team's captain. i dont see a need for us to do that too.

My biggest concern is that the promotions team would gain more of a say on who does and does not get to be jstaff, potentially muddying the waters on what would be team and/or subteam captain approvals.

the only people who wont be submitted to captains are those who dont have at least 100 days on the wiki yet. i dont understand how PT would gain any water muddying abilities through this, since all we are doing is copy-pasting responses and pinging team sub/captains.

I think this team would also need access to any sort of staff blacklists and perhaps taking on the responsibility for general sorts of background checks on potential jstaff would be wise. I'd like to hear a bit more about that as well

generally speaking, the only real barriers to being on staff are "dont display a pattern of breaking rules and dont have a significant disc/aht history." of course, there may be some others considerations per team captain, but thats the only universal one.

As gee mentions in the mainsite mirror, this doesn't really address the question of select OS being able to recruit. With the bullet points above, maybe some OS could bring potential candidates to the promotions team without team and/or subteam captain approval?

when you say "select OS being able to recruit", do you mean allowing OS to recruit team members? because this has never been allowed. all new staff members go through their respective captains. yes, some team sub/captains are OS, and they are allowed to recruit as they see fit, with most captains requiring final say.

I'd just prefer to keep the team small because most branches only have 1-2 active Ambassadors in the INT Discord (regardless of whether or not the official number is higher), and if we have too many people there from EN it makes conversations more difficult. Generally we get one vote per branch not per representative, so technically it would be fine for us to have as many Ambassadors as we need, but practically speaking I think it would cause confusion if we had too many people in the chat speaking on behalf of EN, a PR person wouldn't really contribute to that.

As I've said though, I'd be much happier to have that be a person (or two) on my team who can be fully informed as to the situation, rather than a separate team I have to run statements past.

• I share similar concerns with Data that the promotions team would muddy the waters. Will there be any mechanisms in place to alleviate this as much as it can be alleviated?
• While this should serve to lessen the current bottleneck of promotions, but it does also mean promotions are at the mercy of how active the Promotions Team would be at any given time. If they team slows down, then so do promotions and that would place us where we are now, but with an extra team that's not performing its role to full capacity. What will be done to keep the team active to avoid something like this occurring?
• This policy proposal covers recruiting JStaff, but what about inter-team recruitment? We need to be careful we're not stretching any staff too thin, but sometimes the best candidate is someone from another team. Would the Promotion Team have the ability to seek new members for a team from within staff? And, could staff go to the Promotion Team is they'd like to join another team or would they still go to the captain of the team(s) they're interested in?

Overall though I am generally in support of the broad strokes of this and what it is trying to accomplish, but there are definitely some concerns:

• My biggest concern is that the promotions team would gain more of a say on who does and does not get to be jstaff, potentially muddying the waters on what would be team and/or subteam captain approvals.
• I think this team would also need access to any sort of staff blacklists and perhaps taking on the responsibility for general sorts of background checks on potential jstaff would be wise. I'd like to hear a bit more about that as well
• As gee0765 mentions in the mainsite mirror, this doesn't really address the question of select OS being able to recruit. With the bullet points above, maybe some OS could bring potential candidates to the promotions team without team and/or subteam captain approval?

Additionally, I am currently pushing for a recruitment drive for the subteam I am captain of, Data Analysis. If this proposal is accepted or needs to enter a trial run, I'd be willing to offer up this recruitment drive to test the waters a bit.

In summary, I support with an asterisk.