New Blood

Summary:

not about a specific user

New Blood

Drewbear 30 Nov 2012 01:14

Okay, we're getting close to the next round of possible promotions, and we were discussing several people in the secret chat. The thing is, for most of these people, we haven't actually interacted with them one-on-one much. As such, let's use this thread to figure out people that we would like to invite into the secret chat so we can get to know them better. This is NOT to say that we're going to necessarily promote them, as the entire point of this is to feel them out first.

First of all, I suggest Vezaz & SRegan. Both of them are good writers, and give good feedback, plus I've noticed that Vezaz has been helping maintain pages and revert bad/unauthorized edits.

Thoughts? Anyone else you'd like to consider inviting?

---

Giving bearhugs to the unsuspecting since 1872.

Re: New Blood

EchoFourDelta 30 Nov 2012 01:15

Seconding SRegan. Got a good head on his shoulders, and the guy's an excellent writer.

---

Military Consultant, SCP Wiki

Re: New Blood

Eskobar 30 Nov 2012 01:58

Definitely seconding Vezaz. If Azzleflux is ever in chat, we can invite them in, too; I'm impressed with what I've seen so far. Definitely very new, but could end up being our next child prodigy member. Like Murphy.¹

EDIT: On second thought, less enthusiastic about Vezaz. Nothing wrong with him per se, but I think I was just enthusiastic because I knew he was an older member (relatively speaking) and I couldn't think of anything he had done to piss me off. Which is a decent qualification for an admin chat user, but not needing the "definitely".

Footnotes

1. Yes, Murphy, I know you're like twice my age, shut up not the point.

Last edited on 07 Dec 2012 18:13 by Eskobar Show more

Re: New Blood

Drewbear 30 Nov 2012 21:05

Thinking of prodigies, I'm VERY impressed with Snowshoe lately. They've been giving good critiques on the latest round of terribad SCPs, in very humorous and non-attacking ways. They've written a couple of stories, but no SCPs yet, so I think I'd want to see more posted work from them before making any kind of recommendation aside from bringing into staff chat.

---

Giving bearhugs to the unsuspecting since 1872.

Re: New Blood

Eskobar 30 Nov 2012 23:48

Seconding both counts: good to date, wanna see more work. But both Azzleflux and Snowshoe are shaping up to be good critics.

Re: Snowshoe

Drewbear 01 Dec 2012 16:52

Actually, thinking some more on this, I'm not sure that I want Snowshoe in staff chat yet. I do think we should bring him/her in at some point, but I want to see more of them on the wiki or in 19 first. His/her recent comments are witty and very impressive, yes, but I want to see a longer pattern of behavior.

Withdrawing suggestion to bring Snowshoe in, but keep an eye on him/her.

---

Giving bearhugs to the unsuspecting since 1872.

Re: New Blood

Communism will win 30 Nov 2012 01:15

Both of them would be good for staff chat. I think Kalinin could come in as well — they've written as much (and better) stuff than I have and they're at least as helpful, so I don't see why not.

---

if your reading this your gay

Re: New Blood

thedeadlymoose 30 Nov 2012 21:53

I would be okay with all these people, though I wouldn't (yet) actively push for any of them. I'll leave that to others.

And… I would suggest Soulless. She has multiple issues and at least one staff member would probably violently disagree with me on this (hello EchoFourDelta), others would mildly disagree, and others would recommend that I not even suggest her at all so as not to rock the boat. All of them have reasons for this. But she is a very good writer when all is said and done, she's as helpful or more than any of the senior staff, and she's a valuable community member with a big footprint.

And unlike certain other users who I will not name who fall into this category (of being good or excellent writers but being socially problematic), Soulless always tries to operate in good faith and generally tries to improve herself when called on things. If her social foibles are an issue, we can ask her to tone them down in staff chat so as not to annoy us. That's the nice thing about staff chat, see? And don't you think she could use the good influence?

EDIT: Also, I should say I'm uncertain about using 05 for discussion of who we invite to staff chat. Maybe just me. But while we're doing it, I'm gonna use it too. :)

Last edited on 30 Nov 2012 21:58 by thedeadlymoose Show more

Re: New Blood

RhettSarlin 30 Nov 2012 22:07

Agree strongly with soulless. Regardless of what certain people may think, soulless provides some of the best feedback of anyone on the forums, generally stays levelheaded, and despite harrassment received has stuck around all the same. Been around forever, one of the better writers, decently respected in the community, and raises valid concerns about nearly any issue. Can't think of anyone who you could say is really MORE involved and invested in the site other than maybe Mackenzie. I'd rather have Soulless on staff than any other non-Staff member I know of, and known resistance to the idea has been the only thing making me hesitate to make the suggestion in the past.

Re: New Blood

thedeadlymoose 30 Nov 2012 22:20

I don't want her on staff, actually. Not right now, anyway. Even I don't want to deal with that much controversy and stupid shit that will inevitably arise from that. And more to the point, I think she's still not quite ready. What I want is her in staff chat.

Just bein' clear here.

Last edited on 30 Nov 2012 22:28 by thedeadlymoose Show more

Re: New Blood

Communism will win 30 Nov 2012 22:26

I can also back Soulless for staff chat. Say whatever else you want to about them, they're definitely dedicated and very good at both writing and feedback.

Eh, fuck it. I like everyone who's been mentioned thus far. They're all good members.

---

if your reading this your gay

Re: New Blood

Drewbear 30 Nov 2012 23:38

Agreed on Soulless as well.

---

Giving bearhugs to the unsuspecting since 1872.

Re: New Blood

Eskobar 30 Nov 2012 23:50

Twenty-fifthing Soulless.

Re: New Blood

AdminBright 01 Dec 2012 01:36

Soulless is one i wouldn't mind seeing in staff chat. I have no real opinion on Sregan. Azzleflux… I find myself disliking, not sure if I could tell ya why. Gut feeling. On further reflection, he seems to be a nitpicker.

---

Admin, SCP Wiki

Last edited on 01 Dec 2012 01:50 by AdminBright Show more

Re: New Blood

Drewbear 03 Dec 2012 18:34

I made the thread because it's a massive pain to get large-scale votes on this kind of thing just operating in chat.

---

Giving bearhugs to the unsuspecting since 1872.

Re: New Blood

Sorts 30 Nov 2012 22:08

I'll back SRegan and Azzleflux

Re: New Blood

TroyL 30 Nov 2012 23:13

Slight Note:

There is currently a list of people who are up for consideration for SS. I normally message people shortly before promotions and ask them to rank the list that I keep, and then I begin the promotion drive off of this ranking. People who are consistently ranked well on the list are put up for promotion, while people who are ranked lower are held off on until the next round.

Before people are invited to staff chat, I generally like to grill them. I know that's a bit off, but it gives me a chance to see how people think and who I could pair them with if I needed something done. If, when this discussion is finished, you could PM me a list, I'd appreciate it.

Thanks.

---

"WELL FOUNDATION. YOU MADE IT SO EASY. SO VERY VERY EASY." - dimensionpotato

Re: New Blood

Quikngruvn 01 Dec 2012 03:58

I can get behind inviting SRegan and Soulless in. I don't know Azzleflux, Snowshoe, or Kalinin enough to form an opinion on them. As for vezaz… a few days ago I had a mildly unpleasant experience with him in 19. Not nearly bad enough to disqualify him, though— I'm filing him under "no opinion" at the moment.

Last edited on 01 Dec 2012 03:59 by Quikngruvn Show more

Re: New Blood

Dexanote 01 Dec 2012 04:07

I back Soulless and SRegan. I do not have an opinion on Azzleflux or Kalinin. I only know Snowshoe from Far Recon, and I am kinda iffy on Vezaz.

Re: New Blood

Djoric 01 Dec 2012 15:24

I'll back SRegan, Azzleflux, and Kailinin.

Soulless, I'm unsure of. She's definitely invested in the site, a good writer, a good reviewer, but personality wise… I'm not particularly fond of her. She just seems incredibly abrasive.

Then again, I rarely speak to her, and most likely there are explanations that I'm not privy to.

Re: New Blood

Photosynthetic 03 Dec 2012 16:58

I'd also back Vezaz and Soulless. I don't know the others. Also, given that I've been away for most of this month, take my recommendations with a grain of salt.

Re: New Blood

Drewbear 03 Dec 2012 18:19

Okay, so as of right now, if I'm counting right, the opinion seems to be as follows:

Soulless: 9 people say yes, 0 are iffy/"no opinion", 0 say no
Vezaz: 4 people say yes, 3 are iffy/"no opinion", 0 say no
SRegan: 8 say yes, 2 are iffy/"no opinion", 0 say no
Azzleflux: 3 say yes, 3 are iffy/"no opinion", 1(?) says no (I'm interpreting Bright's comment as a no)
Kalinin: 2 say yes, 3 are iffy/"no opinion", 0 say no
Snowshoe: 1 say yes, 4 are iffy/"no opinion", 0 says no

Based on the numbers so far, I'd say Soulless & SRegan are definitely people we want to refer to Troy, with Vezaz as another possibility. Everyone else mentioned so far has as many or more "iffy/not yet/no opinion" votes as "yes" votes, so I don't think they're quite ready yet. Anyone else want to toss in?

---

Giving bearhugs to the unsuspecting since 1872.

Last edited on 03 Dec 2012 18:35 by Drewbear Show more

Re: New Blood

RhettSarlin 03 Dec 2012 19:04

So let it be written, so let it be done.

Re: New Blood

thedeadlymoose 03 Dec 2012 20:59

I'll forward Soulless, SRegan, and Vezaz to Troy, votes included. Troy can make his own decision, with other admins, on deciding on Vezaz. (Well, all of them, of course, but Vezaz especially.)

If more names come in this round, we can weigh in on them too.

By the way, here's what I feel is an Important PSA: If you are an 05 watcher, and your name hasn't been mentioned, don't draw any conclusions from that. Unless the conclusion is to be more awesome so we can't help but notice you (or get over any misgivings, if present), in which case, go for it! Either way, this is not a scientific process, and it's going to have an element of randomness baked in, unfortunately. Thanks.

Last edited on 03 Dec 2012 21:03 by thedeadlymoose Show more