Some admin faults come with appointing friends to the positions. I think what needs to be done is to have a third-party advisory panel of honest, nuetral people to help with conflicts etc. The people aren't friends with any admin (doesn't matter if they become friends with them as long as they don't take sides) and they don't take sides until evaluting the whole problem, and then discussing it amongst other admins not in the problem and the other advisory panel members. You call this a median between decision making since the third-party feels the effects of all adminstrative decisions more than the admins (they feel the effects of the third-parties reaction the changes, etc.). If done correctly, this could reduce admin and user conflicts, and also reduce the admins worry about conflict between users as the position to deal with that would be on the advisory panel. They'll get requests from a user about another. They'll get in touch with the other user(s) to question why they're having problems (leaving the other user anonymous) to hear both sides, then discuss amongst themselves what could/should be done. If it's just a civil thing then no admins need to get invovled and its just a matter of healing wounds, but if its something admins need to get into then a verdict is passed on to the admins of what should be done. In that, the AP has no adminstrative, or moderator, status, they are just an advisory panel. As well as taking care of disputes between users they'll all take care of suggestions made by users and, if logical and legitimate suggestions, pass them onto the admins for further review on if they should be taken to the dev department to put to work. Also, they'd have the second say in appointing new admins/mods to the site. An admin will have first say, but not, I repeat, but not have power to overrule the AP's decision. The AP members will question the new suggested admin about a few things to see if s/he is knowledgable, competant, and can hold the responsibility to maintaining the site as if it were their own.
If it hasn't sunk in yet, I'm basically saying the whole site needs a "Checks and Balances". It's not something I've actively seen done on a website, but with the site getting as big as it was, I think it was what was missing... A division between the user and admin, as well as admin between admin. And, like I said, if done _correctly_ there should be no problems and conflicts between admins, unless the admins don't consult or even listen to the AP's. This is only a suggestion that would most likely work quite well if it had full support of the administration and the common user of FA. I have some more but I'll have to give myself a rest so they can come back to me.
--Conneich
If it hasn't sunk in yet, I'm basically saying the whole site needs a "Checks and Balances". It's not something I've actively seen done on a website, but with the site getting as big as it was, I think it was what was missing... A division between the user and admin, as well as admin between admin. And, like I said, if done _correctly_ there should be no problems and conflicts between admins, unless the admins don't consult or even listen to the AP's. This is only a suggestion that would most likely work quite well if it had full support of the administration and the common user of FA. I have some more but I'll have to give myself a rest so they can come back to me.
--Conneich
