[POLL Ends 7/27] Renaming the SA Team

[Conman118]

What if we made three groups of appointed admins for the CS:GO Servers?

An introductory group, halving the current # of SA. These members will be in the C-Team and will have the same commands that the SA currently have.

An experienced but not veteran group, the rookies but not noobs, the other half of the SA team. These members will construct the B-Team, and serve as equal mentors to the introductory C-Team (No doubt this is already happening). They will have the same powers and immunity level as the C-Team, or the same power that SAs currently have.

The A-Team. This already exists. This is the 2nd from the best and goal for all members wishing for an elected administrative position. (New member goes to C, B, and finally A-Team until they get recognized for staff promotion, or they're content with A-Team.)

I like the idea, it makes more sense to go from C to B to A, rather than SA to Ateam.

I can see how an opposer would say that creating ranks in our admins would have a negative effect. I disagree however on the fact that servers already have administrative hierarchies and that simply renaming the groups of appointed admins would have little to no effect on that.

Here is an idea, what are the benefits or negative that you see from it?

Apologies for the grammar errors the post probably contains.

C into B into A. We will remain to have 5 A-team as a maximum, but maybe this will make it more interchangeable where A-teams can rotate with B teams depending on performance, etc. Only an idea and this is not being added to the official suggestion by any means.

If the suggestion proceeds, we will work out all the kinks at a JB Community Meeting. It will be revamped by the server, and not just by the jailbreak staff.

As always, please post your opinion of the idea. I'd love to see any new benefits/deductions you guys can find.

[Wumbear]

Could you elaborate some more on the why we should do this. What I got from reading both threads is that it’s a: new user friendly b: more distinctive and c: offers sa’s more incentive to prove themselves?
A: don’t think it matters. To players, admins are admins and paidmins are paidmins, renaming it doesn’t change much if not nothing.
B: it splits  sa’s, don’t really want that potential conflict that could occur with the competition/headache brought with deciding who should get moved up or not. People on the bottom could end up feeling disappointed or angry at the fact that xyz got b team but I’m stuck on the bottom. I get that it’s really not a big deal on its own, but I think it’s just too much for what it’s worth. There’s really not too many benefits to this that I see right now that can convince me that it will be worth it to go about changing all of this.
C: kind of ties in with b, we should be keeping an eye out on our sa team regardless, and those who do prove themselves do get recognized by others for their hard work and eventually apply for a-team.
Tl:dr: too much change for something that’s just not necessary or important

[S.]

Well firstly do you have permission to change something like that, even if it's JB exclusive it would need approval to tinker with

[Conman118]

Could you elaborate some more on the why we should do this. What I got from reading both threads is that it’s a: new user friendly b: more distinctive and c: offers sa’s more incentive to prove themselves?
A: don’t think it matters. To players, admins are admins and paidmins are paidmins, renaming it doesn’t change much if not nothing.
B: it splits  sa’s, don’t really want that potential conflict that could occur with the competition/headache brought with deciding who should get moved up or not. People on the bottom could end up feeling disappointed or angry at the fact that xyz got b team but I’m stuck on the bottom. I get that it’s really not a big deal on its own, but I think it’s just too much for what it’s worth. There’s really not too many benefits to this that I see right now that can convince me that it will be worth it to go about changing all of this.
C: kind of ties in with b, we should be keeping an eye out on our sa team regardless, and those who do prove themselves do get recognized by others for their hard work and eventually apply for a-team.
Tl:dr: too much change for something that’s just not necessary or important

Cool, so the purpose behind it would be that it makes more sense to advance from a C to B to A rather than Supp to Ateam. I wouldn't describe the suggestion as a way for SAs to prove themselves.

The main impact  this suggestion brings is when all new SAs that get accepted, would go straight to C team. They would have some sort of distinction on the roster and/or the server that shows this to everyone else.
This would show people that A. They are new to administrating, it will take them a little bit longer to deal with scenarios & that they aren't as familiar with administrating as an Ateam or Bteam would be.
B. This would make it easier for our paidmins, divs, trusted, and ateams to be looking out for our newly accepted C teams. When they first get that admin, the best way to learn and get ahold of things would be that hands-on experience. A mentorship written test won't be as useful as another Ateam helping you through the different scenarios.
C. This would visually show the playerbase our admins' experience while also, making it more parallel to GMOD. It can be pretty useful to have similar admin rankings across divisions in case players transfer into different gamemodes like TTT/JB.

A: don’t think it matters. To players, admins are admins and paidmins are paidmins, renaming it doesn’t change much if not nothing.

The suggestion isn't really going to impact the players. At the most, they will message another admin in case a Cteam needs some help administrating.

B: it splits  sa’s, don’t really want that potential conflict that could occur with the competition/headache brought with deciding who should get moved up or not. People on the bottom could end up feeling disappointed or angry at the fact that xyz got b team but I’m stuck on the bottom. I get that it’s really not a big deal on its own, but I think it’s just too much for what it’s worth. There’s really not too many benefits to this that I see right now that can convince me that it will be worth it to go about changing all of this.

It will not split the SAs. C team is temporary. With this suggestion, there can be 9 Cteams and 1 B team, or vice versa. We can have 10 B teams if they have been SA for long enough. They will eventually be moved up, and if they aren't then they will be released from SA (Will that ever happen though w/o a strong abuse? Doubtful). If you want to run w/ straight competition, we could say that same bottle necking is happening between SAs and Ateam right now.

C: kind of ties in with b, we should be keeping an eye out on our sa team regardless, and those who do prove themselves do get recognized by others for their hard work and eventually apply for a-team.

C into B into A. We will remain to have 5 A-team as a maximum, but maybe this will make it more interchangeable where A-teams can rotate with B teams depending on performance, etc. Only an idea and this is not being added to the official suggestion by any means.

I wrote it isn't apart of the official suggestion.

Well firstly do you have permission to change something like that, even if it's JB exclusive it would need approval to tinker with

One step @ a time. If the community wants the change, I can see it being done. It isn't radical by any means.
You're completely right though.

[majd]

it dont matter if its A team, B team or C team. y'all taking the L team

but in all seriousness, no this will just creat more unneeded competition

[Wumbear]

So you’re trying to distinguish the newer sa’s out from the rest so that they could be helped easier as well as some other things, I think I’m getting it now. Once they’re experienced enough to manage a hypothetical requirement such as: managing most situations, knowing what to do in case of special situations, knowing answers to very specific questions, and maybe being able to administrate alone on a server of 20 people or just generally be an overall fluid admin, if that makes sense, then they should be promoted to b-team. I’m now in the middle regarding the suggestion because I don’t actually think this will change much. The new admins will still be new admins, but just more clearly labeled, and the more experienced admins will remain just that: admins. It just honestly feels unnecessary and all to me, but I can sort of see the potential benefits.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Also, this is where I was getting the “a” from my original post from:

The point of the pitched suggestion wasn't to increase the # of free adminship, but instead make the system more new-user friendly.

[Dragonate]

-1

The SA team works fine as it is and so think the name fits the job. You’re a supplementary admin until you then apply for and are approved for the Advisory Team. Works fine as is. I feel the change is just unnecessary.

[awakening]

See now polls like this I just don’t understand. Conman I discussed this to you on steam, change isn’t always good how about we work on our current admins instead of adding more or renaming them? The names have worked for god knows how long(i dont think renaming things that 90% of the server will ever see, nor will help the ranks either) they are fine as is. The community obviously isn’t 100% satisfied with our current team I can’t imagine more at LEAST until we fix the current problems(nor do I think this would ever pass executives).

I agree with @Wumbear , -1 will never get my vouch as a Div staff.

[awakening]

Won't be happening, thanks for voting.

@Conman118 ill help ya out

Conman Edit:
"The idea didn't carry the momentum from when it was first suggested. Was an unneeded change. "