 |  |  |
I'm probably blowing my chances of being moderator by saying i'm 15. But the thing is the age minimum should be lowered. Or atleast changed in some way. I know y'all made it 16 for a reason but they're should be some exceptions. For example: if you've been a member for atleast 3-6 months and are active with no spectating time you should be ATLEAST considered. Please take this into consideration.
Sincerely,
BigA
| | |
haha i know..it sucks! i was hoping to provide some alternatives to the 15 rule
| | |
That's a good idea, actually, but I'm sure they've already thought of that, too. They have IP on the staff, after all :)
| | |
What?
| | |
He's implying you're the thinktank. Little does he know you spend all your time infiltrating governments.
| | |
Did u read the topic invisible?
| | |
i think that he was replying to power's comment, i could agree with you but i think that they would keep it at 16, its painful for me because i'm close to turning 15 and i'm like the most mature kid in my (high)school etc... but i have to wait like 1 year and 5 months(April 24th) till i can apply to become a moderator. in that time though i would like to be encouraging to help people and other things within the community.
| | |
I've never liked the rule, and they've told me before that it's almost a no exceptions rule. It's kind of silly. There are a lot of mature people under 16. Sure, some aren't, but you can easily tell that from knowing them or sometimes just by looking at their app.
If I worked hard enough at it, I could probably find a nice handful of below 16 staff members.
And another thing, plenty of these new mods are probably under 16, and just don't mention it. It's a good rule to have a age limit, but no one is really going to care about it, so raising the limit isn't going to help you any.
I'd love to debate this. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe I'm not. I can never get to any high staff because they shoot me down saying something like it doesn't concern me or they've thought about it for a long time and won't change it. I could probably put more effort into finding an answer than I have, so I guess I'll get on that, starting with this post.
| | |
Well they should lower it a bit. I was devastated when i found out i wasn't old for mod but not just that there are really good people who are under age for mod but can handle situations really good. They should lower it after like 5-6 months of being member but being active and no offenses logged in. You know?
 | |  |
16 is just fine for an age
I know there are exceptions but its the rules
| | |
i would like for a senior staff member to read this and acknowledge that they have.
| | |
Well, we do understand how that could be an issue, but this matter is not debatable or discussable. We staff as a whole have voted upon it. Yes, there may be a few admins that may be under 16, but don't you think it would be cruel to demote them now for something that we came up with after they were admin? Just put yourself in their position. For this reason, we are not lowering the age, nor are we demoting our current staff. We did try age limits in the past, but because we made a few exceptions the rule slowly became unstable. Now there will be no exceptions so the rule stays intact.
For the reason that my text explains everything, this post is now locked.
WoM Coins: 0
BigA, the staff have thought long and hard on every rule. I'm 15, too, but we're just going to have to be patient and wait. April 1st is going to take a while... :)