(03-09-2021, 02:38 AM)two rats kissing Wrote: The problem with a democratic system on dink's (aka the problem with any true democracy) is that it is susceptible to groupthink, those with the most popularity/ biggest mouths will hold an advantage over others regardless of if their viewpoints are correct. Issues will be boiled down to meaningless semantics of who can paint the better picture over an issue.
The most effective system is the one we have now. The staff never hold a position as an "elite" like in historical oligarchs, because there is a constant rotation of active staff. In other words Dink's goes through community changes on a yearly basis, you will always see new players joining, players can make their way up the ranks relatively quickly and gain influence, creating the means for a different zeitgeist of opinions. These opinions get passed onto other staff members and next thing you know actual change happens. Sure, its slow and sometimes people disagree, but the general opinions of the common user on dinks can't be trusted in the masses because the internet is intrinsically flawed in that manner. A poll for most conflicts will just end in a contest in who can get the most of their friends on the forums to vote for the side they are on. It is also in the interest of the common Dinkleberg's user to make their voice heard by actively speaking their opinions to staff and in public forums (such as this one and discord) to keep the "oligarchs" in check. So it's not just a one sided thing.