[poop MANIAC(fecal frenzy!!!!!!!!]

After the events taking place earlier tonight (https://www.dinklebergsgmod.com/site/sho...?tid=13842) as well as an opening discussion on staff transparency and accountability, I feel that the discussion of public referendum regarding community guidelines is especially relevant; there were many hotly held opinions on the matter, and I believe the practice of polling will alleviate some of the current stress the Dink's executive and judicial body is experiencing. It would be helpful to hear how others feel on the matter.

[ratty]

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.

[poop MANIAC(fecal frenzy!!!!!!!!]

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.

A fair point, however I disagree. I believe while polls may be somewhat susceptible to abuse, in the end the truth would always prevail and the community would know what it wants. The fact is currently the only changes which can go through are ones pushed by staff and to the benefit of staff, but often not even then. To be a moderator, one must have the right friends in the right places in the first place, so naturally opinions which conflict with the existing groupthink are unrepresented by defualt. The unwashed masses such as myself are ignored if not outright derided spitefully as bad actors, and we see little of our interests if any being represented by the powers that be.

That is, in my experience anyways.