This whole staff election thing got me thinking, we are missing something.... approval ratings! These ratings are to better determine who is fit for office and who is not based on how well they carry out their time in office. It is also a way of tracking what these people do during their time in office.

How It Works

---

All staff begin with 0% approval rating once getting elected to office. From there, they can improve their rating by interacting with those within the community. I realize not all staff positions involve community interactions but that does not mean people can't still rate them on certain incidents.

Unlike Trust Points or Contribution Points, Approval Ratings are entirely based on how well you perform your duties as an elected official of Vizzed.

The public would be entitled to rate as many times as they want but only once per unique incident. Once you submit a rating for an incident, you will NOT be able to edit it and flip flop on your rating for said incident.

The reason for allowing people to rate as many times as they want (once per unique incident) is because each action should be judged individually and the person at question should not be judged as a whole in any specific moment in time. So in essence, you are rating folks based solely on how well they perform a specific task. Once an elected official leaves office their approval rating will be frozen and no one can no longer voice their opinion on said official.

To prevent fraud, incidents must be rated QUICKLY. This means, you cannot rate someone on an incident that happened a month ago. It has to be quick and swift, maybe within 24 hours of each incident. Any fraud within that 24 hour timeframe can be easily detected at the same time it closes the door to lots of unwanted and unwarranted ratings from things that happened a long time ago.

We need a public page that displays everyones approval ratings and descriptions of each incident, HOWEVER, for saftey the usernames of the raters will be classified as well as the source of said incident.

Two Types Of Approval

---

There are two types of Approval Ratings, public approval and staff approval. When a staff rates another staff, it will be considered an endorsement and will NOT COUNT towards their public approval rating. At the same time, it will allow us to monitor how well they perform in both sectors of Vizzed community both public and staff.

Two Types Of Incidents

---

There are also two types of incidents, direct and indirect. Direct incidents are those you have directly with an official staff member. Indirect incidents are based on what you witness in public view from an official. Say a mod calls someone a bad name or does something bad on the forums, you can rate this as an indirect incident (one that doesn't involve you but something you witnessed happen).

Approval Rating Guidelines

---

- You can rate ONLY ONCE, per incident, within 24 hours of said incident.
- You cannot edit or flip flop on your ratings after submission.
- You must list url source in your rating (for verification purposes) or it will be rejected.
- You cannot rate yourself!

Approval Rating Form

---

- Interaction: What kind of interaction did you have with this official?
:: DIRECT / INDIRECT

- Friendliness: Was this official friendly to you or others?
:: YES / NO

- Responsiveness: How fast did an official interact?
:: SLOW / FAST

- Helpfulness: Was the official helpful in this situation or not?
:: YES / NO

- Completion: Was the problem solved?
:: YES / NO

- Source: Location of incident which you are rating the official
:: URL to source

- Final Thoughts: Describe in detail why you are rating this official.
:: Your public opinion on said incident.


* DISCLAIMER: I realize this is probably not going to be added to vizzed, but hey, I was bored and needed something to do so there you have it!

It's a neat idea, but there's a couple concerns I have with it.

My first concern is with how it opens itself up to ganging up on a user, even if they've done nothing wrong. There's a lot of hive-mind on the internet, and especially among teenagers. What's to stop a group from abusing the system? Who is moderating this system? Are they immune from the Approval Rating system? They can't well moderate themselves, that's a conflict of interest.

My second is on the staff end, what's to stop staff from "publicly" supporting their fellow staff to keep their approval rating at 100%, even if they suck at their job? With such a subjective system, how can we moderate that?

Finally, I'm a little concerned about how complicated it may be. It sounds like it would take a lot of work to implement, when current systems "should" be good enough to make it work without having to design a whole system around it. It should be as simple as _______ sucks at ______, and everyone knowing it. It's Vizzed, word spreads quickly.

legacyme3 : You are right, this was mainly a fantasy idea I thought about this morning when I was bored but it has a lot of problems now that you mention it. Who has time to make this anyway? David does not, I might, but it would be a lot of work to implement.

It would need to be monitored and modded by someone not elected to office, a third party so to speak. I wouldn't mind doing the job and making all actions publicly visible with notes...

There is a HUGE problem though I just noticed, this would require admin like snooping power to verify staff approval ratings and ... well... there goes this whole idea LOL. No non-elected person is going to have that kind of power EVER. I didn't think about that before I posted this. Oh well... at least I tried to think outside the box for a few minutes. I will think of other more realistic ideas in future, ones not as complex and confusing

Local Moderators :
Global Moderators:

You may close this thread, it is very unrealistic idea I just proposed and I am realizing that just now. Thanks legacyme3 for the input