[Suggestion] Application Ratings

[MiniXIII]

Description of the idea
Remove all ratings except Agree, Disagree, and Informative on posts in the Staff Applications section of the forums.

Why should this be added? (pros)
Ratings other than Agree, Disagree, and Informative are useless and have to real benefit.
Stops toxicity with rating applications 'optimistic' out of spite.

What negatives could this have? (cons)
None​

 

[Hendricks]

I think it’s fine how it is, optimism isn’t a bad thing and same with getting that rating. It’s nice that it’s there as it’s in the middle like if you think someone has some potential but they still need to develop so instead of giving it disagree or agree, you can just rate optimistic as they’re still hopeful of getting it, but also, ratings at the end of the day play a very very minimal part in staff acceptance whatever it is, there have been staff beforehand with mainly disagrees and were seen to be highly optimistic to apply for the role yet they’ll get it because it’s up to administration’s vote and consideration of said applicant as a person rather than what other people rate them. So what I’m trying to say is what difference is there in having it or not, better just leave more options if people want to vote things but not comment, I also don’t see any toxicity aspect to it, it’s a positive rating.
//phone

 

[Double J]

I agree with Hendricks. Ratings don't play a huge rule in the decision. People who leave a negative rating on your application and don't leave feedback is probably the main issue.

 

[Mxdium]

I'd rather have a rule that says if you rate you have to reply why you rated that but that goes a bit too far.

It's fine how it is

 

[MiniXIII]

I'd rather have a rule that says if you rate you have to reply why you rated that but that goes a bit too far.

It's fine how it is

I actually agree with this idea to be honest.

 

[Mxdium]

I actually agree with this idea to be honest.

make a rule suggestion instead and just remove this.

highly doubt itll get accepted though, you cant enforce that sort of stuff its way too excessive

 

[Kempotent]

this is just really irrelevant as ratings and player input really don't have an affect on your application

 

[Mxdium]

this is just really irrelevant as ratings and player input really don't have an affect on your application

But I can completely understand why people want to know why someone rated their application disagree. You can't improve at something if you don't know what to improve on right?

 

[Double J]

I went ahead and made a rule suggestion FOUND HERE.

I do agree that people should leave feedback on your application if they leave a rating else you can not improve on what they find is a flaw

 

[Kempotent]

But I can completely understand why people want to know why someone rated their application disagree. You can't improve at something if you don't know what to improve on right?

Which is why if your application is denied then you are able to dm administration to see what you need to improve on, people shouldn't be obliged to tell them why they disagree with an application

 

[Bnjemann]

Ratings aren’t often considered for an enforcer candidate in many cases.

 

[Mxdium]

Which is why if your application is denied then you are able to dm administration to see what you need to improve on, people shouldn't be obliged to tell them why they disagree with an application

Yes, agreed. However, some people bring up strong points that Admins either didn't notice, forgot to put in or it is just completely wrong but the person giving the feedback thinks that.

I myself have improved a lot from player feedback, probably more than from Admin feedback. Players usually bring up the most random out of the blue things, they are the people that we assist so their opinion is very important.

 

[TinySlayer]

I'm going to rate your enforcer application disagree because you said informative ratings have no benefit.