Server 44 Expert Nominations Discussion

I think it's a great idea to have 2 nominations for expert! because of unholy3's inactivity and abuse it is only normal to have 2 nominations. I hope the admins will take a serious look at this because the chat has gone wild. nobody can stop the cussing guys... so please admins... do look at this very serious.

sincerely Djrow1

yes 2 experts would be nice and needed
this is almost just like what mustang and i did but just a little different so yeah i like this

I think it's a great idea to have 2 nominations for expert! because of unholy3's inactivity and abuse it is only normal to have 2 nominations. I hope the admins will take a serious look at this because the chat has gone wild. nobody can stop the cussing guys... so please admins... do look at this very serious.

sincerely Djrow1

I think it's a great idea to have 2 nominations for expert! because of unholy3's inactivity and abuse it is only normal to have 2 nominations. I hope the admins will take a serious look at this because the chat has gone wild. nobody can stop the cussing guys... so please admins... do look at this very serious.

sincerely Djrow1

yes 2 experts would be nice and needed
this is almost just like what mustang and i did but just a little different so yeah i like this

I third this! This would be a great idea.

Yes, I agree - It would be better with 1-3 experts so there always is someone online... there are players from all allround the world, and one expert cannot be online all the time.

yes, but it seems none of the admins/ moderators are reading this...

yes, but it seems none of the admins/ moderators are reading this...

Yeah I don't know maybe they are thinking about it who knows
I'm sure they will do something they know servers have to have more than one expert because some servers have like 6 experts

[QueenofNo]

I think three experts are warranted -- three who have little connection with each other -- who are online mostly at different times.

Friendships and alliances are made and broken daily -- for example just a few days ago Mustang posted this:

"I wanna announce a crazy idea, I've contacted the nominees for expert. I think that instead of voting on one let's vote on 2! I think myself (Mustang82) and Raptors1 would make an amazing expert combo. We both have substantial amounts of votes so we are well liked and we both get along very well. This is the most logical solution"

Now Mustang is nominating someone else in the nominations thread. Oddly someone who was vocal in his disappointment that Mustang became expert and who has already, like Mustang, in the nominations thread nominated Raptors:

"I would like to change my nomination to Raptors1. He is very helpful to people who have questions and seems like a good guy."

I think whoever is making the decisions should try and avoid appointing more experts that are easily swayed by peer/alliance pressure...and try to not appoint experts from within the same alliance or who have a strong connection to one another -- and especially ones who seem to be making and breaking deals to support each other for expert.

I've seen a lot of scheming, conniving, posturing, pretending, and demonstrations of faux helpful attitudes in the race to the riches of expert. It's not unlike real world politics in any regard -- with one exception: the expert is charged with an unbiased enforcement of the TOS as well as being a mentor to less knowledgeable players... and there are very few players who have demonstrated the maturity to offer both. So, let's wish us all luck in our playing experience with the upcoming experts -- we need it.

I think three experts are warranted -- three who have little connection with each other -- who are online mostly at different times.

Friendships and alliances are made and broken daily -- for example just a few days ago Mustang posted this:

"I wanna announce a crazy idea, I've contacted the nominees for expert. I think that instead of voting on one let's vote on 2! I think myself (Mustang82) and Raptors1 would make an amazing expert combo. We both have substantial amounts of votes so we are well liked and we both get along very well. This is the most logical solution"

Now Mustang is nominating someone else in the nominations thread. Oddly someone who was vocal in his disappointment that Mustang became expert and who has already, like Mustang, in the nominations thread nominated Raptors:

Raptors knows I didn't re nominate him because of his 3 day string of inactivity.

"I would like to change my nomination to Raptors1. He is very helpful to people who have questions and seems like a good guy."

I think whoever is making the decisions should try and avoid appointing more experts that are easily swayed by peer/alliance pressure...and try to not appoint experts from within the same alliance or who have a strong connection to one another -- and especially ones who seem to be making and breaking deals to support each other for expert.

I've seen a lot of scheming, conniving, posturing, pretending, and demonstrations of faux helpful attitudes in the race to the riches of expert. It's not unlike real world politics in any regard -- with one exception: the expert is charged with an unbiased enforcement of the TOS as well as being a mentor to less knowledgeable players... and there are very few players who have demonstrated the maturity to offer both. So, let's wish us all luck in our playing experience with the upcoming experts -- we need it.

I would like to nominate ash<3 because he was so helpful and helped me lvl when no one else would i dont know what i could of done without him

Nominations go into the nomination thread. This is the discussion thread. Your nominations posted here won't be seen.