Declined Make accepted staff applications public.

[Green.]

By making it public, people can learn from previous staff applications and see what they are missing in their app (this is a feature on blackwonder forums), it makes it easier for an applicant to make his app, the bad part of this is that people will tend to copy and paste one of the apps on the accepted section, hope this gets accepted, thanks for reading.

EDIT: I'll look like this.

Spoiler

 

[Kyo]

+1 He's right

 

[Redds]

I would love this however i think there is a reason why they arent public. #1 applications are a part of signing up yes, however i feel like staff are more interested in experience, behavior, and how to handle power. #2 I feel like we would have a lot of copy and paste which isn't good. #3 It already shows declined apps, because we can learn from our past mistakes so yeah. Maybe show honorary members apps but for now. Neutral

 

[Neliel]

-1

 

[Kyo]

+1 He's right

Actually i'm gonna change my vote to -1 due people who are going to apply can steal the answers from people who got accepted

 

[Tonic]

Unsure about this. Can cause problems. -1.

 

[Inspector Pootis]

-1 i know this could help someone who is planning to apply.But it could also cause someone just to copy someone answers.

 

[Coronarena]

Actually i'm gonna change my vote to -1 due people who are going to apply can steal the answers from people who got accepted

Essentially exactly what I thought before my internet even loaded this thread. I also believe this was mentioned sometime before this thread and it had the same reason.

-1 because really if you're "missing something" then it's up to the applicant to amend it by themselves on THEIR application, not on someone else's.

 

[Squadface]

-1 what Coronarena said.

 

[floot_guy]

-1
Plagiarism would be a serious issue here.

Also, if an applicant lacks ideas, they would just copy on other's content.
This happened before:
[READ]:

Declined - Stud's second staff application

Requirements: No VAC/Game ban(s) on record | Info [ ✘] Clean [+]SteamREP | Info [ ✔] No active bans on the community. | Info [ ✔ ] Member in our steam group | Info [ ✔] At least 16+ years old (preferred 18+) [ ✔ ] Team Fortress 2 playtime: 600+ hours [ ✔ ] No limited/F2P Steam account. | Info...

wonderland.tf

Read the critics of Deleted member 598 (Shadow)at the end (Spoiler)
and

Declined - Bio Medic's 2nd Application

Requirements: No VAC/Game ban(s) on record | Info [ ✔ | Clean [+]SteamREP | Info [ ✔ | No active bans on the community. | Info [ ✔ | Member in our steam group | Info [ ✔ | At least 16+ years old (preferred 18+) [ X | Team Fortress 2 playtime: 600+ hours [ ✔ | No limited/F2P Steam account. |...

wonderland.tf

 

[Redds]

Yeah the evidence stacks up -1

 

[Aldash]

Big +1

If it is plagiarised then it should be up to staff to deal with it.

Staff applications are usually some of peoples first application due to them (usually) being too young to apply for a job, having a large amount of successful references is really good to see what wonderland is looking for.

If people copy an answer word by word then yes it should be dealt with but if it is not copy and pasted I don't see the problem, they learned the knowledge to write it in their own words and if what they wrote isn't horrifically wrong then you can see their understanding of it.

Removing a useful resource just so staff don't need to deal with it is lazy.

 

[Redds]

You would be surprised by how many people just copy and paste, being young and taking ideas from accepted past apps, well it isn't your idea its a pasts or current staffs idea, claiming to do something because someone said it doesn't feel good and the chances of it happening can be low.

 

[Aldash]

You would be surprised by how many people just copy and paste, being young and taking ideas from accepted past apps, well it isn't your idea its a pasts or current staffs idea, claiming to do something because someone said it doesn't feel good and the chances of it happening can be low.

All applications are simply telling the person what they want to hear not about yourself. I am against people just copying and pasting, but having a library of past applications to reference has major benefits making it easier to apply.

 

[Red]

-1 to this
+1 to making accepted apps visible, but not readable.

 

[Plastic]

Do not make them readable, as then plagiarism is a possibility, giving moderators more work in making sure a well written app is not s copy paste, and there is the chance it might be similar, but coincidental and costed a good man an acception.

But, visible, I am neutral with as it would allow rule breakers to go through apps and identify admins so they can leave if one connects, but allows reporters to have easier ways to find admins. Both being rather useless, but the reasonings exist.

 

[Aldash]

Do not make them readable, as then plagiarism is a possibility, giving moderators more work in making sure a well written app is not s copy paste, and there is the chance it might be similar, but coincidental and costed a good man an acception.

But, visible, I am neutral with as it would allow rule breakers to go through apps and identify admins so they can leave if one connects, but allows reporters to have easier ways to find admins. Both being rather useless, but the reasonings exist.

Discord has the list of staff members on the right hand side.

People wanting staff apps to be visible makes very little sense. Just make them readable.

 

[sowon]

Contextually, I have a couple of points as to why opening up accepted applications to the public is a bad idea.

1. New applicants can effectively take answers and make them their own i.e plagiarize previous - and succesful - applicants.

2. New applicants will look at accepted applications and know how to make a flawless app that won our support, rather than form an application from their own heart and brain.
Every new applicant should bring what they have to the table, not read over previous applicants' applications and take pages out of their books.
We want you to show us what you're about from a raw perspective, not see what the successful applicants did and learn from them, as that's ingenuine and doesn't paint a true picture of who you are as an applicant.

Making only the subforum, maybe, but that would conflict with my ideology above. Obviously, making the applications readable for the public is a complete no from me.
The reason as far as I'm aware for declined applications being open is so aspiring applicants can learn from them about what not to do/write in an application, declined applications generally do not give you the right answers, rather you have to disect them yourself to figure out the right things to say, that they must do themselves and not rely on studying the accepted applications.

 

[Scorch]

-1

I don't get the whole "making it easier for applicants to formulate an app" thing. You're already given all the info and requirements you need to produce a good application so what's the point? Being able to view declined applications is more than enough for aspiring applicants.

 

[Plastic]

-1

I don't get the whole "making it easier for applicants to formulate an app" thing. You're already given all the info and requirements you need to produce a good application so what's the point? Being able to view declined applications is more than enough for aspiring applicants.

This lad gets it.


And no risk of plagiarism! (Sort of)