|
Post by Silver Windrunner on Jul 5, 2013 4:07:15 GMT -5
all im saying replace inactive staff so more staff is around
|
|
|
Post by Zeno on Jul 5, 2013 22:26:39 GMT -5
So...are you really suggesting it or are you telling us to do it? "Replace inactive staff so more staff is around." There's a certain way to suggest something like this, and that is not the way to do it. The proper way would have been like, "I think inactive staff should be replaced with others so more staff members are around." That sounds like a respectful way to say it as opposed to just saying replace inactive staff. I know things aren't going all that well, but at least keep the respect here please.
Anyway, I am going to take consideration in removing people like Maximus from the staff and giving some other people the position. As long as the population of members remains the way it is, I will not be staffing anyone else since we don't need an overflow of staff members since we have enough already. In other words, it isn't necessary for like 6 staff members to manage the site with like 6 members logging on in the past 24 hours.
|
|
|
Post by Ryan Andreson on Jul 8, 2013 9:30:27 GMT -5
True, we can have about 1-2 new staffs. Just 1-2 would be fine.
|
|