As we have finally put up a vote for a limit on how many head/lt spots that a user may hold, another issue that has come up often in debates, chats, etc is the question of officially inactive users that have head/lt spots. We've discussed back and forth a few ideas, one of course being not to change anything. To clarify, currently this is how we deal with that:
- Officially Inactive/Semi Active users= if they go 6 months 0 edits an admin archives all their chars, and in the process automatically replaces any spots their chars held
- Unofficially inactive users= If they hit 14 days 0 edits, they lose any head/lt spots and those spots are automatically replaced by an admin
To clairfy the current process for choosing/replacing the spots: if the users were head spots, lts get moved up and a new lt is chosen. If they were just lt spots, a new lt is chosen, generally a character that fits the requirement of having been on the wiki for over a month, is owned by an active user and someone who doesn't already have a ton of spots.
So one option of course would be to once and for all vote to make that as our official stance.
However, some feel that for officially inactive users 6 months is too long, while others of us feel that, say we did a 1 month 0 edits thing, like with the admin team and dept edits, and that auto filling the spots for users who may not even want it, is a waste of time. So some of us think a better idea would be to allow users to make a formal request once a user who owns a counsellor post goes past 30 days 0 edits. It is quicker than a challenge, yet still shows that they indeed actively desire the spot.
Yet another option, which may be even more involved: Some might feel that just automatically requesting the head spot currently retained by an inactive user isn't fair to the current lt, because of our previous use of auto promotion. So if the lt wants the head position the user requesting and the lt may challenge each other for the spot.
As I see it anyone who loses their position should theoretically be able to take it back with little issue. If they can't then perhaps they shouldn't have had it anyway. That said I do think the matter of inactivity should be tied to the user and not the character. I.e. If the user edits but doesn't often use the character, it should not affect the character's leadership status. It's unfortunate that Cabin Heads and LT spots are still more or less meaningless.