Talk:Organizational Change Proposal
(→Proposed Chain of Command) |
|||
| (2 intermediate revisions not shown) | |||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
** Directors | ** Directors | ||
*** Managers | *** Managers | ||
| - | *** and so on... | + | **** and so on... |
Not sure if that make sense, but worth a shot. | Not sure if that make sense, but worth a shot. | ||
-[[User:SecretAgent|SecretAgent]] | -[[User:SecretAgent|SecretAgent]] | ||
| + | |||
| + | agreed | ||
| + | |||
| + | -[[User:NiTeMaRe|NiTeMaRe]] | ||
Current revision as of 22:57, 12 September 2008
Proposed Chain of Command
Not sure I completely agree with the first proposal. I think it's really going to apply on the issue at hand. For example, a Support Operator would have more authority (and the last word) in matters pertaining to user abuse, than say a Server Administrator who is not at least a Support Operator themselves.
Additionally, Server Operators would be limited to decisions that directly affect their server, unless they were also a member of Support, in which case they might have increased authority over some matters there.
So I think something more like the following would be appropriate:
- Executive Board
- Directors
- Managers
- and so on...
- Managers
- Directors
Not sure if that make sense, but worth a shot.
agreed
