Most of what I would have said has already been covered in previous replies so I'm just going to take these two points for now.
You're really not in a position to say whether our not our expectations are needlessly high or not and you proved it with your examples. Poor quality rips existing on the site is no excuse for allowing people with a history of making consistent mistakes in their own submissions to be responsible for reviewing and approving submissions for others. If anything, it means that our bar is not high enough.
We are not missing the point of anything you're trying to say. You're not the first to say it nor are you the first to completely ignore the facts we've presented in response. Nobody is accusing you of devaluing anything - we are simply stating that your view of how things work is incorrect. This isn't a matter of trust and we already have a test in place for determining who might make a good candidate for staff - it's called the submission process. I can't speak for the quality of your submissions as I don't review models but you've already taken the first step to passing this test you seem so eager for us to implement by submitting them. There is no better way to determine someone's level of expertise than to see their work and that's already what we're doing which means our decisions are not based on a lack of trust or some crazy notion that we can handle this ourselves - they're based on the fact that we already know whether someone will be able to review submissions based on what they themselves submit.
Edit:
I was writing this as JewyB responded so I just want to quickly reiterate what Mighty Jetters said in thanking them for having a level head and unusual understanding of the situation. I broke the thank button to make sure that point came across visually as well.
(03-10-2020, 05:07 AM)Xinus23 Wrote: the only problem i see here is how needlessly high yours bars for being an approval staff is.
You're really not in a position to say whether our not our expectations are needlessly high or not and you proved it with your examples. Poor quality rips existing on the site is no excuse for allowing people with a history of making consistent mistakes in their own submissions to be responsible for reviewing and approving submissions for others. If anything, it means that our bar is not high enough.
(03-10-2020, 09:36 AM)Xinus23 Wrote: I think you're missing the point of what i'm trying to say
first of all. i am n o t trying to completely devalue all of what you have done to this site.
what i was trying to say with those mentions of bad rips is that, nobody is perfect. people who submit stuff can sometimes make a mistake in their model submission. but i'm gonna bet that so do you. everyone makes mistakes.
We are not missing the point of anything you're trying to say. You're not the first to say it nor are you the first to completely ignore the facts we've presented in response. Nobody is accusing you of devaluing anything - we are simply stating that your view of how things work is incorrect. This isn't a matter of trust and we already have a test in place for determining who might make a good candidate for staff - it's called the submission process. I can't speak for the quality of your submissions as I don't review models but you've already taken the first step to passing this test you seem so eager for us to implement by submitting them. There is no better way to determine someone's level of expertise than to see their work and that's already what we're doing which means our decisions are not based on a lack of trust or some crazy notion that we can handle this ourselves - they're based on the fact that we already know whether someone will be able to review submissions based on what they themselves submit.
Edit:
I was writing this as JewyB responded so I just want to quickly reiterate what Mighty Jetters said in thanking them for having a level head and unusual understanding of the situation. I broke the thank button to make sure that point came across visually as well.