I don't like the idea of mod elections. That's essentially giving residents of a town the right to elect new members of the police force. I can see more harm than good coming from that. Modship is something that is earned, and deservedly so for most people, being able to elect new mods would take that away and would, as a result, lessen the importance of the job. There would also, unboubtably, be overwhelming amounts of power abuse by people who get elected but don't truly deserve it. Overall, I don't see it as a very good idea.
Is it really, though? Mods don't just enforce the rules. They also make the rules. Police, for the most part, are meant to do exactly what their rules and regulations tell them to do. Mods/admins
make these rules and regulations. At the very least, administrators for sure are closer to say a President or a member of the Senate than a police officer.
You also have to realize that
anybody can become a police officer. You do your schooling, and you're in. There's no secret club of people who will pick the best people in the town and make them into police officers. As long as there is some sort of oligarchy, and there is, at the very least the oligarchical figures should be elected. If anyone can be a mod as long as they meet x qualifications, and they are in with a little application, that's fine and dandy, but that's not the case. There's not an equal opportunity, there is not an application process that guarantees a good shot at being a mod, and right now, there's not even any community say. We don't elect
anyone. Not mods, not admins, heck, not even community coordinators. That's like if states didn't elect their senators, cities didn't elect their mayors, countries didn't elect their presidents. No one is elected.
"Oh people might only vote in someone who they like and not who is most suited." Umm, what does it mean to be most suited? IMO, that means you serve the needs of the people. If 80% of the people want the rules to be x way, then their elected moderator will probably make it as such. Instead, the staff decide to just assume what people want and often times, even go against what people want if it fits what
they want.
As far as I'm concerned, there are 100s of users and only a handful of staff. The staff have 100% of the say. What is the big deal with giving the users 10% of that by at least electing people who match their values?