LonelyDodo wrote: What your saying is completely true imo and that people shouldnt be getting denied for having less then 2 weeks of activity beacuse it is recommended or a reason that is recommended to have.

LonelyDodo wrote: That is what I think as well about SA/HA applicants that are applying and getting denied but when I personally think they deserved it or actually worked hard for it and not getting HA cause a HA resigns.

[quote="LonelyDodo" post=1125334]Bosscomic did a great job back in his day and I have no reason to believe he wouldn't do that this time as well. You shouldn't check the clock to see when people are ready rather their devotion, maturity, and capabilities as a staff member. He always rose up to the task and the expectations we had for him.[/quote] What your saying is completely true imo and that people shouldnt be getting denied for having less then 2 weeks of activity beacuse it is recommended or a reason that is recommended to have. [quote="LonelyDodo" post=1125334] Ammount of people on rank X should never be the reason for denial. If there are too many in your opinion raise the standards you have and get rid of the ones that do not fit the standard and are incapable of meeting the new standards, but do give them solid point to improve themselves on. [/quote] That is what I think as well about SA/HA applicants that are applying and getting denied but when I personally think they deserved it or actually worked hard for it and not getting HA cause a HA resigns.