Forum:Usergroup changes

as most of us know, RR has changed around the usergroups UoH, CoH, PoH, and FoH, so that the leaderships are more even or something like that. i might be the only one who thinks this, but i think we should go back to the old ways of leadership, since technically(at least in the UoH, though possibly in other usergroups) he had no authority to make such changes. i hate the way the usergroups are now that RR's been messing with them, and i think they should go back to the old ways. of course, this is just one Halopedian's opinion, so i put this forum to ask the rest of Halopedia if they agree with me.  Phil.e.  [Talk to me] 22:35, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
 * It 'twas accepted 8-0-0 Halopedian concensus. :-) However, all amendments are able to be reversed...I'm open to a reversal. :-) Cheers, Relen tless Recu sant 'o the Halopedia Team [[Image:Fleet Admiral.jpg|25px]] TALK • SPEAK 22:40, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

As the founder of the first usergroup, the CoH, i would have liked if i could have added my opinion and suggestions to the "new" leadership. However, as i was away, i had no voice in the matter. I like the idea of less Councilors, but i don't like the current outcome. The three secondary leaders shouldn't be Imperial Admirals, as that rank was meant to be an honor for our user that improved the most, not an elected office (and there was only supposed to be one IA). The ONE Councilor now, makes it a bit of a dictatorship, there should be three Councilors, and the one Imperial Admiral who would be a de facto commander if the Council failed in it's duty. The same goes with the CoH subgroups, although, you'd change the name to that group's theme (General, Gravemind, Monitor). And that's my two cents.
 * -- Donut THX 1138 [ Comm ] 02:44, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

RR's decision was probably due to the necessity to have a rank structure in place, as elections were well overdue. We could always revert to the old method for the next term; it'd be too much stuffing around to do it now. --  Manticore  TalkundefinedCSV 04:52, 28 June 2007 (UTC)