Thread:Gojiran103/@comment-27040518-20160801103720/@comment-10948389-20160801184231

Users that are higher authority above moderators have favor in who they believe should be promoted. They closely watch their actions and ask themselves if they are deemed worthy enough to hold such authority. If the user portrays and behaves well with a good spirit, they shall be promoted. If they continue doing that or do better, they can go from rollback all the way to a bureaucrat.

However, if the user acts and behaves the exact opposite of what the administrators and bureaucrats want to expect, then that user is no longer favorable of promotion and will look upon another user instead. They do have a second chance, however, and it depends on the administrators and bureaucrats if they want to give them more chances. Although, I think it's preferable that we go up to a maximum of three chances, but I think we're doing that anyway.

If that user still fails the second time, or does worse (especially worse), then it's an absolute no to that user.

Users that are currently promoted also follow this same method. Take LSDKama for example. He is currently a moderator. You get that LSDKama keeps doing good, he ranks up. But if LSDKama starts doing bad, then the administrators and bureaucrats are going to take consideration to demote him. If he continues such acts, then he is stripped away from his moderator powers and it depends if the administrators and bureaucrats also want to remove his rollback rights, as they have the ability to do that if this happens.

Now, for administrators, if they keep doing doing good, they have can rank up. If bureaucrats keep doing good, then one out of all of them may remain in that status for some time. That individual bureaucrat who keeps doing good, and the rest of the staff thinks they are worthy of another rank up, they may rank up to the next Chairman as thee community's vote. And that's how far it can go.

If you have more questions, lemme know.