12-22-2018, 05:53 PMKing Wrote:

12-22-2018, 05:47 PMNJBadApple Wrote: I'm not saying you came up with the model, but you were the recruitment head for a while.  If you thought it was an issue, why not change it when you had the chance?  To me it seems like you're backpedaling.

I did try to change it.

You even got annoyed at me at the time for doing so and spoke about on our your podcast Link. At the time you were upset I was graphics head and recruitment head and was suggesting so many changes to both models.

I replied to your post here explaining I did make changes to graphics but they were turning out well and that I had just taken the recruitment job so too early to say how I'd do.

Also I wasn't recruit head for awhile. I got the job Sept 29th proof and there was already a new head by Oct 13th proof.

Nice. Even with being relieved early from the position, two weeks running the recruitment drive seems like enough time to make a change that most people are likely on board with.

Not saying you did a bad job at that (or GFX, now that you bring it up), but you've had consistent inactive recruits each season under the 2TPE rule. I don't like @Keygan that much but he has a solid point, they all amount to almost no time on the site combined. It leaves me [and clearly] others to wonder if you're caught red-handed, via example, abusing the system and you're trying to backtrack saying it should be changed.