The admin team do an amazing job, and it isn't their fault. It is the system.
Bottom line is this; the server will go on without us -- but brutallity like this (which in my view could have been avoided) only serves to strengthen the Them (i.e. DMs) vs US (players) mentaillty -- many players are bitter at the staff here and you have to ask why? The system promotes doing less, not more -- and it results in a barron wasteland event wise.
When a DM is removed (from my experience as lobo and from other sources I spoke to) the DM who gets axed is just as shocked and confused as the community is. We are given no time to wrap up any on going plot or ideas and everything is left in the open. OK, A system is in place for other DMs to take over old plots -- but this rarely happens.
By the time we have read the removal letter, we have already been booted and 95% of the time the reasons are hazy and it leads to confusion and anger. Normally what happens is the reasons 'stack up' and it becomes a numbers game i.e. complaints, without us knowing -- then BOOM, removal letter. Gone. Other times the reasons presented make no sense at all and seem utterly ridiculous.
That is why it cuts so deep. We don't know it is coming. It could happen any time.
Maecius explained to me that they adapted this system to prevent damage to the server as a DM who was aware they are going to be axed could go on a rampage, and that makes sense -- and it works, mostly. It is essentially straping on a bomb jacket when you join the team, knowing at any time they could press the button. It breeds fear, and is not something we should have on our team. However it is dreadfully disrespectful to the DM in question, not to mention it causes a drift between the DM team and the community. Each time it is done.
Does the 'drop kick when you are not looking' methord work? Yes. Could it be better? 100% Yes, the removal process does not need to be so cut and dry, the removal process does not need to be so dark and illusive.
I do not think HDM voting would work, but I would like to see communication and more openness with the DM / HDM team, and from what I have seen -- they are getting better at it but there is still a lot of room for improvement.
What I would suggest is transparancy. The DM who gets a concern or 'complaint' should be contacted and spoken to regarding it (each time it happens), until they have been approched and allowed to give their side of the story -- the complaint / issue should not be valid, instead, here it seems anyone can attach a 'concern' to the HDM team and said DM will gain 1 complaint, without us knowing -- and this is the problem. When complaints are proven to be valid I would opt for a 3 strike system, where the DM is removed on the third strike. Atleast then it is not so 'sneak attack' as it is now. It may also be a good idea to have a criteria which lists what actually merits as a 'complaint' because this is where things can go off the rails if 'anything' is marked as a complaint it leaves huge holes for abuse
The DM was ignoring tells
The words concern and complaint should not be brushed together. Any any concerns should be looked into, but common sense I feel would serve the system well.
I do want to reassure players considering to become a DM to not be put off by this, in my honest experience; it is the DMs with the ambitions who either sink into the mud, or fall silent and the more submissive / passive DMs who thrive. Big ideas are not a bad thing, but normally are the reason behind the storm -- and any future DMs should constantly check in with the HDM team, keep the others in the loop and leave plenty of notice doing that and you should be fine.