I don't really have strong opinions about many of the staff here - I'm still too new for that - but I do have some thoughts. Just remember that they should be taken with an appropriately sized pinch of salt.
I think there are too many members of staff. Going through the list, I didn't know that Serah's Cat, Adri and DNA were moderators, and I don't recall seeing much of most of the site staff, including Cloud_S (last active two weeks ago), Glitterberri (four weeks ago), KuraudoStrife (over two
years ago) or pESCAbAdA (three months ago). I have no idea how much any of them work on the main site, though, and I guess visiting the forum isn't compulsory, but perhaps it should be in all but exceptional cases. Continuously inactive members of staff should lose their positions, in my opinion, especially if they don't give a good reason. Making the staff team should be a privilege, and having inactive staff makes it look like they don't care.
The "S-E Affiliated Admins" are another group of mysterious people to me - what do they do? As for the others, like the admins and super mods, I've seen them around but haven't really noticed them doing very much staffy stuff. That's not a criticism at all, as maybe there isn't much to be done, or maybe they just do it in the background. Again, I don't know. But it does feel like there are a few too many of them.
Does it matter? I think the current drama is highlighting one reason why it does. There have been promises to do certain things (like deal with reports promptly and transparently), and those promises haven't been kept, from what I've heard. With so many staff, some think "it doesn't concern me", others think "I don't know the full story", others think "someone else will deal with it", some just aren't around when it all happens, and in the end, things don't get done. With a more streamlined hierarchy - for example, a place of this size could get by just fine with one guy in overall charge, two other admins, two super mods and a handful of forum-specific mods and site staff as requirements dictate - everyone would have a clear grasp of exactly where their responsibilities lie, and they would be expected to carry them out, as there is no-one else to do it. It also presents a much clearer picture for new members: I've been here for three months and I don't really know who does what. So if I ever feel like there is a problem, I don't know who to contact.
The only time I've really interacted with any of the staff on here in a formal way has been when I suggested some sort of limit or improvement on the current arrangement for changing usernames, which I think is very confusing. I got different comments and ideas back from different staff (as well as regular members), who seemed to understand the need to make things a bit clearer, but couldn't agree on how. In the end, nothing got done, so I'm still getting confused on a daily basis and having to spend time looking through the username changing thread just to try and keep track of things. If there were just two admins, they could have a quick discussion through IM, agree on something, and then go about implementing it. That could involve discussion with the other staff or the community as a whole, but it should be in the form of "this is what we want to do, what do you think" rather than "we could do something, but we don't know what, and we probably won't do anything". Sometimes democracy should make way for dictatorship.
I have positive comments for a few people. I think it's absolutely fine that there is one guy who just works on the technical side of things, like Yop. As well as being one of the people I've got on with the best since joining, he does seem to get things done... eventually
Ryu always seems to be on IRC - he's often been the first person to reply to any queries I have mentioned there, and I've been impressed with his judgement. Pixel and Shademp have been the two members of site staff to most visibly put time and effort in to producing content which will enrich TLS, so hats off to them as well.
That's it.