| Fish Tank Clan :: Forums :: Fish Tank Clan :: FT Community Clan |
|
« Previous topic | Next topic » |
| [Discussion] Article II of the Constitution | ||
| Author | Post | ||
| b4ndito |
|
||
b4ndito
Registered Member #958
Joined: Fri Jan 04 2008, 06:59AMPosts: 3385 |
I'm in full agreement of the blind vote. I think that fixes about everything that is wrong with this system. What would it take for Kremit to set the preferences to allow for that? |
||
| Back to top |
|
||
| V3cT0rMan |
|
||
v3ct0rman
Registered Member #1160
Joined: Tue Jun 30 2009, 09:42PMPosts: 608 |
i have a really simple solution: 1. nomination proposals are only YES/NO/WITHHOLD VOTE 2. If, and only if, the proposal DOESN'T pass, a NEW thread can be made where people can voice there opinion on why it didn't or why they felt that person shouldn't have been allowed to be a member. 3. Based on this discussion, the previous proposal decision can be overturned if there is a group consensus that it should be OR a NEW NOMINATION proposal can be made to vote again on said person being nominated EDIT: this may have already been suggested but other than a BLIND vote i don't see another way to get past this voting issue Edited Sat Aug 18 2012, 10:28PM |
||
| Back to top |
|
||
| gLiTch |
|
||
Anal Assassin
Registered Member #455
Joined: Mon Oct 09 2006, 04:58AMPosts: 3848 |
b4ndito wrote ... I'm in full agreement of the blind vote. I think that fixes about everything that is wrong with this system. What would it take for Kremit to set the preferences to allow for that? Done. Only clan members can see anything in the FT Community forum including open/closed proposals. I had it so anyone can "view" the Community Forums but couldnt "post" in them. This was because there are sometimes valuable threads that regulars should see. To my knowledge, there is no way to make the sub-forums viewable to members only. It is all based on the parent forum. |
||
| Back to top |
|
||
| b4ndito |
|
||
|
b4ndito
Registered Member #958
Joined: Fri Jan 04 2008, 06:59AM Posts: 3385 |
Okay, that takes care of that facet. Thank you Glitch, you're a gentleman and a scholar. Also, I would suggest: 1. The first word of your post in a proposal should be your vote - Yes, No, or Withholding. Bold it, separate the rest of your post with a couple lines. 2. Any post that a moderator sees as flaming, spamming, or other such inflammatory nonsense will be deleted without explanation. If we're going to have more debate about nominations, I want it to be civil and responsible. |
||
| Back to top |
|
||
| Knightrider |
|
||
Meteor 2016
Registered Member #316
Joined: Mon Jun 26 2006, 09:14PMPosts: 3503 |
Thank you for bringing back the old method of having discussions in nominations. Now I won't have to have an aneurism when my rebuttals are deleted. | ||
| Back to top |
|
||
| b4ndito |
|
||
|
b4ndito
Registered Member #958
Joined: Fri Jan 04 2008, 06:59AM Posts: 3385 |
Smartass | ||
| Back to top |
|
||
| peacebypeice |
|
||
peacebypeice
Registered Member #925
Joined: Mon Nov 26 2007, 05:23AMPosts: 1452 |
Happy with this. The whole time I kept thinking how it must feel to be Fisher and have that shit going on about/because of him. Private is good. There needs to be some area to put extra thoughts as long as it isn't flaming. I also like banditos suggestions about the first thing being a yes or no just to make it easier for the proposal starter. Yes or No without any extra doesn't seem like the right answer. This leaves a little room for swaying. | ||
| Back to top |
|
||
| Rusty |
|
||
FTS Server Op
Registered Member #159
Joined: Wed Mar 01 2006, 06:33PMPosts: 2682 |
Why doesn't the creator of the proposal also make a discussion thread in the open nom sub forum? This could solve the discussion part. | ||
| Back to top |
|
||
| gLiTch |
|
||
|
Anal Assassin
Registered Member #455
Joined: Mon Oct 09 2006, 04:58AM Posts: 3848 |
Rusty wrote ... Why doesn't the creator of the proposal also make a discussion thread in the open nom sub forum? This could solve the discussion part. Not a bad idea but i would like to keep the number of threads to a minimum. I figure that people having to switch back and forth between threads to have a discussion could become annoying. Although...i will definitely ponder on that idea. It would keep the proposal thread simply yes and no votes. |
||
| Back to top |
|
||
| alcosatz |
|
||
FT Classic Op
Registered Member #39
Joined: Fri Dec 02 2005, 10:30PMPosts: 1545 |
I'm thinking the decision to end several years of transparency in clan activity should have been decided by the clan. This forum admin decision (to make all FTCC sub/forums private) was apparently made because nominees' feelings might possibly be hurt. Attention FT Feelings Police: now my feelings are hurt because you broke with tradition. Can the alcosatz Hurt Feelings Suffrage Movement begin now? What happens when a potential nomination fails, everyone goes apeshit in that discussion/voting thread (which is now private, yay!), but a later nomination passes for the same nominee? That former nominee who is now a member can see all of the hurtful things (like an FT member saying "I don't know this person" ! The drama!) Are you going to delete the failed vote to keep everything nice and tidy, so that no feelings are hurt? When did this become the goal of FT? When did we become such a sensitive bunch? If you want to keep discussion and voting separate then you need a two-stage system: -[link]- We could also talk about how important it is that FT is an elite force of officers and surfers who don't know each other. |
||
| Back to top |
|
||
Powered by e107 Forum System
|
|