| Fish Tank Clan :: Forums :: Fish Tank Clan :: FT Community Clan |
|
« Previous topic | Next topic » |
| New Voting System... | ||
| Author | Post | ||
| BuBBLe GooSe |
|
||
The Original MilfHunter
Registered Member #163
Joined: Mon Mar 06 2006, 02:24PMPosts: 1592 |
Basic Outline for New Voting Procedure... 1. There is only 1 stage per proposal. The Old system was 2 stages, discussion and vote. In this system, each proposal only has one stage and only one topic thread. Think of it as a 'fast-track' past the discussion phase, and we start off in the voting phase. You post comments, arguments for/against and your vote, all in one thread/post. If there is a back and forth ongoing argument, than thats fine, but you can only say Y/N in one of your posts. And yes you can change your vote based on what others have to say, just use the edit button adn make sure it is done before the proposal ends. 2. Simple and standard timelimit. Basic choices, less confusion. Nomination/Termination proposals can be open for 3 or 5 days. Policy change is 5 days. (Some members have mentioned in teh discussion phase that these numbers should be changed and that's fine. I'm sure the first amendment will be with regards to this topic. Specifics will be ironed out and clan wide input is exected via a proposal.) 3. Tie equals 'did not pass'. Example: Nominate 'Sid Finch'; 5 Y's & 5 N's = TIE. Result: he is not in the clan. For a proposal to pass, the yes vote has to be +1 of the no side. Essentially, over 50% have to be in agreement. (Again, an amendment could be proposed whereby stricter margins of victory could be suggested. Perhaps 60 or 65% should be the margin by which a proposal passes. If someone wanted to pose a proposal stating such, then by all means.) 4. Getting rid of expirations. As we have seen, if a thread was left open past the expiration time, it was deemed invalid and all of the votes/time went to waste. I'm proposing that Threads/proposals cannot expire, however votes that are placed after the designated time will not be counted. SOMEBODY will probaly close the thread around the expiration time to keep teh votes honest, but the onus is on the thread starter. This also means that if a thread starter no longer likes the proposal he proposed, he cannot let it expire on purpose. This basically means that voting is crucial and even the thread starter cannot over-ride the say of those who voted. 5. Everyone's vote counts as 1. No special admin privledges. Vote as you see fit. Don't be afraid to rock the boat. You will not be kicked out of the clan if your vote is in opposition to a high level admin/server op. |
||
| Back to top |
|
||
| AwsedreswA |
|
||
Registered Member #223
Joined: Wed Apr 26 2006, 10:53PMPosts: 126 |
Not simple, not bulleted, not easily siteable. Fast track equals shit that the majority doesn't want happening, happening. There should be no minimum vote length, only maximum. I agree that tie equals failure to pass, however. |
||
| Back to top |
|
||
| Wu-banga |
|
||
Registered Member #49
Joined: Tue Dec 06 2005, 01:37AMPosts: 1561 |
i like that whole idea, if our current members can be a little more strict instead of just letting everyone in | ||
| Back to top |
|
||
| BuBBLe GooSe |
|
||
|
The Original MilfHunter
Registered Member #163
Joined: Mon Mar 06 2006, 02:24PM Posts: 1592 |
Because Awsedreswa is retarded... 1. There is only 1 stage per proposal. You post comments, arguments for/against and your vote, all in one thread/post. 2. Nomination/Termination proposals can be open for 3 or 5 days. Policy change is 5 days. 3. For a proposal to pass, the yes vote has to be +1 of the no side. Essentially, over 50% have to be in agreement. 4. Threads/proposals cannot expire, however votes that are placed after the designated time will not be counted. SOMEBODY will probaly close the thread around the expiration time to keep teh votes honest, but the onus is on the thread starter. This also means that if a thread starter no longer likes the proposal he proposed, he cannot let it expire on purpose. This basically means that voting is crucial and even the thread starter cannot over-ride the say of those who voted. 5. Everyone's vote counts as 1. Simple, bulleted, citable. "Fast track equals shit that the majority doesn't want happening, happening." What I said was... "Think of it as a 'fast-track' past the discussion phase, and we start off in the voting phase. You post comments, arguments for/against and your vote, all in one thread/post. Hopefully people could understand the co-relation between what was in the old system, compared to what I was now trying to propose. Did anyone mention 'if a proposal gets X amount of yes votes, it could be declared 'passed' prior to the closing date'? (Even by your conception of 'fast-tracking', your logic is still flawed. If an overwhelming majority of persons voted a certain way, then the shit that happens is what the majority wants, right? But its a non-issue. If something is set to stay open for 5 days, it can't be closed before that, so hit up forums like once a week adn you shouldn't miss anything too important. Oh, that's right. You missed the Discussion and Voting for the abolishment of the old system.  ) Woot for Awsedreswa's 4th grade reading level. Here's a sticker. "There should be no minimum vote length, only maximum." So you're saying everything should have a default value? That's cool, make a thread and see what people think. However, your system had an 8-14 day discussion phase, then an 8-'whenever 7 votes are cast' voting phase. I suggested 3 and 5 days just to keep shit moving, and to have SOMETHING on paper for nominations and proposals until somebody offered an amendment. "I agree that tie equals failure to pass, however." Great, I can also assume that you agree with 'Everyone's vote counts as 1. No special admin privledges. Vote as you see fit' stipulation as well. Awse, you still seem to harbor some resentment towards me because I mocked your voting procedure. (And for the record, I did it again in this thread.) Dude, your system was the same as the old system, but the minimum for recruitment proposals was 16 days. Don't take it personally. Clearly your justification was based on the fact that you don't visit forums often. Yes the old system did have an explanation for every contingency and yes the old system elaborated on many more areas. But the old system was created by Alex and set the wheels in motion which formed the basis for the modern FT clan. By comparison, these 5 rather minute points seem impotent and lacking. But the beauty of it is that now FTs have the ability to customize a new system. Remember, this is what everyone wanted. People voted to get rid of the old system and start fresh. There are aspects of the old system that everyone liked and wanted to keep; everyone having an equal say by way of an impartial voting system and no central leadership. I personally wanted to keep teh old system because I didn't have any problems with it and I rather liked it, but I knew that its 'flaws' were becomming evident to everyone else. I saw the way people butchered certain aspects of it and I knew that Alex or Fetus would be quick to correct the matter. When an opportunity arose to make a change, I jumped on it out of fear that somebody might try to elect a stupid system (refer to Awsedreswa's in the voting phase for the new system). As the vote was happening to abolish the old one, I stepped up. Yes, I suppose that I have to rationalize the reasons as to why. I stepped up and put together 5 basic principles because I saw the areas in the old system that were causing the confusion. I think that I have had a whole bunch of experience regarding the old system, just check teh first reply here and notice the timestamp... -[link]- All I wanted was for some of the more evident creases to be ironed out in favor of simplicity, efficiency, yet to keep the good parts and work it from there. Basically... 1. The old system's discussion phase. Saying you need 2 approvals means just that. 2 people must approve before the closing time so that the proposal could be valid. People thought that because a proposal got 6 approvals and 7 disapprovals, that the proposal was then invalid. Nooo, it got the 2 approvals necessary so it could be moved onto a vote. It needed 2 Invalidatoins to be deemed invalid.< Seeing this I proposed that we get rid of the discussion phase altogether and forget about approvals/disapprovals because most likely, if someone approves they will vote yes as well. Hence I thought that by having 1 phase where you vote and discuss, you could eliminate the problems surrounding the disapprovals being more than the approvals and people actually thinking that because more people 'chose not to approve', that this somehow translated into invalidity of the proposal. 2. The timelimits were being butchered. At first there were minimum, default and maximium. It seemed as though everyone just followed suit and made 3 day discussion and 3 day votes for nomination proposals. Taking this into account I stipulated that we don't need a bunch of options to confuse the matter, and settle on a few key timeframe choices. This way people will know how long they have until something closes, there won't be premature thread closings by other members, and there won't be any guesswork as to how 'long should this thread stay open for.' 3. I can't recall a time when a tie occured, but keeping with the democratic feel, over 50 sounded like a reasonable starting ground. If somebody wants to propose that for votes regarding policy should have 60% in agreement instead of 50%, that's fine. But initially, 50 sounded like a good objective starting point. 4. Expirations. Recall the termination proposal for 'Bobby Digital'. The discussion and vote phases were overwhelmingly in favor of having this member terminated, but due to a clerical matter, the whole thing was invalid because the voting stayed open for longer than it was supposed to. There were a bunch of annoyed people because it was all for not. My suggestion was to eliminate invalidations because of excessive elapsed time. Hence, if 20 members vote for something, then our votes will be valid, even if the thread is left open for longer. Granted, votes after the alloted time would just not be counted. Also, there was a loophole in the old system whereby the thread starter could intentionally let the thread expire, thus deeming it invalid. Now because threads can't expire, it is up to members to make the decision of whether or not to pass a proposal, not the person who started the thread. 5. Everyone' s vote counts as 1. This is the basis for the old and new systems. This point needs to be emphasized because the old system saw a shitload of herd mentality in that people would tend to agree with what the person above them wrote, or would agree with what Alex wrote. Having 1 thread per proposal should help remedy this slightly because it will allow for a different style of discussion. By this I mean, people will not have the option to 'approve the proposal but I'm still unsure as to how I will vote'. If you want to say something, it will have to be something definitive and members will not have the option to be vague in a discussion phase only to gauge the responses of others, and follow suit in the voting phase. Look, I'm just trying to put some of my experience to use. I realize that change is difficult, and something of this nature is definitly hard to swallow. But these are just 5 basic points that will get the ball rolling. The point is so that members can come up with ideas and customize the system to fit everyone's needs. I'm not looking for props or anything for stepping up with a system. If anything, it has caused more problems for me than I had anticipated. I don't want it to look like I'm forcing this system down anyone's throat or trying to gain power or anything. The fact is that I'm just a player and just a member of the clan. What may set me apart from some is that I have been here since this incarnation of FT started back in the spring and I think that my experience can be beneficial. Lets face it. Usually we would all wait for Alex to remedy a situation or wait for him to propose a system or something. But he has made it clear that he doesn't want to be directly involved with drafting the new system because he doesn't want it to seem like his opinion matters more than anyone else's. This is very noble and I commend him on it. He felt as though he forced the old system on everyone, but I don't think it was a bad thing. So now because we collectively decided to get rid of the old system, its only fair that we all come up with something fresh (with Alex's input I hope). I'm not a server owner or anything, I'm just a strong minded clan member and I like to type. I just thought that because I knew the old system pretty well, and that I recognized where it could be improved, then perhaps I could take a crack at writing something that could benefit everyone, yet flexible enough to amend as needed while still feeling all warm and fuzzy like the old system. I'm not going to appologize because the 5 points I posted are not perfect. Its a start, that's all it was intended to be, so in those regards, it has potential. But to fulfill its potential, it needs input and amendments from the entire FT community. Its up to clan membership to direct the path of the clan, and as such, lets look to the future with tenacious positivity and declare FT as the bestest CS:S clan in all of the internets.  (Sry Awse if I came off a bit harsh, but I'm feelin some PMS comin on. ) |
||
| Back to top |
|
||
| alcosatz |
|
||
FT Classic Op
Registered Member #39
Joined: Fri Dec 02 2005, 10:30PMPosts: 1545 |
What is the default length of time for recruitment/termination proposals? Three or five days? | ||
| Back to top |
|
||
| BuBBLe GooSe |
|
||
|
The Original MilfHunter
Registered Member #163
Joined: Mon Mar 06 2006, 02:24PM Posts: 1592 |
3 or 5, up to the starter. I realize that its a bit short, but that will be ironed out depending on what the membership decides. -[link]-
|
||
| Back to top |
|
||
| emerican |
|
||
Registered Member #164
Joined: Tue Mar 07 2006, 12:07PMPosts: 3146 |
damn goose i must say that is some kickass shit. props to you  |
||
| Back to top |
|
||
| alcosatz |
|
||
|
FT Classic Op
Registered Member #39
Joined: Fri Dec 02 2005, 10:30PM Posts: 1545 |
[quote] 3 or 5, up to the starter. I realize that its a bit short, but that will be ironed out depending on what the membership decides. -[link]- [/quote1161634663] What happens when the starter forgets to pick a time... why does this sound familiar?
|
||
| Back to top |
|
||
| BuBBLe GooSe |
|
||
|
The Original MilfHunter
Registered Member #163
Joined: Mon Mar 06 2006, 02:24PM Posts: 1592 |
Yeah, but I was assuming that if by chance the thread starter forgot to pick a time, then usually the first or second poster would see that and bring up that fact. The starter would most likely check the thread within a few days and toss in an edit saying: "Oops, i forgot to mention that this thread will stay open for 5 days" and we could just take it from there. Remember that invalidating an entire thread based on minute details is more of a piss off then overlooking a small clerical error. Yes it sounds less strict than before, but that is sorta the point as well. | ||
| Back to top |
|
||
| alcosatz |
|
||
|
FT Classic Op
Registered Member #39
Joined: Fri Dec 02 2005, 10:30PM Posts: 1545 |
Proposals were not invalidated when this happened before so I'm not sure why you mention that. | ||
| Back to top |
|
||
Powered by e107 Forum System
|
|