| Fish Tank Clan :: Forums :: Fish Tank Clan :: FT Community Clan |
|
« Previous topic |
| Voting System | ||
| Author | Post | ||
| alcosatz |
|
||
FT Classic Op
Registered Member #39
Joined: Fri Dec 02 2005, 10:30PMPosts: 1545 |
10/16/2006 EDIT: This voting system has been abolished. See details here and here. 08/30/2006 EDIT: Updating from this accepted proposal I swear I've already done this once... This is what I've come up with. Feel free to reject it, love it, or make suggestions about how it may be improved. The only thing I ask is that we do this quickly so we can (hopefully) get something in place and begin our much anticipated clan!  I know this is a lot of crap to read, but it is meant to cover all the angles and make it possible for our clan to truly govern itself instead of having a few people make all the decisions. Here is a brief explanation of how a successful change works with this system: 1. Someone comes up with an idea of how to improve the clan. 2. The idea is posted as a proposed change on the clan forum after a little homework is done to make sure the change doesn't break rules stated in the voting system below. 3. All clan members get the chance to comment on the proposal, and if a certain amount of people think the change should be put to a vote then it is. 4. All clan members get a chance to vote. 5. If the vote passes then the change is implemented. Below are all the gory details. -- FT Community Clan Voting System All members are given equal responsibility in maintaining the clan. We want to encourage all members to contribute by giving everyone an equal voice. All members are given the opportunity to share their opinion as well as vote on all clan policy issues. This document attempts to describe the processes of our voting system. The basic concept is that a member will make a proposal on the clan forum that he or she would like to see established by a community-wide vote. A minimum amount of time for discussion as well as a minimum number of vote approvals, depending on the type of issue, is required before a vote may actually take place. If the issue gets enough support for a vote (vote approvals) then a new thread is created on the clan forum and every clan member is allowed to vote. The results of the vote become reality and there is no need for anyone to approve the results. I. Voting Process A proposal is simply a change (or set of closely-related changes) to the clan that a member believes will have a positive impact on the clan and our community. The process of change requires confirmation by other members that the proposal is a valid change, discussion to further describe and improve the proposal, and results of a vote that indicate more members agree that the change should be implemented than not. a. Initial Proposal A proposal is posted on the clan forums with a specific change that is clearly stated by the poster. All members are allowed to make proposals for change. There is no exclusive group of members that must approve proposals. There are, however, constraints designed to prevent abuse of the voting system. Each type of proposal (types described below) has constraints that limit certain aspects of voting such as how often a specific vote may be called, minimum amount of vote approvals, prohibited topics, etc. Also, each member may only have one active proposal. b. Discussion Phase This stage is where all members are given a chance to describe their opinions of the proposal. This begins immediately following the posting of the initial proposal. A minimum and maximum amount of time for discussion is guaranteed for each type of proposal (see below for specific details). This is intended to give ample time for members to voice their opinions as well as provide vote approvals (see next section), but deter several open threads of unwanted and/or unresolved proposals from accumulating. The poster may specify a deadline for the end of discussion as long as it is within the range defined by the proposal type. If a proposal appears to be in violation of the rules defined by this voting system then it may be declared 'invalid.' The processes of invalidation, as well as the requirements, are described later in this document. The proposal may be modified by the original poster to reflect suggestions or concerns raised by other clan members; however, changes may occur no later than 24 hours before the expiration of the discussion phase. This stipulation exists to prevent the original poster from altering the topic of discussion without giving other members enough time to verify that the modifications to the original proposal do not invalidate it. Also, if modifications are made to the original proposal then a post must be made of the updated proposal, in its entirety, by the original poster. Only the most recent and entire text of a proposal may be used if a vote is initiated. 1. Vote Approval A vote approval is a confirmation by another member that the proposal appears to legitimately be in the positive interest of the clan and should be voted upon. The minimum number of required vote approvals varies by type of proposal. Vote approvals must be explicitly stated before the expiration of the discussion phase. A proposal that does not receive the minimum number of vote approvals before discussion expiration is considered the same as a vote that has failed (see "Voting Phase" below). 2. Invalidation A proposal may be declared as invalid during the discussion phase if it does not comply with the rules stated in this voting system. Any member may declare a proposal as invalid, but a specific reason for declaring the proposal as invalid must be cited. Each type of proposal has a required number of invalid assertions (similar to vote approval). Proposals that are sufficiently asserted as invalid may not be voted upon or discussed further. c. Voting Phase A vote thread must be created on the clan forums within 48 hours of the expiration of the discussion phase only if the minimum number of vote approvals has been provided and the proposal has not been deemed invalid. As with the discussion phase, the minimum and maximum length of the voting phase is constrained by the vote type and the original poster of the proposal is able to state the vote expiration time. The actual vote takes place in a new thread which is created by the original poster of the proposal. All clan members may vote regardless of whether they posted in the discussion thread. A vote must consist of either "Yes" or "No." Votes are counted after the expiration of the voting phase, and proposed change(s) are effective immediately unless otherwise stated by the proposal. II. Proposal Requirements Varying requirements for each type of vote are listed below. If these requirements are not honored then a vote may be found invalid. a. Description of Proposal Requirements Minimum Vote Approvals / Invalidations This is the least number of vote approvals to move a proposal to the voting phase and the least number of invalidation claims required to void a proposal. Minimum Days for Discussion / Voting: The poster of the proposal may specify that the discussion phase and the voting phase remain open for no fewer than this amount of days. If the proposal does not include a set number of days for discussion and voting then the minimum number of days is the default. Maximum Days for Discussion: The poster of the proposal may specify that the discussion phase and the voting phase remain open for no more than this number of days. Minimum Days Before New Proposal After Failure: This requirement determines how soon a new proposal can be given on a topic that has either failed to pass after a vote, didn't receive enough vote approvals, or was determined to be invalid. The justification of this requirement is to prevent members from continually proposing a change until it passes. This applies to individual changes grouped together in a proposal. For example, if a member makes a proposal to change X, Y and Z and that the proposal does not pass then X, Y, or Z may not appear in future proposals by this member until the minimum number of days have passed. b. Requirements By Type Member Recruitment: This is for proposals on whether a new member should be brought into the clan or not. Note: All new recruits, including server admins, must have an accepted proposal according to this voting system. Minimum Vote Approvals / invalidations: 2 Minimum Days for discussion / voting: 3 Maximum Days for discussion / voting: 10 Minimum Days Before New Proposal After Failure: 14 Member Termination This type of proposal removes a current member from the clan. Minimum Vote Approvals / invalidations: 5 Minimum Days for discussion / voting: 2 Maximum Days for discussion / voting: 10 Minimum Days Before New Proposal After Failure: 7 Policy Change These requirements apply to all clan policy changes. Minimum Vote Approvals / invalidations: 3 Minimum Days for discussion / voting: 5 Maximum Days for discussion / voting: 14 Minimum Days Before New Proposal After Failure: 7 c. Prohibited Proposals All proposed changes should be in the spirit of improving the clan and our community; however, some topics which may be positive are not appropriate for this voting system. There are also domains in which this voting system does not have any influence or power. Proposed changes of prohibited topics, even if properly discussed and voted upon, will not become effective. 1. Special Interest Policy may not be implemented that gives a specific person elevated control or influence in the social clan. Preserving the democratic spirit of the clan and giving all clan members equal responsibility and access to all clan functions should be taken into account with all votes. 2. Server Operation The focus of the FT clan is both social and competitive. Server and website operation can not be determined by the community clan voting system. 3. Clan Scope Proposals may not be made that go beyond the scope of clan operation. If a proposal does not deal with clan membership, policy, or function then it is not valid. 4. Game Play No proposals may abridge how social clan members play CS:S. Considering that server rules ultimately define how we are privileged to play CS:S then it is impossible for a proposal to usurp the authority of server operators. -- Did anyone make it this far? If so, please us know what you think of it.
Edited Mon Oct 16 2006, 04:09AM
|
||
| Back to top |
|
||
| BuBBLe GooSe |
|
||
The Original MilfHunter
Registered Member #163
Joined: Mon Mar 06 2006, 02:24PMPosts: 1592 |
Sup Sup. Thats a nice post man. I like how this system would allow each member equal opportunity and equal say. Allow me to do a mock trial run of it and let me know if Im on point, or if I managed to bugger it up. Here's a hypothetical situation... I begin a post calling for a clan member's removal. I state my purpose... "Joe" is a douche! He intentionally TK's me every single time I join, he uses racial slurs every 2 seconds, he hacks(lol), he mic spams and he is detremental to the community as a whole. When he posts on the forums, he makes it a point to drop 'N-Bombs" as every second word. So as the initial poster, I determine that the discussion would remain open for a max of 5 days, with at least 5 approvals needed before it can go to a final vote. Now the discussion period opens up and "Tim" states that he has witnessed these events as well. He approves...and so on...and after the 5 days, there are actually 12 approvals. Joe was evidently a huge asswipe. (Question 1.> What if the required 5 approvals were given after only 2 days of discussion? Could a vote thread then be opened up or would we have to wait out the full 5 days?) With that, I start a new thread within the 48 hours, concerning the vote whereby, (given such an overwhelming response) this "polling station" remains open for only 2 days. (As per the stipulated minimum. Question 2.> Do the discussion days have to be equivalent to the voting days ie: 5 and 5, or can it be a varied combination of max and mins like the 5 and 2?) After 2 days the votes are counted with 80% saying that "Joe" should be gone. Hence, "Joe" is taken out back and shitkicked.  I think I got it right. Question 3.> Just to clarify, in the "Polling Station aka Voting Thread" is it going to be the push button thingy at the top of the page or Fetus' suggestion of typing a response ie: 'I Vote YES!!'? I think its the 'Fetal Position' but just to be sure... Question 4.> 'On Recruitment' How do one of these threads get started? Is it up to a FT member to post a thread concerning a wannabe inductee? Do prospective members post in a general or 'recruit specific' marked forum and then copy/pasted into the member's section to initiate teh discussion period? Regardless, I'd like to see a firm set of time restraints on the issue of recruits. Keep the minimum 2 approvals, but limit the number of discussion and voting days, to ensure objectivity throughout. Because if a member is trying to get his friend in, of course he'll post the minimum number of approvals (2), but he might opt to do the max number of discussion and voting days, so that his friend could play a lot more, go around to all the servers and kiss every FT persons ass just to garner a bunch of votes in the voting phase. I can't see why this area would need the option to have varied time allotments. Sure, its quite evident why say a "policy change" thread may require more time for discussion and vote, given the magnitude of the decision, but to keep things as level as possible and not to show favoritism, maybe having a default time stipulation on the issue of recruitment would be key. Unless of course, I overlooked something, like I usually do. Question 5.> Using the hypothetical situation above regarding "Joe", say during the voting, it came back as a tie? Say 6 votes yes, 6 votes no... whats next? But yeah, this system is definitly sweet! I see a lot of time and effort has been put into it, and I can't wait to have it going at full steam. This system will allow for everyone to voice their equal say, and will allow things to be handled in a democratic and timely fashion. Big Ups Alex, good goin! 
|
||
| Back to top |
|
||
| alcosatz |
|
||
|
FT Classic Op
Registered Member #39
Joined: Fri Dec 02 2005, 10:30PM Posts: 1545 |
FIrst off, let me say that I like this protocol of providing numbered questions, Goose. It makes it easier for me to make short posts although I guess it depends on the definition of "short posts." It also makes it easier for others to follow the discussion, I think. Good work! I'm pretty hammered but let me whore some A's to your Q's: 1. This is an awesome question about expediting the discussion phase! There will definitely be proposals that are obvious winners and there is no sense in holding up a vote if it appears that there is overwhelming support for the proposal. What if we say that if double the number of required vote approvals is given then the proposal may be put to a vote immediately? 2. No, the discussion limit vs. vote limit can be varied. If the poster sees that there is overwhelming support for the proposal during or after the discussion phase then the minimum amount of days for the actual vote is a good idea -- this sort of ties into my answer to questions one and four. 3. No "push button" forum poll will be used because we don't get timestamps on the votes and a lack of timestamps would make all of the expiration rules open to manipulation. Votes have to be cast as forum posts so we know who voted for what and at what time. 4. If a member is trying to get his asshat friend in, and they both have the patience to wait the max amount of time, then that's awesome. This gives all the other legit members a chance to comment on what a dick the potential recruit is during the discussion phase, and more time for all voters to read what a cocksmack this guy is based on the comments made during the discussion phase when (or if) we actually get to vote. I know you're saying the asshole friend could be sugar-coated during the discussion phase and choose to be a prick as soon as he's voted in, but seriously... who's going to wait the max amount of time just to get a termination vote called on him within hours of his acceptance? I have a suspicion that those who collude to get sketchy friends in and opt for the max amount of time will probably fuck up somewhere along the line. Also, a longer amount of time would typically indicate (to me at least) that the poster predicts much discussion or an amount of uncertainty about the legitamcy of the proposal. Those who want to "pull a fast one" will usually opt for the smallest discussion/voting windows and, as responsible voters, if no one knows the potential clan member then we'll either not provide vote approvals or vote "no" if it actually gets to a vote because we have no basis to accept a total stranger. 5. I completely forgot to include this. Thanks for reminding me! I originally suggested that the poster gets to provide the tie-breaking vote (which would almost always be "yes"). This seems to be the only logical way to handle a tie-break since we're (hopefully!) trying to avoid exclusive groups of people to handle such things. Grrr... it's 5AM again and I'm posting on forums.... |
||
| Back to top |
|
||
| Pockyninja |
|
||
Ruler of all that is pocky
Registered Member #28
Joined: Mon Nov 28 2005, 11:17PMPosts: 704 |
wow that must have taken a lot of time to write. I thnk it's pritty good | ||
| Back to top |
|
||
| aborted fetus |
|
||
The All-Cum Diet
Registered Member #47
Joined: Mon Dec 05 2005, 04:55PMPosts: 1888 |
This all looks and sounds great to me. I'm sure I can speak for us all, alexh, when I say thanks for taking the time and effort to make that post. There is one thing I would like to add with regard to the voting system. Though it may seem obvious, we need to have a rule that states an individual must have logged in to vote and may not post anonymously. Even though we can find out who it was that placed the vote, we should make the site admins' lives as easy as possible. Aside from that, everything looks great! |
||
| Back to top |
|
||
| alcosatz |
|
||
|
FT Classic Op
Registered Member #39
Joined: Fri Dec 02 2005, 10:30PM Posts: 1545 |
No problem -- it took a while, and it's not perfect... but we can always vote to change it later. I'd like to give this more time for discussion, but I also think it is important we give this plan a try and just go for it. I will be out of town from Wednesday until Sunday so someone else will get to start off the first discussion and vote. This is just the way I'd like to see this turn out. I'll leave this thread open in case others do want to discuss it, and encourage others to start making proposals! |
||
| Back to top |
|
||
Powered by e107 Forum System
|
|