| Fish Tank Clan :: Forums :: Fish Tank Clan :: FT Community Clan |
|
« Previous topic | Next topic » |
| Two-Stage Proposals | ||
| Author | Post | ||
| alcosatz |
|
||
FT Classic Op
Registered Member #39
Joined: Fri Dec 02 2005, 10:30PMPosts: 1545 |
Hopefully this thread will draw some attention away the fireworks elsewhere, and stoke some positive discussion about how to avoid common problems with proposals, especially terminations. I suggest we consider the costs and benefits of going back to a previous method of handling proposals by splitting them into two phases: discussion and voting. The discussion phase gives members time to share their opinions and consider issues and ideas raised by fellow clan members. The benefit of this is that it gives voters a better chance to make an informed decision about a proposal when it reaches the voting phase. This was a part of the original FTCC voting system from 2006. The biggest complaint was that the procedure was too complicated. It did seem to stifle change because many people did not handle proposals within the constraints of the voting system, got flamed for bungling the proposal, and it lead to proposals being a minefield with many possibilities to make mistakes and have a proposal get invalidated. I think if we avoid all the wacky time constraints that the old process had and go with the more relaxed approach of the current system we can make this work. Ironic enough, you can consider this thread as a prototype of a two stage system because I'm not interested in voting yet--I want to talk about it first and, with (hopefully constructive) criticism from other members, put it to a vote. Do you think this is even worth exploring? What is a reasonable outline for timing? The current system is simply 6 days of mixed voting/discussion. Does 3 days of discussion and 3 days of voting sound reasonable? Again, I'm looking forward to some positive discussion so we can take a break from other, less savory topics. 
|
||
| Back to top |
|
||
| kd. |
|
||
♥ (✿◠‿◠) ♥
Registered Member #75
Joined: Sat Dec 17 2005, 08:51PMPosts: 3128 |
I like it, but I think some of the discussion might float on into the voting part if it doesn't get done in the discussion thread. Maybe leave the discussion open after the voting one starts, and don't allow discussion in the voting thread? |
||
| Back to top |
|
||
| [FT](.)(.)'s a |
|
||
[FT](.)(.)\\\\(.)'s a](/media/avatar/100x0/upload/css_spray.1189739279.jpg)
Registered Member #355
Joined: Sun Jul 23 2006, 06:38AMPosts: 244 |
I think this is a better way of going about it. Goose and wild made some good points although it seemed more about current politics instead of FT lol (I love yall guys) but one main issue is that a few people seem to gang up on others when more popular members make a termination or vote for new or old members. I think only facts should be the main thing we follow and this is the best way to get the facts strait before a actual vote takes place. | ||
| Back to top |
|
||
| Knightrider |
|
||
Meteor 2016
Registered Member #316
Joined: Mon Jun 26 2006, 09:14PMPosts: 3503 |
This would also end a mass confusion that seems to go on in voting threads. Most of the votes are clunky messes. So I agree in favor of the two part discussion. However, I kind of grown fond of the 6 day rule. Maybe the discussion 3 days and the voting 6? I've noticed that some members are late on the voting past 3 days, so more votes = better. I'm not sure if you mentioned that in your post or not, but that's my idea. | ||
| Back to top |
|
||
| GOD. |
|
||
Registered Member #381
Joined: Wed Aug 09 2006, 08:21PMPosts: 405 |
the old voting system invalidated my nomination  DAMN TIME CONTSTRAINTS! get rid of time constraints and it will be great. |
||
| Back to top |
|
||
| alcosatz |
|
||
|
FT Classic Op
Registered Member #39
Joined: Fri Dec 02 2005, 10:30PM Posts: 1545 |
I really like the idea of keeping the discussion phase open, kd. Certainly something to consider. Yeah, tits, I was thinking the same thing about people ganging up on each other. Tempers may run a little cooler if there is less room for intimidation while votes are being cast. It may also make sense to say that votes may ONLY consist of 'yes' or 'no' in the vote thread. Night, I suppose the time limits on the phases could be tweakable. Edited Tue Oct 30 2007, 03:03AM |
||
| Back to top |
|
||
| [FT](.)(.)'s a |
|
||
|
[FT](.)(.)\\\\
Registered Member #355
Joined: Sun Jul 23 2006, 06:38AM Posts: 244 |
Alcohol-Powered wrote ... I agree the voting phase should only be yes or no and nothing else while the discussion is just that a discussion. 3 days for both is great and a good ideal, and keeps the tank from becoming a reality show from TV lol. The discussion phase would of kept out a few members because the facts would be more prevalent instead of the propaganda that gets tossed around in most votes.
Edited Tue Oct 30 2007, 03:10AM
I really like the idea of keeping the discussion phase open, kd. Certainly something to consider. Yeah, tits, I was thinking the same thing about people ganging up on each other. Tempers may run a little cooler if there is less room for intimidation while votes are being cast. It may also make sense to say that votes may ONLY consist of 'yes' or 'no' in the vote thread. Night, I suppose the time limits on the phases could be tweakable. |
||
| Back to top |
|
||
| Madvillain |
|
||
Registered Member #445
Joined: Sun Oct 01 2006, 11:42PMPosts: 2233 |
yup, seems like a strong idea, however the discussion and voting lengths of 3 days each seems like they might pose some problems. it will still have the time constraint as the previous voting system and might take more than 3 days for a discussion and/or voting system to fully come to a close. | ||
| Back to top |
|
||
| Zero |
|
||
I want to fuck your hand.
Registered Member #571
Joined: Thu Feb 15 2007, 09:59PMPosts: 2809 |
For the longest time, I was confused as hell as to what the "discussion" period of voting was. Its in our rules, but I never saw anybody follow it, so I figured no one did it anymore. But right when I got into the clan, I was confused as to whether I should nom people without discussing it first, whether you guys had a chat room, in ventrillo, or where ever, I just simply wasnt invited I thought  Id like to see this back in Action. But it wouldnt be fair to discuss it for a short ammount of time, and have people miss the discussion, and then like Knight said have the 6 day rule. The ratio should be about 1:1 for however many days we have it set for. I say 4-5 would be good. Probably 5. Also, could we have a seperate PRIVATE forum for these discussions, so that people not in the clan couldnt even look in this forum. Becasue I dont know about everyone else, but I dont think some people should be able to read the discussions. Also if I was a new member, I wouldnt even want to see what people were saying about me. This would also *somewhat* reduce public bullying and flaming. my two cents thus far. Ive always been completely perplexed as to what the discussion period was, and if we still did it haha. I feel dumb as hell, but now I would like for it to once again be implemented. If I think of anything else, ill post it.
|
||
| Back to top |
|
||
| [FT](.)(.)'s a |
|
||
|
[FT](.)(.)\\\\
Registered Member #355
Joined: Sun Jul 23 2006, 06:38AM Posts: 244 |
My opinion: who wants to wait weeks for a vote or duscussion we need to get to the point of things instead of have a reality based FT clan, tv show style. Seriously we are smart enough to make a decision in 3to3. Any longer then that will make the process corny and lame. The reason it was gone before was because it took to long and became pointless after a few weeks of talking about something simple as hi and/or bye to the clan. If the discussion takes longer then 3 days then cool but it shouldn't be longer unless the situation makes it that way. Basically it should be on a case by case basis, but the overall rule should be 3 days for both. Edited Tue Oct 30 2007, 03:36AM | ||
| Back to top |
|
||
Powered by e107 Forum System
|
|