Tbert's law - requesting some clarification. :)
Posted: Tue Jul 17, 2007 4:53 pm
I know the official discussion has closed, but i was hoping Tbert could clarify or straighten some things out for me so i can vote yes for this proposal as well.
How is this decided wether or not it is necessary? I think it would be good to have some rules for this.An X-Game could be run, with the proposal implemented, if it is deemed necessary by the people in the thread.
I don't think it is a good idea to have the option of changing the period in which can be voted during the actual vote. That could lead to a vote being extend or not extend depending on if the results is what is expected by the moderator. It is better to have the moderator set a time frame (how long is up to his discretion) and when it ends, it ends, no extensions.A week is given for votes, with the possibility of extension to two weeks if votes are still trickling in after a week.
This is the main part why i voted no. Too many people who can decide on what should happen with the discussion and when, how and on what should be voted. This should be one person and one person only, the moderator. If the moderator is not available the back up moderator (also elected) can step in. Otherwise we will still have tons of threads with votes start constantly popping up with nobody really regulating them.The main regulators of the discussion will be the forum moderators and the original creator of the proposal (myself, in this case). They have the power to stop the discussion and start the vote, dependent on how active the discussion is. They also have the power to lock the discussion thread while voting is going on to avoid people trying to change the proposal after the vote starts. The final power they have is regulating the length of the voting, which, like discussion, depends on how active the voting thread is.