Zoe ,'The Train Job'
A thread to discuss naming threads, board policy, new thread suggestions, and anything else that has to do with board administration and maintenance. Guaranteed to include lively debate and polls. Natter discouraged, but not deleted.
Current Stompy Feet: ita, Jon B, DXMachina, P.M. Marcontell, Liese S., amych
But, now billytea and Gar are talking about how many people need to be interested in the issue before we can formally discuss it in the (not yet voted on) issues thread. I think we are getting way ahead of ourselves with that.
I'm good with getting the core stuff voted on first.
Like Cindy said, let's leave some things to the discretion and good sense of the board when the time comes.
Exactly. Cindy's original item was very specific. I'm trying to make it less so. No need to get into the definition of "holiday" right now, but I'd like to see an acknowledgement that the time periods can be extended in certain instances.
None of my blithering has anything to do with Cindy's suggestion. Really, all it needs is a volunteer, and then I can set up an e-mail forward to their e-mail addy, someone can note it in press, and we're off.
I am a freak. Therefore I will count votes.
Cindy - I do think we may need to refine the proposal a bit before voting. I know you and Hec are impatient to move on this - but it does seem that quorum is being used in two ways - number of votes needed for it to pass, vs. number needed to discuss -with some supporting one, some supporting the other and some supporting neither.
ita - the proposal has 4 days discussion period built into it, and 3 days voting period.
Sophia, does this help on the quorum thing?... First quorum issue is regarding voting. Do we need a minimum number of Buffistas voting, to enact whatever it is we just voted on. So say I asked that the discussion thread be opened so that we could vote on whether or not we require Gar to post while wearing an "I love W" button. If only 3 people show up to vote, and two of us vote "yes", is that enough to require Gar to wear the "I love W" button. If we want a quorum of Buffistas voting, it's not enough. If we only care that the majority of those interested approved the measure, it's buttons for Gar.
Gar and billytea are saying that perhaps we need at least a minimum number of people to open up the discussion thread, never mind voting.
No need to get into the definition of "holiday" right now, but I'd like to see an acknowledgement that the time periods can be extended in certain instances.
Jon - I agree with that and will add wording to that effect to the motion. I'll then repost it.
Thanks Cindy.
the proposal has 4 days discussion period built into it, and 3 days voting period.
Sorry -- I was being completely non sequiturish and reacting to Billytea's 24 hour suggestion. However, since my urge is to get unsupported decisions put away for six months or more, even 24 minutes is fine by me, although incredibly unfair.
vote@buffistas.org now points to your profile address, jengod.
Includes revisions but may still be a draft
I move we hold our initial vote (to see whether or not we'll vote) starting at 12:00am Eastern Time (board time) Wednesday and continuing through until the end of Friday (12:00am Eastern Time, Saturday). Included in this motion are the following items to be included in the vote.
A yes vote on this item signifies the voter agrees that we should create a voting system for community decisions that do not require immediate action.
Exemptions: Thread naming, disciplinary action against trolls (although the process itself could come up for a vote at some point) and tasks currently performed by Stompy Feet, including but not limited to board maintenance.
A no vote on this item signifies that the voter does not agree to a voting process to determine the community's will as it pertains to community decisions.
A yes vote on this item signifies the voter wants a minimum* number of community members voting on any item in order for the vote to count.
A no vote on this item signifies the voter wants implemented the decision of the majority** of voters who participated, regardless of the number of total votes.
A yes vote on this item signifies the voter agrees that a simple majority vote is sufficient to enact changes for any issue brought up for vote.
If this item passes, we will hold a discussion and vote on how to handle ties. If it doesn't pass, the point is moot.
Regarless, this item does not affect the outcome of Item 2. In other words, if people vote in favor of requiring a quorum on any issue, the quorum requirement will still stand and the smallest majority that would allow an initiative to be voted in would equal [one half + one] of the votes needed for the quorum.
A no vote on this item signifies the voter does not think a simple majority is sufficient to enact change for any initiative brought up for vote, and instead wants a higher majority.
If item is voted down, the size of the higher majority required will be put up for a separate vote.
A yes vote on this item signifies the voter agrees that a full week's time is sufficient to discuss the issue. The week would be broken down thusly: Discussion: Days 1, 2, 3, and 4. Voting: Days 5, 6, 7. NOTE - added on edit *** When there is a conflict for major holidays (to be defined) we will make accomodations (to be defined) as needed. ***
A no vote on this item signifies that the voter doesn't agree with this timetable and is requesting that the community continue to discuss timetables.
------
* for Item 2: Quorum, yes vote: the minimum number will be a number to be determined by the community in a subsequent vote, if item 2 is voted in.
** for Item 2: Quorum, no vote: "majority" is a percentage to be determined by the community in a subsequent vote.
-------
Any glaring errors? The wording may need refining, but I think it's time to fish or cut bait on voting, because we're getting bogged down in other issues again -- issues that would be best served by having some sort of decision making process in place, whether that process involves voting or me picking numbers out of my arse.
---------------------
Attention: The following item has been removed from the motion. I am preserving the text below, on the very-off chance that someone has a valid reason to reinstate it. But for now, I emend my motion to include only the first 4 items.
*************************************
THE FOLLOWING ITEM HAS BEEN DELETED FROM THE MOTION
A yes vote on this item signifies the voter agrees to cast votes via email until such time as a poll function can be added to the Buffistas.org site.
A no vote on this item signifies the voter does not agree to vote via email.
If a voter has voted "no" on item one, it is still recommended he vote on item five, with the assumption that item 1 will probably pass.