board77

The Last Homely Site on the Web

VOTING OVER: Interim Vote on Multiple Screen Names

Post Reply   Page 2 of 4  [ 69 posts ]
Jump to page « 1 2 3 4 »
Author Message
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 21 May , 2005 7:30 pm
Offline
 
Posts: 5170
Joined: Thu 10 Feb , 2005 6:53 pm
Contact: Website
 
truehobbit wrote:
I think the ballot covers all things, but I wonder whether we might end up with a mixed result, if all these are voted on separately.

We might end up having secondary IDs allowed in ToE and disallowed in Made in Dale
If in fact a majority of committee members wanted to let secondary IDs in ToE but a majority did not want to allow them in the Made in Dale forum, then that would be the appropriate result, regardless of what individuals thought. But I don't think that is very likely.
Quote:
allowed in the Bike Racks and disallowed in Outside (which is really the same, so I'm wondering if 8 and 14 aren't the same, too?),
I was wondering who was going to point this out. ;) They are not really exactly the same, and I think there is value to having both of them. I think including the Outside forums in the litany of questions regarding which forums secondary IDs should be prohibited from posting in, but I also think that there should be a question about whether secondary IDs should have the right to participate in discussions in the bike racks as part of the litany of questions regarding what roles they are not allowed to be used for. And frankly if the votes on the two questions were to contradict each other it would be a firm indication that the vote was not validly conducted.


Top
Profile Quote
truehobbit
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 21 May , 2005 7:58 pm
WYSIWYG
Offline
 
Posts: 3228
Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 6:37 pm
Location: wherever
 
I don't think it's likely either, and I agree if that's what people want, we'd have to have it - but it would be ridiculously complicated, IMO.
Quote:
I was wondering who was going to point this out. ;)
Hehe, your resident nitpick at your service! :D

Hmmmh, you mean, it would show people didn't think about the ballot properly? But does that mean we'd repeat the vote in case of such a result, assuming that they didn't think enough?
Or would we have to have a rule saying you'll somehow have to find a way to participate in a bike racks discussion without posting in Outside? ;)

_________________

From our key principles:

We listen to one another, make good-faith efforts to understand one another, and we treat one another respectfully at all times.


Top
Profile Quote
Cerin
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 21 May , 2005 8:03 pm
Thanks to Holby
Offline
 
Posts: 2039
Joined: Sat 26 Feb , 2005 4:02 pm
 
Wow, this makes so much more sense to me now. Thanks, Voronwe!

For Question 3., do you want to add the choices

A. I agree with this statement.
B. I do not agree with this satement.


What I'd like to do is start the vote at 7:00 a.m. GMT tomorrow morning and leave it open for 36 hours to make sure that all of the committee members have an opportunity to vote.
Did we find that 24 hours wasn't enough? (No big deal, whatever you decide is ok with me.)

Jnyusa wrote:
(3)
• Secondary ID's may not post in the Bike Racks
• Secondary ID's may post in the Bike Racks if it was the secondary ID that was involved in the dispute.
It appears this choice didn't make it onto the ballot? I think I might favor allowing secondary IDs to post in Bike Racks IF and only if it was that name that had been involved in the interaction that went to Bike Racks. But I don't think I could vote for it if that wasn't specified. So could Question 14 read thus:


Question 14. Please choose one of the following statements:

A. Secondary screen names may not participate in Bike Rack discussions.
B. Secondary screen names may participate in Bike Rack discussions.
C. Secondary screen names may participate in Bike Racks IF it was the secondary screen name that was involved in the interaction that was moved to Bike Racks.

(Btw, I prefer the shorter wording, 'may post in Bike Racks'.)

Edit

I'm really torn over the question of secondary IDs in ToE. There seem to be compelling reasons either way. I would be interested in hearing from ToE posters, as to how they feel about it.

Last edited by Cerin on Sat 21 May , 2005 8:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
Profile Quote
IdylleSeethes
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 21 May , 2005 8:11 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 911
Joined: Fri 11 Mar , 2005 5:10 pm
Location: Bretesche
 
Voronwe,

All of the "B"s use "satement" instead of "statement".

The rest is fine, assuming Cerin's question 14 issue is resolved.

_________________

Idylle in exile: the view over the laptop on a bad day
[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 21 May , 2005 8:23 pm
Offline
 
Posts: 5170
Joined: Thu 10 Feb , 2005 6:53 pm
Contact: Website
 
Quote:
Question 14. Please choose one of the following statements:

A. Secondary screen names may not participate in Bike Rack discussions.
B. Secondary screen names may participate in Bike Rack discussions.
C. Secondary screen names may participate in Bike Racks IF it was the secondary screen name that was involved in the interaction that was moved to Bike Racks.
Sorry. Missed this. I will make this change. I will also delete question 8 because there could be a valid contradiction between prohibiting Sec. IDs from posting in the Outside Forums but allowing secondary names to participate in Bike Racks discussions if it were the secondary name involved in the interaction. That will then eliminate Hobby's questions about what will happen if there is a contradiction.

I will fix the Satements. :roll:

Laureanna has raised a question in the business forum thread about Question 1, and I have addressed it there. As relevant to this ballot, she suggested that the following be added as an additional choice to Question 1:
Quote:
C. Members are not limited to one screen name, but are limited to one vote per member for each ballot in which they are entitled participate. Posting under the guise a secondary screen name does not relieve a member of his/her rights and responsibilities of Board77 membership.
I responded as follows:
Quote:
Thanks, laureanna. I'm glad you are still taking an interest in this process.

Though it is not entirely clear, I assume that what you are proposing is that if the committee were to choose that choice, it would override any of the restrictions on secondary forums that we would be voting on in Part II?

Is that correct?
I have no problem with adding this choice, so long as it is sufficiently clear what we are voting on.


Top
Profile Quote
Cerin
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 21 May , 2005 9:04 pm
Thanks to Holby
Offline
 
Posts: 2039
Joined: Sat 26 Feb , 2005 4:02 pm
 
Voronwe_the_Faithful wrote:
I have no problem with adding this choice, so long as it is sufficiently clear what we are voting on.
I'm afraid it isn't clear to me. It seems redundant to option B. (Let's see what Laureanna says in response to your request for clarification.)

I wonder if Question 1:B should read, "subject to the conditions determined, etc." (rather than "restrictions")?


Top
Profile Quote
Jnyusa
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 21 May , 2005 9:41 pm
One of the Bronte Sisters
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5107
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 8:54 am
Location: In Situ
 
First of all, the first sentence of laureanna's suggestion is no different from the first question already on the ballot.

Secondly, laureanna offered an entire article for us to consider, not just one sentence:

C. Members are not limited to one screen name, but are limited to one vote per member for each ballot in which they are entitled participate. Posting under the guise a secondary screen name does not relieve a member of his/her rights and responsibilities of Board77 membership.

(The following would go later in the Membership rights/responsibilities text.)

A member may use a secondary ID as a vehicle for light or serious RP or other obviously fictional creativity, as appropriate.

A member may wish to post extremely private/sensitive matters on our public message board using an alternate screen name. As a courtesy, the member should mention that this is a an alternate screen name and not a new person. Others should strive to protect that anonymity, but it cannot be guarranteed.

In keeping with Board77 levels of courtesy, secondary screen names may not be used to lie, injure, appear to inflate one side of an argument, spam, cast multiple votes, or carry on an extended conversation with oneself.

B77 reserves the right, through future vote of the membership, to limit or eliminate secondary IDs, if they become a routine source of abuse.


Voronwe,

I leave it up to you, because I'll be here to vote whenever we hold the vote, but I would really suggest putting multiple screen names to a NOW vs LATER vote before we spend any more time trying to refine language, decide which forum to allow them in, etc.

Jn

_________________

"All things considered, I'd rather be in Philadelphia."
Epigraph on the tombstone of W.C. Fields.


Top
Profile Quote
truehobbit
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 21 May , 2005 11:19 pm
WYSIWYG
Offline
 
Posts: 3228
Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 6:37 pm
Location: wherever
 
Cerin wrote:
I think I might favor allowing secondary IDs to post in Bike Racks IF and only if it was that name that had been involved in the interaction that went to Bike Racks. But I don't think I could vote for it if that wasn't specified. So could Question 14 read thus:


Question 14. Please choose one of the following statements:

A. Secondary screen names may not participate in Bike Rack discussions.
B. Secondary screen names may participate in Bike Rack discussions.
C. Secondary screen names may participate in Bike Racks IF it was the secondary screen name that was involved in the interaction that was moved to Bike Racks.
It's not that I'm opposed to the option, because I don't think it would do any harm, but could someone explain to me why we would want to talk to someone's secondary rather than their first ID, when that person was involved under their secondary ID? IMO, this is like treating them as if they were different persons!

_________________

From our key principles:

We listen to one another, make good-faith efforts to understand one another, and we treat one another respectfully at all times.


Top
Profile Quote
Primula_Baggins
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 21 May , 2005 11:42 pm
Living in hope
Offline
 
Posts: 7291
Joined: Sat 29 Jan , 2005 5:54 pm
Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
 
Friends, I just posted this in the multiple screen names thread in Business:
Primula_Baggins wrote:
I need to get serious for a moment.

I've been looking back at this discussion, here and in the Jury Room, and I'm getting concerned. We were moving ahead very well on the charter, and that has come almost to a stop.

What I realize is that we're trying to sort out a very complex issue that really does not need to be sorted out now. In fact, I honestly think we can do a better job of it later, after opening, with the input of new members and with most of the turmoil behind us.

I think we should recover our momentum and get back to what I thought was the original plan—get through the essentials of the charter that the members have said they want in place before we open, and open as soon as that is true. I honestly hope that without further delays this could happen as early as next month.

We're giving a disproportionate amount of time to something that is, for most of us, a side issue. I know that it is deeply important to some members; but opening is deeply important to the vast majority, and that's what we're delaying here.

And it's a complex issue. Absorbing. I know it's distracted me, considering all the ramifications of all the possibilities.

But in the context of the charter, it's a side issue.

I would like to call for a vote in the convention: basically, do we finish this discussion now, or do we use the language already in place, move on, and revisit the issue once our major deadline has passed and we are open?

All of us are busy, all of us have limited time, and as I have bored everyone silly with pointing out, I strongly believe that delaying our opening is harmful to this board. At this point we are not doing justice to our task of moving the charter along; nor are we doing justice to this one issue.

Let's vote on whether to set it aside, for now, and get through the business that stands between us and opening.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Cerin
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 21 May , 2005 11:51 pm
Thanks to Holby
Offline
 
Posts: 2039
Joined: Sat 26 Feb , 2005 4:02 pm
 
So Prim, you're saying, vote immediately on whether to present the Charter with the one ID only provision, and if one ID only for now passes, put aside the rest of the ballot Voronwe has prepared until a later date?


Hobby, this is what I was thinking. Suppose you get into some kind of spirited side discussion with an alternate screen name that doesn't really warrant a thread of its own, but is derailing another thread, say in Turf. Those two could take it to Bike Racks, and why not just continue the discussion as they were, using the screen names that were being used?


Top
Profile Quote
Primula_Baggins
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 22 May , 2005 12:02 am
Living in hope
Offline
 
Posts: 7291
Joined: Sat 29 Jan , 2005 5:54 pm
Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
 
That is what I'm proposing, Cerin—with the clear understanding that this matter will be taken up again at that later date.

I just don't think we're close to solving it yet, and I just don't think it's the best use of our time right now. But I don't want to see this discussion abandoned completely—just suspended for a matter of weeks until we've passed the next milestone.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Holbytla
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 22 May , 2005 12:09 am
Grumpy cuz I can be
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 6642
Joined: Thu 09 Dec , 2004 3:07 am
 
I was under the assumption that we were very close to having language we could vote on. If that isn't true then we can wait I guess.
Of course there are plenty of other obstacles to hurdle as well.
I am not convinced at all we could open in a month. Two maybe, but not one.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Primula_Baggins
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 22 May , 2005 12:20 am
Living in hope
Offline
 
Posts: 7291
Joined: Sat 29 Jan , 2005 5:54 pm
Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
 
Maybe not in a month, but I don't want to let things slide.

And I don't sense we're close to final language—things keep ramifying, new suggestions keep being made, and they're all points well worth discussing, and so we do. . . .

There is nothing here that can't wait a while. It won't do any harm, and I don't mean any disrespect to the issue by proposing it.

I just think our obligation is to the membership at large, and what they've just voted for is to open the board once we finish enough of the charter. I think we should do that and return to this. I think at least we should vote on whether to do so.

If the majority of the committee wants to finish this point here and now, before we address the other fifteen points in Article 2, I will shut up and try to help make it happen. :)

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
IdylleSeethes
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 22 May , 2005 1:33 am
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 911
Joined: Fri 11 Mar , 2005 5:10 pm
Location: Bretesche
 
At the moment, I agree with both sides of the NOW/LATER discussion. It is totally dependent on how close the board is to a consensus. The level of discussion peaked on the 18th. There have been about 16 posts today, but not much new. Prim's post has gotten no reaction. It may be building up for an explosion, but it seems tomorrow may be a good day to decide.

_________________

Idylle in exile: the view over the laptop on a bad day
[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 22 May , 2005 2:16 am
Offline
 
Posts: 5170
Joined: Thu 10 Feb , 2005 6:53 pm
Contact: Website
 
I see no reason why we can't move forward with the vote as planned. I will added Laureanna suggested choice, make the other necessary edits, and begin the vote in four and half hours or so.


Top
Profile Quote
Primula_Baggins
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 22 May , 2005 2:27 am
Living in hope
Offline
 
Posts: 7291
Joined: Sat 29 Jan , 2005 5:54 pm
Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
 
If we're ready to settle it, then by all means let's do so. I have no problem with that.

I'm not trying to be obstructionist—quite the opposite, in intention anyway. I apologize if I've disrupted things.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Jnyusa
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 22 May , 2005 3:08 am
One of the Bronte Sisters
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5107
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 8:54 am
Location: In Situ
 
I apologize if I've disrupted things.

I'm not going to let you take heat alone, Prim, if there is heat to be taken. I asked you to step in and move things along, just as I asked Voronwe not to spend more days discussing additional content until we know whether we need it or not. I thank both of you for taking this in hand and will be very happy to vote tomorrow with whatever ballot appears at the top of the thread.

Jn

_________________

"All things considered, I'd rather be in Philadelphia."
Epigraph on the tombstone of W.C. Fields.


Top
Profile Quote
Holbytla
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 22 May , 2005 4:10 am
Grumpy cuz I can be
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 6642
Joined: Thu 09 Dec , 2004 3:07 am
 
Oh fer cryin out loud !
As if either of you two need to be taking heat for anything you have done regarding the Convention.
big fat :roll:
Your points are well taken. :)
Whatever needs to have been said at this point has most likely been said. Let us vote and move on.
That goes for the other issues as well.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 22 May , 2005 4:20 am
Offline
 
Posts: 5170
Joined: Thu 10 Feb , 2005 6:53 pm
Contact: Website
 
Okay, I have posted what I consider to be the final ballot, barring some last minute catastrophe. I have added Laureanna's suggested choice as an option in Question 1, and I have tried to make it as clear as possible what voting for that option would mean.


Top
Profile Quote
Holbytla
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 22 May , 2005 4:22 am
Grumpy cuz I can be
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 6642
Joined: Thu 09 Dec , 2004 3:07 am
 
Is voting now officially open?

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Display: Sort by: Direction:
Post Reply   Page 2 of 4  [ 69 posts ]
Return to “Threads of Historical Interest” | Jump to page « 1 2 3 4 »
Jump to: