Total Posts:26|Showing Posts:1-26
Jump to topic:

DDO Survey

1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2015 1:03:02 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
I conducted an anonymous survey with randomly selected people (I randomized a list of members and went down it as needed). These were the results - 30 members submitted answers.

1. Do you view the Presidency to be a position of any value?

17 members (56.67%) said "yes," 12 (40%) said "no," and 1 (3.33%) said "no opinion".

2. Explain your answer to #1.

Among those who answered "yes," a few said that no matter how useless it may seem and how inactive Juggle is, a representative is important. A few also said that it organizes community-building into being done by a respected member, vs. having random people do it - where people may not listen.

The "no"s tended to say that the mediator between the community and Juggle is now obsolete do to Juggle being inactive, and that community-building can be done by anyone.

3. What is the extent of your approval of the current moderation?

The results were 10/11/1 extremely/generally/slightly positive, 4 neutral, 1/3/0 extremely/generally/slightly negative. (33.33%/36.67%/3.33%, 13.33%, 3.33%/10%/0%)

4. How would you improve moderation, if you believe it needs improvement?

Those that suggested improvement said things such as listening to the community more in regards to policy and bans, being stricter towards toxic members and trolls, sub moderation in each forum, reforming poll moderation to remove inappropriate content quicker, giving more power to the voting moderator, increasing transparency, being harsher with harassment, and one person perhaps gave the best advice, which was: "less Jews" (there was a 50 character minimum).

5. Do you believe Airmax is too lenient in regards to banning?

10 (33.33%) said "yes," 13 (43.33%) said "no," and 7 (23.33%) said "no opinion."

6. Do you think that voting moderation is strict enough at the moment?

17 (56.67%) said "yes," 8 (26.67%) said "no," and 5 (16.67%) said "no opinion."

7. Do you think the mobile update has or will in the future decrease the frequency of your use of the site?

16 (53.33%) said "yes," 6 (20%) said "no," and 8 (26.67%) said "no opinion and/or not applicable."

8. Do you think the site is decreasing in terms of quality?

14 (46.67%) said "yes," 11 (36.67%) said "no," 1 (3.33%) said "no, I think its getting better," and 4 (13.33%) said "no opinion."

9. Have you have any (serious) thoughts about permanently leaving the site in the past month?

13 said (43.33%) "yes," and 17 (56.67%) said "no."

I was worried about that at first, because at first, the "yes" members were an excessive majority. That certainly changed later on.

---

Use this information and be informed.

I was particularly pleased to see the confidence in moderation, and also hope that they might use the information from the survey to further improve their regime, err...regulation. Note: even those that had an extremely positive view sometimes suggested ways to improve, so there may be some ways to go still, no matter how well-received the moderation is. 6 members said the moderation is perfect and fine as is.

I think that it says something that more members value the presidency than not. I must say, the "no"s are a very vocal minority - they make it seem like they're a large majority at times, from my view.

I think that the declining quality and serious thoughts about leaving were important too. This shows that many do actually think the site needs improvement, and steps to make that improvement may be necessary. Those who said "yes" to one question were more likely to say "yes" to the other, and vice versa. Let's make sure that we do not lose anybody.

Also, I think the mobile update thing was significant for not only the community, but also Juggle. People are being turned off by the mobile version, and it may and will reduce returning visits from non-members as well as turn away current members, which means negative things for their profits from the site.

Also, I should note that those involved with Presidential candidates and moderators were automatically excluded from participating, due to the nature of some of the questions.

Feel free to add to this matter.
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2015 2:08:10 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
By the way - to those who didn't respond and didn't take the survey - I closed it. I waited too long already. I was expecting it to be done hours before it was.
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
greatkitteh
Posts: 394
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2015 2:47:11 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/3/2015 1:03:02 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
I conducted an anonymous survey with randomly selected people (I randomized a list of members and went down it as needed). These were the results - 30 members submitted answers.

1. Do you view the Presidency to be a position of any value?

17 members (56.67%) said "yes," 12 (40%) said "no," and 1 (3.33%) said "no opinion".

2. Explain your answer to #1.

Among those who answered "yes," a few said that no matter how useless it may seem and how inactive Juggle is, a representative is important. A few also said that it organizes community-building into being done by a respected member, vs. having random people do it - where people may not listen.

The "no"s tended to say that the mediator between the community and Juggle is now obsolete do to Juggle being inactive, and that community-building can be done by anyone.

3. What is the extent of your approval of the current moderation?

The results were 10/11/1 extremely/generally/slightly positive, 4 neutral, 1/3/0 extremely/generally/slightly negative. (33.33%/36.67%/3.33%, 13.33%, 3.33%/10%/0%)

4. How would you improve moderation, if you believe it needs improvement?

Those that suggested improvement said things such as listening to the community more in regards to policy and bans, being stricter towards toxic members and trolls, sub moderation in each forum, reforming poll moderation to remove inappropriate content quicker, giving more power to the voting moderator, increasing transparency, being harsher with harassment, and one person perhaps gave the best advice, which was: "less Jews" (there was a 50 character minimum).

5. Do you believe Airmax is too lenient in regards to banning?

10 (33.33%) said "yes," 13 (43.33%) said "no," and 7 (23.33%) said "no opinion."

6. Do you think that voting moderation is strict enough at the moment?

17 (56.67%) said "yes," 8 (26.67%) said "no," and 5 (16.67%) said "no opinion."

7. Do you think the mobile update has or will in the future decrease the frequency of your use of the site?

16 (53.33%) said "yes," 6 (20%) said "no," and 8 (26.67%) said "no opinion and/or not applicable."

8. Do you think the site is decreasing in terms of quality?

14 (46.67%) said "yes," 11 (36.67%) said "no," 1 (3.33%) said "no, I think its getting better," and 4 (13.33%) said "no opinion."

9. Have you have any (serious) thoughts about permanently leaving the site in the past month?

13 said (43.33%) "yes," and 17 (56.67%) said "no."

I was worried about that at first, because at first, the "yes" members were an excessive majority. That certainly changed later on.

---

Use this information and be informed.

I was particularly pleased to see the confidence in moderation, and also hope that they might use the information from the survey to further improve their regime, err...regulation. Note: even those that had an extremely positive view sometimes suggested ways to improve, so there may be some ways to go still, no matter how well-received the moderation is. 6 members said the moderation is perfect and fine as is.

I think that it says something that more members value the presidency than not. I must say, the "no"s are a very vocal minority - they make it seem like they're a large majority at times, from my view.

I think that the declining quality and serious thoughts about leaving were important too. This shows that many do actually think the site needs improvement, and steps to make that improvement may be necessary. Those who said "yes" to one question were more likely to say "yes" to the other, and vice versa. Let's make sure that we do not lose anybody.

Also, I think the mobile update thing was significant for not only the community, but also Juggle. People are being turned off by the mobile version, and it may and will reduce returning visits from non-members as well as turn away current members, which means negative things for their profits from the site.

Also, I should note that those involved with Presidential candidates and moderators were automatically excluded from participating, due to the nature of some of the questions.

Feel free to add to this matter.

Nice poll, all and well. I`m suprised most questions about Juggle are indirect, But It won`t play well to straight up ask "Is juggle corrupt?" or anything like that.
bluesteel
Posts: 12,301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2015 3:19:30 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/3/2015 1:03:02 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
I conducted an anonymous survey with randomly selected people (I randomized a list of members and went down it as needed). These were the results - 30 members submitted answers.

1. Do you view the Presidency to be a position of any value?

17 members (56.67%) said "yes," 12 (40%) said "no," and 1 (3.33%) said "no opinion".

2. Explain your answer to #1.

Among those who answered "yes," a few said that no matter how useless it may seem and how inactive Juggle is, a representative is important. A few also said that it organizes community-building into being done by a respected member, vs. having random people do it - where people may not listen.

The "no"s tended to say that the mediator between the community and Juggle is now obsolete do to Juggle being inactive, and that community-building can be done by anyone.

3. What is the extent of your approval of the current moderation?

The results were 10/11/1 extremely/generally/slightly positive, 4 neutral, 1/3/0 extremely/generally/slightly negative. (33.33%/36.67%/3.33%, 13.33%, 3.33%/10%/0%)

4. How would you improve moderation, if you believe it needs improvement?

Those that suggested improvement said things such as listening to the community more in regards to policy and bans, being stricter towards toxic members and trolls, sub moderation in each forum, reforming poll moderation to remove inappropriate content quicker, giving more power to the voting moderator, increasing transparency, being harsher with harassment, and one person perhaps gave the best advice, which was: "less Jews" (there was a 50 character minimum).

5. Do you believe Airmax is too lenient in regards to banning?

10 (33.33%) said "yes," 13 (43.33%) said "no," and 7 (23.33%) said "no opinion."

6. Do you think that voting moderation is strict enough at the moment?

17 (56.67%) said "yes," 8 (26.67%) said "no," and 5 (16.67%) said "no opinion."

7. Do you think the mobile update has or will in the future decrease the frequency of your use of the site?

16 (53.33%) said "yes," 6 (20%) said "no," and 8 (26.67%) said "no opinion and/or not applicable."

8. Do you think the site is decreasing in terms of quality?

14 (46.67%) said "yes," 11 (36.67%) said "no," 1 (3.33%) said "no, I think its getting better," and 4 (13.33%) said "no opinion."

9. Have you have any (serious) thoughts about permanently leaving the site in the past month?

13 said (43.33%) "yes," and 17 (56.67%) said "no."

I was worried about that at first, because at first, the "yes" members were an excessive majority. That certainly changed later on.

---

Use this information and be informed.

I was particularly pleased to see the confidence in moderation, and also hope that they might use the information from the survey to further improve their regime, err...regulation. Note: even those that had an extremely positive view sometimes suggested ways to improve, so there may be some ways to go still, no matter how well-received the moderation is. 6 members said the moderation is perfect and fine as is.

I think that it says something that more members value the presidency than not. I must say, the "no"s are a very vocal minority - they make it seem like they're a large majority at times, from my view.

I think that the declining quality and serious thoughts about leaving were important too. This shows that many do actually think the site needs improvement, and steps to make that improvement may be necessary. Those who said "yes" to one question were more likely to say "yes" to the other, and vice versa. Let's make sure that we do not lose anybody.

Also, I think the mobile update thing was significant for not only the community, but also Juggle. People are being turned off by the mobile version, and it may and will reduce returning visits from non-members as well as turn away current members, which means negative things for their profits from the site.

Also, I should note that those involved with Presidential candidates and moderators were automatically excluded from participating, due to the nature of some of the questions.

Feel free to add to this matter.

Nice job on the poll. I took three interesting takeaways from this (that I found interesting). (1) The percentage of people who think the presidency is not worthwhile is actually larger than I thought. I would have guess closer to 20%, not 40%. (2) Even among people who support the presidency, their main concerns are community organizing, not representation to Juggle, which is what I see the president's current role as being. (3) People want me to have more power, which is fine by me. And most of the mod complaints don't seem related to me, except that I should be authorized to remove more stuff. Actually most of the mod complaints seem related to wanting more moderation, rather than less, which is interesting.
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Posts: 18,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2015 3:31:31 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/3/2015 1:03:02 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
6. Do you think that voting moderation is strict enough at the moment?

17 (56.67%) said "yes," 8 (26.67%) said "no," and 5 (16.67%) said "no opinion."

This is surprising to me that a significant percentage of people want stricter voting moderation. I was under the impression that people feel moderation is too strict but my sample is coming mostly from voters who have had their votes removed. I think it would have been helpful to see how many people wanted moderation to be *less* strict rather than an enough/not enough dichotomy. "Too much" is an answer too.

I think raising the level of sufficiency does have merit and the best way to do it is probably by setting the bar at evaluating the entire debate and all arguments. We'll probably enhance the voting guide soon.

I think that it says something that more members value the presidency than not. I must say, the "no"s are a very vocal minority - they make it seem like they're a large majority at times, from my view.

In the past, the anti-presidency protests came from a lack of understanding what the position really entails but I'm glad to see that the majority understand that it is a distinct position from moderation.
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Posts: 18,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2015 3:37:16 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Also, as voting moderators, we do have discretionary power when to remove and re-instate voting privileges so I don't know how that can be increased. I think it more reflects that people actually want debates to be moderated more stringently.

I'm curious if it is because they simply think bad votes are getting by on legitimate debates or they want troll/non-serious debates moderated.
tejretics
Posts: 6,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2015 3:57:59 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/3/2015 3:37:16 AM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
Also, as voting moderators, we do have discretionary power when to remove and re-instate voting privileges so I don't know how that can be increased. I think it more reflects that people actually want debates to be moderated more stringently.

I'm curious if it is because they simply think bad votes are getting by on legitimate debates or they want troll/non-serious debates moderated.

The former, at least according to me. There are so many bad votes getting by on legitimate debates.
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Posts: 18,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2015 3:59:22 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/3/2015 3:57:59 AM, tejretics wrote:
At 6/3/2015 3:37:16 AM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
Also, as voting moderators, we do have discretionary power when to remove and re-instate voting privileges so I don't know how that can be increased. I think it more reflects that people actually want debates to be moderated more stringently.

I'm curious if it is because they simply think bad votes are getting by on legitimate debates or they want troll/non-serious debates moderated.

The former, at least according to me. There are so many bad votes getting by on legitimate debates.

If you have reported them and they still haven't been removed, they likely passed moderation review. Does it help to have a reason why they passed review?
tejretics
Posts: 6,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2015 4:04:14 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/3/2015 3:59:22 AM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
At 6/3/2015 3:57:59 AM, tejretics wrote:
At 6/3/2015 3:37:16 AM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
Also, as voting moderators, we do have discretionary power when to remove and re-instate voting privileges so I don't know how that can be increased. I think it more reflects that people actually want debates to be moderated more stringently.

I'm curious if it is because they simply think bad votes are getting by on legitimate debates or they want troll/non-serious debates moderated.

The former, at least according to me. There are so many bad votes getting by on legitimate debates.

If you have reported them and they still haven't been removed, they likely passed moderation review. Does it help to have a reason why they passed review?

Yes, it does, and it is happening. But what I mean is ..

An example: A vote I reported once was: "very good debate, but Pro had better arguments", more or less, awarding arguments point to Pro. Three people reported it, and it wasn't removed for 2 days. Finally, I got fed up and PM'd the voter, who graciously apologized and tied the vote.
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
tejretics
Posts: 6,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2015 4:08:12 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/3/2015 3:19:30 AM, bluesteel wrote:
At 6/3/2015 1:03:02 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
I conducted an anonymous survey with randomly selected people (I randomized a list of members and went down it as needed). These were the results - 30 members submitted answers.

1. Do you view the Presidency to be a position of any value?

17 members (56.67%) said "yes," 12 (40%) said "no," and 1 (3.33%) said "no opinion".

2. Explain your answer to #1.

Among those who answered "yes," a few said that no matter how useless it may seem and how inactive Juggle is, a representative is important. A few also said that it organizes community-building into being done by a respected member, vs. having random people do it - where people may not listen.

The "no"s tended to say that the mediator between the community and Juggle is now obsolete do to Juggle being inactive, and that community-building can be done by anyone.

3. What is the extent of your approval of the current moderation?

The results were 10/11/1 extremely/generally/slightly positive, 4 neutral, 1/3/0 extremely/generally/slightly negative. (33.33%/36.67%/3.33%, 13.33%, 3.33%/10%/0%)

4. How would you improve moderation, if you believe it needs improvement?

Those that suggested improvement said things such as listening to the community more in regards to policy and bans, being stricter towards toxic members and trolls, sub moderation in each forum, reforming poll moderation to remove inappropriate content quicker, giving more power to the voting moderator, increasing transparency, being harsher with harassment, and one person perhaps gave the best advice, which was: "less Jews" (there was a 50 character minimum).

5. Do you believe Airmax is too lenient in regards to banning?

10 (33.33%) said "yes," 13 (43.33%) said "no," and 7 (23.33%) said "no opinion."

6. Do you think that voting moderation is strict enough at the moment?

17 (56.67%) said "yes," 8 (26.67%) said "no," and 5 (16.67%) said "no opinion."

7. Do you think the mobile update has or will in the future decrease the frequency of your use of the site?

16 (53.33%) said "yes," 6 (20%) said "no," and 8 (26.67%) said "no opinion and/or not applicable."

8. Do you think the site is decreasing in terms of quality?

14 (46.67%) said "yes," 11 (36.67%) said "no," 1 (3.33%) said "no, I think its getting better," and 4 (13.33%) said "no opinion."

9. Have you have any (serious) thoughts about permanently leaving the site in the past month?

13 said (43.33%) "yes," and 17 (56.67%) said "no."

I was worried about that at first, because at first, the "yes" members were an excessive majority. That certainly changed later on.

---

Use this information and be informed.

I was particularly pleased to see the confidence in moderation, and also hope that they might use the information from the survey to further improve their regime, err...regulation. Note: even those that had an extremely positive view sometimes suggested ways to improve, so there may be some ways to go still, no matter how well-received the moderation is. 6 members said the moderation is perfect and fine as is.

I think that it says something that more members value the presidency than not. I must say, the "no"s are a very vocal minority - they make it seem like they're a large majority at times, from my view.

I think that the declining quality and serious thoughts about leaving were important too. This shows that many do actually think the site needs improvement, and steps to make that improvement may be necessary. Those who said "yes" to one question were more likely to say "yes" to the other, and vice versa. Let's make sure that we do not lose anybody.

Also, I think the mobile update thing was significant for not only the community, but also Juggle. People are being turned off by the mobile version, and it may and will reduce returning visits from non-members as well as turn away current members, which means negative things for their profits from the site.

Also, I should note that those involved with Presidential candidates and moderators were automatically excluded from participating, due to the nature of some of the questions.

Feel free to add to this matter.

Nice job on the poll. I took three interesting takeaways from this (that I found interesting). (1) The percentage of people who think the presidency is not worthwhile is actually larger than I thought. I would have guess closer to 20%, not 40%. (2) Even among people who support the presidency, their main concerns are community organizing, not representation to Juggle, which is what I see the president's current role as being. (3) People want me to have more power, which is fine by me. And most of the mod complaints don't seem related to me, except that I should be authorized to remove more stuff. Actually most of the mod complaints seem related to wanting more moderation, rather than less, which is interesting.

Exactly, you should be authorized to remove much more stuff.
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
tejretics
Posts: 6,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2015 4:09:13 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/3/2015 3:59:22 AM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
At 6/3/2015 3:57:59 AM, tejretics wrote:
At 6/3/2015 3:37:16 AM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
Also, as voting moderators, we do have discretionary power when to remove and re-instate voting privileges so I don't know how that can be increased. I think it more reflects that people actually want debates to be moderated more stringently.

I'm curious if it is because they simply think bad votes are getting by on legitimate debates or they want troll/non-serious debates moderated.

The former, at least according to me. There are so many bad votes getting by on legitimate debates.

If you have reported them and they still haven't been removed, they likely passed moderation review. Does it help to have a reason why they passed review?

Ultimately, though, it's obviously not your fault. The moderators should have much more powers, if you ask me.
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
greatkitteh
Posts: 394
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2015 4:12:22 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/3/2015 3:59:22 AM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
At 6/3/2015 3:57:59 AM, tejretics wrote:
At 6/3/2015 3:37:16 AM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
Also, as voting moderators, we do have discretionary power when to remove and re-instate voting privileges so I don't know how that can be increased. I think it more reflects that people actually want debates to be moderated more stringently.

I'm curious if it is because they simply think bad votes are getting by on legitimate debates or they want troll/non-serious debates moderated.

The former, at least according to me. There are so many bad votes getting by on legitimate debates.

If you have reported them and they still haven't been removed, they likely passed moderation review. Does it help to have a reason why they passed review?

You have removed some of my votes, yet I`m fine with it. It`s a good thing to keep the voting productive as possible.
Adam_Godzilla
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2015 9:34:47 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
People need to know what a DDO president even is or does. Airmax does a fantastic job explaining in one of Philo's interviews. Basically the president is just a representative of the community who pitches ideas to the moderators and do cool stuff. So yeah, not exactly powerful but useful so everyone has someone to go to when they have a concern.

The poll results don't surprise me.
New episode of OUTSIDERS: http://www.debate.org...
Episode 4 - They walk among us
Garbanza
Posts: 1,997
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2015 9:57:03 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/3/2015 3:19:30 AM, bluesteel wrote:
People want me to have more power

I think it was just one person that said that, although he didn't specify.

which is fine by me.

What kind of power would you like that you don't have?
Garbanza
Posts: 1,997
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2015 10:00:27 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/3/2015 4:09:13 AM, tejretics wrote:
Ultimately, though, it's obviously not your fault. The moderators should have much more powers, if you ask me.

Do you mean the voting moderators? What kind of powers would you like them to have?

Btw did you answer the survey?
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2015 11:01:05 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/3/2015 9:57:03 AM, Garbanza wrote:
At 6/3/2015 3:19:30 AM, bluesteel wrote:
People want me to have more power

I think it was just one person that said that, although he didn't specify.

which is fine by me.

What kind of power would you like that you don't have?

I'm inclined to believe that he should have the power to perhaps remove votes himself - it would take a lot of work out of the process for most likely the same results.
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2015 11:06:32 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
I'll probably do something like this again in 6 months or something to see how much things will have changed.
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
Garbanza
Posts: 1,997
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2015 11:10:47 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/3/2015 11:01:05 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
What kind of power would you like that you don't have?

I'm inclined to believe that he should have the power to perhaps remove votes himself - it would take a lot of work out of the process for most likely the same results.

I didn't know he couldn't.
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2015 1:12:52 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/3/2015 3:19:30 AM, bluesteel wrote:
At 6/3/2015 1:03:02 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
Nice job on the poll. I took three interesting takeaways from this (that I found interesting). (1) The percentage of people who think the presidency is not worthwhile is actually larger than I thought. I would have guess closer to 20%, not 40%. (2) Even among people who support the presidency, their main concerns are community organizing, not representation to Juggle, which is what I see the president's current role as being. (3) People want me to have more power, which is fine by me. And most of the mod complaints don't seem related to me, except that I should be authorized to remove more stuff. Actually most of the mod complaints seem related to wanting more moderation, rather than less, which is interesting.

Keep +/- in mind, though, too. This question especially may have been affected by the number of people that didn't respond.
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
tejretics
Posts: 6,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2015 1:32:45 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/3/2015 11:01:05 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 6/3/2015 9:57:03 AM, Garbanza wrote:
At 6/3/2015 3:19:30 AM, bluesteel wrote:
People want me to have more power

I think it was just one person that said that, although he didn't specify.

which is fine by me.

What kind of power would you like that you don't have?

I'm inclined to believe that he should have the power to perhaps remove votes himself - it would take a lot of work out of the process for most likely the same results.

Exactly. And F-16. The three should be able to work independently.
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
tejretics
Posts: 6,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2015 1:33:15 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/3/2015 11:10:47 AM, Garbanza wrote:
At 6/3/2015 11:01:05 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
What kind of power would you like that you don't have?

I'm inclined to believe that he should have the power to perhaps remove votes himself - it would take a lot of work out of the process for most likely the same results.

I didn't know he couldn't.

Permission from Airmax is needed to remove votes.
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2015 7:30:48 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Bump
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
bsh1
Posts: 27,503
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2015 7:52:51 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
This data really is interesting. I am glad the trend regarding departures didn't pan out like it was initially promising too.
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


"Twilight isn't just about obtuse metaphors between cannibalism and premarital sex, it also teaches us the futility of hope." - Raisor

"[Bsh1] is the Guinan of DDO." - ButterCatX

Follow the DDOlympics
: http://www.debate.org...

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2015 10:56:58 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Well, those 16 people might stay active now.
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King