Total Posts:123|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Why the President Does What Individuals Can't

EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 6:15:45 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
The President is the elected representative of the community. He or she can be imagined as a symbol of the will of the community itself. Because (s)he is elected, (s)he is representative. This means the president possesses legitimacy. Any reform advocated can be understood to have the full, or at least majority, support of DDO.

When an individual member does this, their views reflect one and one thing alone: their own desires. While other users can attach their names to any policy, effectively building a petition, the president can do this instantaneously. The presidency is therefore far more effective than any individual user can ever be.

The president, therefore, unlike the moderator, is directly answerable to the community about the direction of the site. The president is also the only measure against unilateral moderator action.

Next, because of what was discussed above, when the president advocates reform to Juggle or Airmax, it has to be considered. Individual users cannot even get a response from Juggle while the president at least retains that potential. Furthermore, since individual users can reflect only individual desires, they are easy to overlook, ignore, or dismiss. Airmax has zero obligation to listen to the concerns of one user. He does, because he is a wonderful moderator, but he does not have to. Nor is there any guarantee a future moderator will. A moderator does, however, have an obligation to listen to the concerns of the president. Here, too, we see that the president has more power than any individual user.

Anyone can launch a community event. Anyone can try to post substantial threads. I myself have done so many times in the politics forum (shameless plug). However, once again, only the president has the obligation to do so. Continuously creating quality content is a difficult and time-consuming process. By electing a president to do this, we are, in effect, delegating that responsibility to him. It is a matter of convenience. The best comparison I can think of is grinding in an RPG. It's a tedious process that takes forever, and it's much better to just get to the final product. The president exists to do that grinding, and by organizing events, not only does he/she generate interest (anything with an official stamp of approval will attract people), but he/she also presents us with both a final project and more time to grind as we like, on our own. Members frequently have great ideas. But only the president has a responsibility toward implementing any.

Notice I haven't even said a word about soft-power yet. Because so many of denounced this recently, I won't either. Many of us still believe in it, and it only has as much power as we give it.
TheGreatAndPowerful
Posts: 3,012
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 6:24:17 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/14/2015 6:15:45 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
The President is the elected representative of the community. He or she can be imagined as a symbol of the will of the community itself. Because (s)he is elected, (s)he is representative. This means the president possesses legitimacy. Any reform advocated can be understood to have the full, or at least majority, support of DDO.

Only if the election process itself is geared toward producing a candidate that is, in fact, representative. First-Past-The-Post election systems are not necessarily representative, especially when the winning candidate doesn't get a majority of votes.

When an individual member does this, their views reflect one and one thing alone: their own desires. While other users can attach their names to any policy, effectively building a petition, the president can do this instantaneously. The presidency is therefore far more effective than any individual user can ever be.

Unless that individual is a mod or site administrator.

The president, therefore, unlike the moderator, is directly answerable to the community about the direction of the site. The president is also the only measure against unilateral moderator action.

How, exactly, does the president provide a measure against unilateral moderator action?

Next, because of what was discussed above, when the president advocates reform to Juggle or Airmax, it has to be considered. Individual users cannot even get a response from Juggle while the president at least retains that potential. Furthermore, since individual users can reflect only individual desires, they are easy to overlook, ignore, or dismiss. Airmax has zero obligation to listen to the concerns of one user. He does, because he is a wonderful moderator, but he does not have to. Nor is there any guarantee a future moderator will. A moderator does, however, have an obligation to listen to the concerns of the president. Here, too, we see that the president has more power than any individual user.

How does the moderator have such obligation? A moderator is an official status that can only be granted by the owners of the site. While Juggle may have deigned to acknowledge the position of President this is more along the lines of (fine, if you heathens want to put forth a single person to filter all of your inane complaints and requests through, that's fine.) There is no obligation by the moderator or Juggle to listen to anything the President has to say. And there is no obligation Juggle has to the moderator.

So long as the moderator isn't fvcking things up, Juggle is probably fine to let them manage the site however they see fit (President or no President) and if that moderator gets out of line then it is to Juggle that they answer to, not us or the president.

Anyone can launch a community event. Anyone can try to post substantial threads. I myself have done so many times in the politics forum (shameless plug). However, once again, only the president has the obligation to do so. Continuously creating quality content is a difficult and time-consuming process. By electing a president to do this, we are, in effect, delegating that responsibility to him. It is a matter of convenience. The best comparison I can think of is grinding in an RPG. It's a tedious process that takes forever, and it's much better to just get to the final product. The president exists to do that grinding, and by organizing events, not only does he/she generate interest (anything with an official stamp of approval will attract people), but he/she also presents us with both a final project and more time to grind as we like, on our own. Members frequently have great ideas. But only the president has a responsibility toward implementing any.

Notice I haven't even said a word about soft-power yet. Because so many of denounced this recently, I won't either. Many of us still believe in it, and it only has as much power as we give it.
Mikal
Posts: 11,270
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 7:27:09 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/14/2015 6:15:45 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
The President is the elected representative of the community. He or she can be imagined as a symbol of the will of the community itself. Because (s)he is elected, (s)he is representative. This means the president possesses legitimacy. Any reform advocated can be understood to have the full, or at least majority, support of DDO.

When an individual member does this, their views reflect one and one thing alone: their own desires. While other users can attach their names to any policy, effectively building a petition, the president can do this instantaneously. The presidency is therefore far more effective than any individual user can ever be.

The president, therefore, unlike the moderator, is directly answerable to the community about the direction of the site. The president is also the only measure against unilateral moderator action.

Next, because of what was discussed above, when the president advocates reform to Juggle or Airmax, it has to be considered. Individual users cannot even get a response from Juggle while the president at least retains that potential. Furthermore, since individual users can reflect only individual desires, they are easy to overlook, ignore, or dismiss. Airmax has zero obligation to listen to the concerns of one user. He does, because he is a wonderful moderator, but he does not have to. Nor is there any guarantee a future moderator will. A moderator does, however, have an obligation to listen to the concerns of the president. Here, too, we see that the president has more power than any individual user.

Anyone can launch a community event. Anyone can try to post substantial threads. I myself have done so many times in the politics forum (shameless plug). However, once again, only the president has the obligation to do so. Continuously creating quality content is a difficult and time-consuming process. By electing a president to do this, we are, in effect, delegating that responsibility to him. It is a matter of convenience. The best comparison I can think of is grinding in an RPG. It's a tedious process that takes forever, and it's much better to just get to the final product. The president exists to do that grinding, and by organizing events, not only does he/she generate interest (anything with an official stamp of approval will attract people), but he/she also presents us with both a final project and more time to grind as we like, on our own. Members frequently have great ideas. But only the president has a responsibility toward implementing any.

Notice I haven't even said a word about soft-power yet. Because so many of denounced this recently, I won't either. Many of us still believe in it, and it only has as much power as we give it.

Having been in office, and have served through the inauguration process I can confirm a great deal of this is false. The one part that is true, is that the president serves as a symbol or figure head for the community. Anyone however can be a figure head to the community and serve the community without the role of president. Bluesteel, Whiteflame, and many others do this on a day to day basis and they also influence moderation and the direction of the site. This is true even before airmax started assigning assistant mods. The position itself is a liaison between juggle and the community. Juggle has explicitly been avoiding this site, so airmax is essentially "juggle" in that sense.

If anything the purpose of the presidency now, is as you said to avoid unilateral moderation. The issue is that airmax is the say all end all of the site. So what the president can do is limited to whether airmax allows it. Anyone can petition to him, and if you present reason he is likely to listen. Again note how much impact white flame, bluesteel , and others had on the direction of the site prior to assistant moderation.

We as members can influence the direction of the site without a president. The primary purpose is to have a direct link to juggle in order to avoid unilateral moderation and speak as the voice of the community. That is gone and now all appeals are to airmax directly. How that impacts us is that everyone can reach and contact airmax routinely and at any point they so desire. It's not like you now need to be elected in order to reach out and talk to juggle. With juggle absent, the position and purpose of the position has greatly decreased, because anyone can contact the new juggle (airmax) at any given point.

The single greatest argument against abolishing the presidency is that the presidency can be assumed to do no harm. So if there is no harm, there is no reason to abolish it. Meaning just because something has no purpose, does not mean we should delete it or get rid of it.

I disagree with that assertion, but that is the only argument that can be made in favor of keeping it
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 9:09:47 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
This is a highly idealistic understanding of the situation. In the best case scenario, voters choose which "bundle of opinions" most closely reflect their own positions and overall vision for the site, which if you think about it, is a very inefficient way of conducting business to begin with. We're better off just running polls and making decisions based on the results of each poll question. The only reason for having elected officials is to make sure that decisions are inline with a constitution, which DDO doesn't have, as well as to ensure that the sheer volume of issues, some of which might be quite technical, are dealt with sensibly, given that individual voters can't be expected to research every single issue that arises, which also doesn't apply to DDO. But even that is unrealistic. There's no reason to think the majority of voters even read the platforms put forth by the candidates, and even if they did they're generally vague and don't cover every issue that could come up. So even if a president wanted to carry out the will of the community, he would probably have to conduct a poll to find out where they stand. To think that "since they voted for me, I have their backing whenever I make a decision" is totally unrealistic. I have no problem with having a community event's manager. But I see no reason why this role should be conflated with the much different role of a president.

In conclusion, the presidency should be replaced with a recurring poll conducted by Juggle to gauge community sentiment.
ClassicRobert
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 9:41:49 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
The presidency creates drama that makes the Debate.org forum more popular than ones geared towards actual discussion.
Debate me: Economic decision theory should be adjusted to include higher-order preferences for non-normative purposes http://www.debate.org...

Do you really believe that? Or not? If you believe it, you should man up and defend it in a debate. -RoyLatham

My Pet Fish is such a Douche- NiamC

It's an app to meet friends and stuff, sort of like an adult club penguin- Thett3, describing Tinder
ColeTrain
Posts: 4,313
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 9:44:25 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/14/2015 9:41:49 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
The presidency creates drama that makes the Debate.org forum more popular than ones geared towards actual discussion.

+1 (Welcome back, btw)
"The right to 360 noscope noobs shall not be infringed!!!" -- tajshar2k
"So, to start off, I've never committed suicide." -- Vaarka
"I eat glue." -- brontoraptor
"I mean, at this rate, I'd argue for a ham sandwich presidency." -- ResponsiblyIrresponsible
"Overthrow Assad, heil jihad." -- 16kadams when trolling in hangout
"Hillary Clinton is not my favorite person ... and her campaign is as inspiring as a bowl of cottage cheese." -- YYW
ClassicRobert
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 9:49:42 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/14/2015 9:44:25 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 12/14/2015 9:41:49 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
The presidency creates drama that makes the Debate.org forum more popular than ones geared towards actual discussion.

+1 (Welcome back, btw)

Who are you?
Debate me: Economic decision theory should be adjusted to include higher-order preferences for non-normative purposes http://www.debate.org...

Do you really believe that? Or not? If you believe it, you should man up and defend it in a debate. -RoyLatham

My Pet Fish is such a Douche- NiamC

It's an app to meet friends and stuff, sort of like an adult club penguin- Thett3, describing Tinder
thett3
Posts: 14,348
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 9:50:33 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/14/2015 9:49:42 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
At 12/14/2015 9:44:25 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 12/14/2015 9:41:49 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
The presidency creates drama that makes the Debate.org forum more popular than ones geared towards actual discussion.

+1 (Welcome back, btw)

Who are you?

That's Royalpaladin, her new account
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
ClassicRobert
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 9:55:17 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/14/2015 9:50:33 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 12/14/2015 9:49:42 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
At 12/14/2015 9:44:25 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 12/14/2015 9:41:49 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
The presidency creates drama that makes the Debate.org forum more popular than ones geared towards actual discussion.

+1 (Welcome back, btw)

Who are you?

That's Royalpaladin, her new account

Oh obviously
Debate me: Economic decision theory should be adjusted to include higher-order preferences for non-normative purposes http://www.debate.org...

Do you really believe that? Or not? If you believe it, you should man up and defend it in a debate. -RoyLatham

My Pet Fish is such a Douche- NiamC

It's an app to meet friends and stuff, sort of like an adult club penguin- Thett3, describing Tinder
Jonbonbon
Posts: 2,760
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 10:12:36 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/14/2015 9:50:33 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 12/14/2015 9:49:42 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
At 12/14/2015 9:44:25 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 12/14/2015 9:41:49 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
The presidency creates drama that makes the Debate.org forum more popular than ones geared towards actual discussion.

+1 (Welcome back, btw)

Who are you?

That's Royalpaladin, her new account

You wish, loverboy.
The Troll Queen.

I'm also the Troll Goddess of Reason. Sacrifices are appreciated but not necessary.

"I'm a vivacious sex fiend," SolonKR.

Go vote on one of my debates. I'm not that smart, so it'll probably be an easy decision.

Fite me m9

http://www.debate.org...
ClassicRobert
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 10:14:59 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/14/2015 10:12:36 PM, Jonbonbon wrote:
At 12/14/2015 9:50:33 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 12/14/2015 9:49:42 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
At 12/14/2015 9:44:25 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 12/14/2015 9:41:49 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
The presidency creates drama that makes the Debate.org forum more popular than ones geared towards actual discussion.

+1 (Welcome back, btw)

Who are you?

That's Royalpaladin, her new account

You wish, loverboy.

Boom roasted
Debate me: Economic decision theory should be adjusted to include higher-order preferences for non-normative purposes http://www.debate.org...

Do you really believe that? Or not? If you believe it, you should man up and defend it in a debate. -RoyLatham

My Pet Fish is such a Douche- NiamC

It's an app to meet friends and stuff, sort of like an adult club penguin- Thett3, describing Tinder
Jonbonbon
Posts: 2,760
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 10:16:14 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/14/2015 10:14:59 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
At 12/14/2015 10:12:36 PM, Jonbonbon wrote:
At 12/14/2015 9:50:33 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 12/14/2015 9:49:42 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
At 12/14/2015 9:44:25 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 12/14/2015 9:41:49 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
The presidency creates drama that makes the Debate.org forum more popular than ones geared towards actual discussion.

+1 (Welcome back, btw)

Who are you?

That's Royalpaladin, her new account

You wish, loverboy.

Boom roasted

http://25.media.tumblr.com...
The Troll Queen.

I'm also the Troll Goddess of Reason. Sacrifices are appreciated but not necessary.

"I'm a vivacious sex fiend," SolonKR.

Go vote on one of my debates. I'm not that smart, so it'll probably be an easy decision.

Fite me m9

http://www.debate.org...
thett3
Posts: 14,348
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 10:16:30 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/14/2015 10:12:36 PM, Jonbonbon wrote:
At 12/14/2015 9:50:33 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 12/14/2015 9:49:42 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
At 12/14/2015 9:44:25 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 12/14/2015 9:41:49 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
The presidency creates drama that makes the Debate.org forum more popular than ones geared towards actual discussion.

+1 (Welcome back, btw)

Who are you?

That's Royalpaladin, her new account

You wish, loverboy.

>calls herself troll queen
>betrays second biggest troll movement in DDO history
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
Jonbonbon
Posts: 2,760
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 10:21:08 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/14/2015 10:16:30 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 12/14/2015 10:12:36 PM, Jonbonbon wrote:
At 12/14/2015 9:50:33 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 12/14/2015 9:49:42 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
At 12/14/2015 9:44:25 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 12/14/2015 9:41:49 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
The presidency creates drama that makes the Debate.org forum more popular than ones geared towards actual discussion.

+1 (Welcome back, btw)

Who are you?

That's Royalpaladin, her new account

You wish, loverboy.

>calls herself troll queen
>betrays second biggest troll movement in DDO history

As long as you're size measuring, you might as well step out of Japan and get into the real world with that lame action.
The Troll Queen.

I'm also the Troll Goddess of Reason. Sacrifices are appreciated but not necessary.

"I'm a vivacious sex fiend," SolonKR.

Go vote on one of my debates. I'm not that smart, so it'll probably be an easy decision.

Fite me m9

http://www.debate.org...
ShabShoral
Posts: 3,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 10:30:36 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/14/2015 10:14:59 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
Who are you?
"This site is trash as a debate site. It's club penguin for dysfunctional adults."

~ Skepsikyma <3

"Your idea of good writing is like Spinoza mixed with Heidegger."

~ Dylly Dylly Cat Cat

"You seem to aspire to be a cross between a Jewish hipster, an old school WASP aristocrat, and a political iconoclast"

~ Thett the Mighty

"fvck omg ur face"

~ Liz
ClassicRobert
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 10:32:38 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/14/2015 10:30:36 PM, ShabShoral wrote:
At 12/14/2015 10:14:59 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
Who are you?

you? are Who
Debate me: Economic decision theory should be adjusted to include higher-order preferences for non-normative purposes http://www.debate.org...

Do you really believe that? Or not? If you believe it, you should man up and defend it in a debate. -RoyLatham

My Pet Fish is such a Douche- NiamC

It's an app to meet friends and stuff, sort of like an adult club penguin- Thett3, describing Tinder
ShabShoral
Posts: 3,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 10:35:56 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
Either a.) it flows from the essence of the Presidency that they have more power and legitimacy than normal users and will act to use these traits to the benefit of the site, or, b.) it does not, meaning that there is no necessary causal link between the Presidency and any actual benefit (meaning that, by definition, any benefit produced must be produced by some other cause).

"a" has been disproven, leaving only "b" , putting your argument in a very tough spot indeed.
"This site is trash as a debate site. It's club penguin for dysfunctional adults."

~ Skepsikyma <3

"Your idea of good writing is like Spinoza mixed with Heidegger."

~ Dylly Dylly Cat Cat

"You seem to aspire to be a cross between a Jewish hipster, an old school WASP aristocrat, and a political iconoclast"

~ Thett the Mighty

"fvck omg ur face"

~ Liz
ShabShoral
Posts: 3,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 10:41:14 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/14/2015 10:32:38 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
At 12/14/2015 10:30:36 PM, ShabShoral wrote:
At 12/14/2015 10:14:59 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
Who are you?

you? are Who

Who you? are
"This site is trash as a debate site. It's club penguin for dysfunctional adults."

~ Skepsikyma <3

"Your idea of good writing is like Spinoza mixed with Heidegger."

~ Dylly Dylly Cat Cat

"You seem to aspire to be a cross between a Jewish hipster, an old school WASP aristocrat, and a political iconoclast"

~ Thett the Mighty

"fvck omg ur face"

~ Liz
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 10:43:20 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/14/2015 10:35:56 PM, ShabShoral wrote:
Either a.) it flows from the essence of the Presidency that they have more power and legitimacy than normal users and will act to use these traits to the benefit of the site, or, b.) it does not, meaning that there is no necessary causal link between the Presidency and any actual benefit (meaning that, by definition, any benefit produced must be produced by some other cause).

"a" has been disproven, leaving only "b" , putting your argument in a very tough spot indeed.

I most verily agree, good sir!
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 11:43:07 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/14/2015 10:35:56 PM, ShabShoral wrote:
Either a.) it flows from the essence of the Presidency that they have more power and legitimacy than normal users and will act to use these traits to the benefit of the site, or, b.) it does not, meaning that there is no necessary causal link between the Presidency and any actual benefit (meaning that, by definition, any benefit produced must be produced by some other cause).

Except "a" is true.

Let's say YYW and Vi-Spex ran in a serious election and Vi-Spex won. Any programs he then put forward would be representative and given more credence than any YYW put forward on his own.

"a" has been disproven, leaving only "b" , putting your argument in a very tough spot indeed.
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 11:45:57 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/14/2015 6:24:17 PM, TheGreatAndPowerful wrote:
At 12/14/2015 6:15:45 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
The President is the elected representative of the community. He or she can be imagined as a symbol of the will of the community itself. Because (s)he is elected, (s)he is representative. This means the president possesses legitimacy. Any reform advocated can be understood to have the full, or at least majority, support of DDO.

Only if the election process itself is geared toward producing a candidate that is, in fact, representative. First-Past-The-Post election systems are not necessarily representative, especially when the winning candidate doesn't get a majority of votes.

Perhaps, but that is not the case here.

When an individual member does this, their views reflect one and one thing alone: their own desires. While other users can attach their names to any policy, effectively building a petition, the president can do this instantaneously. The presidency is therefore far more effective than any individual user can ever be.

Unless that individual is a mod or site administrator.

Sure, but then you get back to the problem of the site itself having no say.

The president, therefore, unlike the moderator, is directly answerable to the community about the direction of the site. The president is also the only measure against unilateral moderator action.

How, exactly, does the president provide a measure against unilateral moderator action?

The president is the only person with whom the moderator has to consult and discuss certain courses of action. The president can even try and persuade the moderator to alter them.

Next, because of what was discussed above, when the president advocates reform to Juggle or Airmax, it has to be considered. Individual users cannot even get a response from Juggle while the president at least retains that potential. Furthermore, since individual users can reflect only individual desires, they are easy to overlook, ignore, or dismiss. Airmax has zero obligation to listen to the concerns of one user. He does, because he is a wonderful moderator, but he does not have to. Nor is there any guarantee a future moderator will. A moderator does, however, have an obligation to listen to the concerns of the president. Here, too, we see that the president has more power than any individual user.

How does the moderator have such obligation? A moderator is an official status that can only be granted by the owners of the site. While Juggle may have deigned to acknowledge the position of President this is more along the lines of (fine, if you heathens want to put forth a single person to filter all of your inane complaints and requests through, that's fine.) There is no obligation by the moderator or Juggle to listen to anything the President has to say. And there is no obligation Juggle has to the moderator.

There is, because otherwise they are running counter to the best interests of the majority of the site and, in any reasonable world, would thusly be replaced.

So long as the moderator isn't fvcking things up, Juggle is probably fine to let them manage the site however they see fit (President or no President) and if that moderator gets out of line then it is to Juggle that they answer to, not us or the president.

Anyone can launch a community event. Anyone can try to post substantial threads. I myself have done so many times in the politics forum (shameless plug). However, once again, only the president has the obligation to do so. Continuously creating quality content is a difficult and time-consuming process. By electing a president to do this, we are, in effect, delegating that responsibility to him. It is a matter of convenience. The best comparison I can think of is grinding in an RPG. It's a tedious process that takes forever, and it's much better to just get to the final product. The president exists to do that grinding, and by organizing events, not only does he/she generate interest (anything with an official stamp of approval will attract people), but he/she also presents us with both a final project and more time to grind as we like, on our own. Members frequently have great ideas. But only the president has a responsibility toward implementing any.

Notice I haven't even said a word about soft-power yet. Because so many of denounced this recently, I won't either. Many of us still believe in it, and it only has as much power as we give it.
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 11:47:33 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/14/2015 9:09:47 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
This is a highly idealistic understanding of the situation. In the best case scenario, voters choose which "bundle of opinions" most closely reflect their own positions and overall vision for the site, which if you think about it, is a very inefficient way of conducting business to begin with. We're better off just running polls and making decisions based on the results of each poll question. The only reason for having elected officials is to make sure that decisions are inline with a constitution, which DDO doesn't have, as well as to ensure that the sheer volume of issues, some of which might be quite technical, are dealt with sensibly, given that individual voters can't be expected to research every single issue that arises, which also doesn't apply to DDO. But even that is unrealistic. There's no reason to think the majority of voters even read the platforms put forth by the candidates, and even if they did they're generally vague and don't cover every issue that could come up. So even if a president wanted to carry out the will of the community, he would probably have to conduct a poll to find out where they stand. To think that "since they voted for me, I have their backing whenever I make a decision" is totally unrealistic. I have no problem with having a community event's manager. But I see no reason why this role should be conflated with the much different role of a president.

Polls are wildly inefficient and subject to substantial abuse. And there is plenty of reason to think voters understand the platform. We're not dealing with the average layperson here. There are voting requirements, which means most voters will have a vested interest in the site, which means they will do their homework.

In conclusion, the presidency should be replaced with a recurring poll conducted by Juggle to gauge community sentiment.
ShabShoral
Posts: 3,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 11:52:40 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/14/2015 11:43:07 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 12/14/2015 10:35:56 PM, ShabShoral wrote:
Either a.) it flows from the essence of the Presidency that they have more power and legitimacy than normal users and will act to use these traits to the benefit of the site, or, b.) it does not, meaning that there is no necessary causal link between the Presidency and any actual benefit (meaning that, by definition, any benefit produced must be produced by some other cause).

Except "a" is true.

Let's say YYW and Vi-Spex ran in a serious election and Vi-Spex won. Any programs he then put forward would be representative and given more credence than any YYW put forward on his own.
We've went over this before. The simple fact that two presidents have not had the effects you seem determined to say are logically necessary disproves your position.

User "a" can be elected president and then immediately make a thread titled "Official Presidential Mandate: Vote on Debates" with no body text. Do you seriously believe that this declaration gains power just because "a" was elected? If not, then, as I specifically said, power does not flow from the essence of the presidency.
"a" has been disproven, leaving only "b" , putting your argument in a very tough spot indeed.
"This site is trash as a debate site. It's club penguin for dysfunctional adults."

~ Skepsikyma <3

"Your idea of good writing is like Spinoza mixed with Heidegger."

~ Dylly Dylly Cat Cat

"You seem to aspire to be a cross between a Jewish hipster, an old school WASP aristocrat, and a political iconoclast"

~ Thett the Mighty

"fvck omg ur face"

~ Liz
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 11:52:47 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/14/2015 7:27:09 PM, Mikal wrote:
At 12/14/2015 6:15:45 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
The President is the elected representative of the community. He or she can be imagined as a symbol of the will of the community itself. Because (s)he is elected, (s)he is representative. This means the president possesses legitimacy. Any reform advocated can be understood to have the full, or at least majority, support of DDO.

When an individual member does this, their views reflect one and one thing alone: their own desires. While other users can attach their names to any policy, effectively building a petition, the president can do this instantaneously. The presidency is therefore far more effective than any individual user can ever be.

The president, therefore, unlike the moderator, is directly answerable to the community about the direction of the site. The president is also the only measure against unilateral moderator action.

Next, because of what was discussed above, when the president advocates reform to Juggle or Airmax, it has to be considered. Individual users cannot even get a response from Juggle while the president at least retains that potential. Furthermore, since individual users can reflect only individual desires, they are easy to overlook, ignore, or dismiss. Airmax has zero obligation to listen to the concerns of one user. He does, because he is a wonderful moderator, but he does not have to. Nor is there any guarantee a future moderator will. A moderator does, however, have an obligation to listen to the concerns of the president. Here, too, we see that the president has more power than any individual user.

Anyone can launch a community event. Anyone can try to post substantial threads. I myself have done so many times in the politics forum (shameless plug). However, once again, only the president has the obligation to do so. Continuously creating quality content is a difficult and time-consuming process. By electing a president to do this, we are, in effect, delegating that responsibility to him. It is a matter of convenience. The best comparison I can think of is grinding in an RPG. It's a tedious process that takes forever, and it's much better to just get to the final product. The president exists to do that grinding, and by organizing events, not only does he/she generate interest (anything with an official stamp of approval will attract people), but he/she also presents us with both a final project and more time to grind as we like, on our own. Members frequently have great ideas. But only the president has a responsibility toward implementing any.

Notice I haven't even said a word about soft-power yet. Because so many of denounced this recently, I won't either. Many of us still believe in it, and it only has as much power as we give it.

Having been in office, and have served through the inauguration process I can confirm a great deal of this is false. The one part that is true, is that the president serves as a symbol or figure head for the community. Anyone however can be a figure head to the community and serve the community without the role of president. Bluesteel, Whiteflame, and many others do this on a day to day basis and they also influence moderation and the direction of the site. This is true even before airmax started assigning assistant mods. The position itself is a liaison between juggle and the community. Juggle has explicitly been avoiding this site, so airmax is essentially "juggle" in that sense.

If anything the purpose of the presidency now, is as you said to avoid unilateral moderation. The issue is that airmax is the say all end all of the site. So what the president can do is limited to whether airmax allows it. Anyone can petition to him, and if you present reason he is likely to listen. Again note how much impact white flame, bluesteel , and others had on the direction of the site prior to assistant moderation.

We as members can influence the direction of the site without a president. The primary purpose is to have a direct link to juggle in order to avoid unilateral moderation and speak as the voice of the community. That is gone and now all appeals are to airmax directly. How that impacts us is that everyone can reach and contact airmax routinely and at any point they so desire. It's not like you now need to be elected in order to reach out and talk to juggle. With juggle absent, the position and purpose of the position has greatly decreased, because anyone can contact the new juggle (airmax) at any given point.


The single greatest argument against abolishing the presidency is that the presidency can be assumed to do no harm. So if there is no harm, there is no reason to abolish it. Meaning just because something has no purpose, does not mean we should delete it or get rid of it.

I disagree with that assertion, but that is the only argument that can be made in favor of keeping it

90% of this is contingent upon Airmax, Airmax, Airmax, which is the height of na"vet". Airmax could get run over by a car tomorrow. He could step down. Treating Airmax the person rather than the Presidency as an institution as inviolable and permanent is mind-boggling.
ShabShoral
Posts: 3,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 11:53:35 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
As soon as you admit that you're dealing in contingent claims, not necessary ones, your case falls apart, and I surely do not see any logical truths.
"This site is trash as a debate site. It's club penguin for dysfunctional adults."

~ Skepsikyma <3

"Your idea of good writing is like Spinoza mixed with Heidegger."

~ Dylly Dylly Cat Cat

"You seem to aspire to be a cross between a Jewish hipster, an old school WASP aristocrat, and a political iconoclast"

~ Thett the Mighty

"fvck omg ur face"

~ Liz
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 11:54:49 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/14/2015 11:52:40 PM, ShabShoral wrote:
At 12/14/2015 11:43:07 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 12/14/2015 10:35:56 PM, ShabShoral wrote:
Either a.) it flows from the essence of the Presidency that they have more power and legitimacy than normal users and will act to use these traits to the benefit of the site, or, b.) it does not, meaning that there is no necessary causal link between the Presidency and any actual benefit (meaning that, by definition, any benefit produced must be produced by some other cause).

Except "a" is true.

Let's say YYW and Vi-Spex ran in a serious election and Vi-Spex won. Any programs he then put forward would be representative and given more credence than any YYW put forward on his own.
We've went over this before. The simple fact that two presidents have not had the effects you seem determined to say are logically necessary disproves your position.

The fact that those two - one, really - was a rare exception and the other 99% of the time backs me suggests that it's better to keep the presidency and the 99% success rate rather than no presidency and 1%.

User "a" can be elected president and then immediately make a thread titled "Official Presidential Mandate: Vote on Debates" with no body text. Do you seriously believe that this declaration gains power just because "a" was elected? If not, then, as I specifically said, power does not flow from the essence of the presidency.

Yes. It does.

"a" has been disproven, leaving only "b" , putting your argument in a very tough spot indeed.
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 11:56:44 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/14/2015 11:53:35 PM, ShabShoral wrote:
As soon as you admit that you're dealing in contingent claims, not necessary ones, your case falls apart, and I surely do not see any logical truths.

Here's another way to put the claim: any member, elected president, can have a greater impact on the community than that same member as a regular member.
ShabShoral
Posts: 3,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/15/2015
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/14/2015 11:54:49 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 12/14/2015 11:52:40 PM, ShabShoral wrote:
At 12/14/2015 11:43:07 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 12/14/2015 10:35:56 PM, ShabShoral wrote:
Either a.) it flows from the essence of the Presidency that they have more power and legitimacy than normal users and will act to use these traits to the benefit of the site, or, b.) it does not, meaning that there is no necessary causal link between the Presidency and any actual benefit (meaning that, by definition, any benefit produced must be produced by some other cause).

Except "a" is true.

Let's say YYW and Vi-Spex ran in a serious election and Vi-Spex won. Any programs he then put forward would be representative and given more credence than any YYW put forward on his own.
We've went over this before. The simple fact that two presidents have not had the effects you seem determined to say are logically necessary disproves your position.

The fact that those two - one, really - was a rare exception and the other 99% of the time backs me suggests that it's better to keep the presidency and the 99% success rate rather than no presidency and 1%.
Okay, let me make this clear: even if you think you know what my argument is, you don't understand logical necessity.
User "a" can be elected president and then immediately make a thread titled "Official Presidential Mandate: Vote on Debates" with no body text. Do you seriously believe that this declaration gains power just because "a" was elected? If not, then, as I specifically said, power does not flow from the essence of the presidency.

Yes. It does.
That is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.
"a" has been disproven, leaving only "b" , putting your argument in a very tough spot indeed.
"This site is trash as a debate site. It's club penguin for dysfunctional adults."

~ Skepsikyma <3

"Your idea of good writing is like Spinoza mixed with Heidegger."

~ Dylly Dylly Cat Cat

"You seem to aspire to be a cross between a Jewish hipster, an old school WASP aristocrat, and a political iconoclast"

~ Thett the Mighty

"fvck omg ur face"

~ Liz
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/15/2015 12:03:17 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/15/2015, ShabShoral wrote:
At 12/14/2015 11:54:49 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 12/14/2015 11:52:40 PM, ShabShoral wrote:
At 12/14/2015 11:43:07 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 12/14/2015 10:35:56 PM, ShabShoral wrote:
Either a.) it flows from the essence of the Presidency that they have more power and legitimacy than normal users and will act to use these traits to the benefit of the site, or, b.) it does not, meaning that there is no necessary causal link between the Presidency and any actual benefit (meaning that, by definition, any benefit produced must be produced by some other cause).

Except "a" is true.

Let's say YYW and Vi-Spex ran in a serious election and Vi-Spex won. Any programs he then put forward would be representative and given more credence than any YYW put forward on his own.
We've went over this before. The simple fact that two presidents have not had the effects you seem determined to say are logically necessary disproves your position.

The fact that those two - one, really - was a rare exception and the other 99% of the time backs me suggests that it's better to keep the presidency and the 99% success rate rather than no presidency and 1%.
Okay, let me make this clear: even if you think you know what my argument is, you don't understand logical necessity.

Logical necessity has zero, zip, and zilch to do with this. Logical necessity cannot make a value claim.

User "a" can be elected president and then immediately make a thread titled "Official Presidential Mandate: Vote on Debates" with no body text. Do you seriously believe that this declaration gains power just because "a" was elected? If not, then, as I specifically said, power does not flow from the essence of the presidency.

Yes. It does.
That is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.
"a" has been disproven, leaving only "b" , putting your argument in a very tough spot indeed.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/15/2015 12:07:37 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/14/2015 11:47:33 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 12/14/2015 9:09:47 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
This is a highly idealistic understanding of the situation. In the best case scenario, voters choose which "bundle of opinions" most closely reflect their own positions and overall vision for the site, which if you think about it, is a very inefficient way of conducting business to begin with. We're better off just running polls and making decisions based on the results of each poll question. The only reason for having elected officials is to make sure that decisions are inline with a constitution, which DDO doesn't have, as well as to ensure that the sheer volume of issues, some of which might be quite technical, are dealt with sensibly, given that individual voters can't be expected to research every single issue that arises, which also doesn't apply to DDO. But even that is unrealistic. There's no reason to think the majority of voters even read the platforms put forth by the candidates, and even if they did they're generally vague and don't cover every issue that could come up. So even if a president wanted to carry out the will of the community, he would probably have to conduct a poll to find out where they stand. To think that "since they voted for me, I have their backing whenever I make a decision" is totally unrealistic. I have no problem with having a community event's manager. But I see no reason why this role should be conflated with the much different role of a president.

Polls are wildly inefficient and subject to substantial abuse. And there is plenty of reason to think voters understand the platform. We're not dealing with the average layperson here. There are voting requirements, which means most voters will have a vested interest in the site, which means they will do their homework.


Some do, but I doubt most. And as I explained earlier, even if someone votes for candidate X on an "informed basis", that doesn't mean they agree with most of their positions (they might just be the candidate with whom they most agree). Thus, the president's stance on a given issue is not necessarily reflective of the majority opinion just because they were voted in by the majority. If you then argue that the president could change his stance to conform to the popular will, then the president is reduced to a middleman who might as well be replaced by a poll. And in fact, a lot people regard the presidency as a joke, which is precisely why about half voted for wylted when he is clearly not fit for a serious political role. These people didn't just all of a sudden start believing this, the attitude has been there for a long time. People who regard the presidency as a joke are unlikely to look into candidates platforms - "do their homework" - because at the end of the day they see them as irrelevant. The costs associated with the presidency are great: constant drama and distraction from interesting conversations. The benefits do not even come close to offsetting this, if they exist at all.