Total Posts:48|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

**The Harder/Solon platform, Part 1**

1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2016 7:13:43 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
***Please do not post until I finish (this will be two posts)***

My campaign's primary focus is redefining the Presidency. DDOers overwhelmingly agree that moderation makes the site better for all, but we can still greatly improve its ability to do good. To do that, we must ask ourselves what we value. There are differing philosophies about what moderation policy should look like. Some seek a laissez-faire policy where we have mostly free reign, and moderators only step in on extreme occasions. Some think that Max should bring the hammer down quicker. These philosophies are not easily balanced when creating policy.

Those in favor of a more lax policy tend to favor Imabench's "DDO Conventions" over Presidential representation. There's one great problem with this system - the moderator veto.

an idea is proposed in a thread that directly addresses how Airmax conducts his job as moderator, or is something that simply cannot be implemented, then Airmax will reserve the right to leave out the proposals from the official Convention thread once he makes the thread... When it comes to actual moderation itself (not including vote moderation), Airmax retains the right to nullify the proposal. This is essentially Airmax's veto power in the new system. Proposals to alter moderation are not flat out banned, Airmax simply retains the ability to veto such proposals. Airmax is also allowed to briefly explain why he omitted certain proposals from being voted on if he chooses to, but it is not necessarily required.

The DDO Convention system is supposed to take over the Presidency's spot as a check to the moderation. But under this system, Max can not only veto the majority opinion - which may be reasonable - but he can choose to outright not talk about the issues. If we are to ever give moderators a good enough input to improve moderation, we cannot simply let topics go ignored. Therefore, as a check to moderation, the abolition replacement plan fails.

So under this convention system, Max and any future mod can choose to not open discussion on vote moderation, the personal conduct policy, or single moderation decisions.

Coming Together

As the President, I will incorporate as many people into the administration as possible. I want abolitionists to put their two cents into any open or closed (PM) debates on any topics that are put on the table. If I work personally to make these people a part of the moderation process, a lot can happen to make the site better. The personal conduct policy can be changed to better reflect the view of the site. The debaters of this site can help perfect vote moderation.

Possibilities are endless if we don't tear each other apart. Being able to work towards a single goal helps bring people together - our common interest is making DDO better (/great again).

The Moderation Process

The President is involved with moderation. The President does not, obviously, have the ability to ban members, remove votes, or anything regarding hard power on the site. But, he has the power of being an advisor to the head of moderation - and the mandate of the democratic majority.

This system allows the membership base of the site to put their views into moderation"s decisions in an effective manner. Any attempt to remove this possibility is, in any event, shortsighted.

Under my administration, members will be able to submit topics relating to moderation-related business to me. From there, I will put topics through a panel to reduce redundancy. Then, broader points may be made into open forum discussions, using examples of the issue that are brought to my attention (e.g. voting policy). Anything that is not redundant but is too isolated to be a part of a broad discussion (e.g. individual moderation issues) will be resolved in private, whether in conjunction with a panel or directly with Max.

The panel for moderation issues will be open to anyone who wishes to join, but there will be limited spots - and the makeup of the panel will properly show the diversity of opinion on the site.

The State of the Presidency and the Community

The Presidency's most important remaining power lies in its ability to argue for the collective values of the site. This allows us to make sure DDO goes in the direction we want it to.

The power is important to harness - a leader who can unite members and get them to work together is extremely valuable for the future of the site. Should we resign ourselves to where the wind blows, or work for a better tomorrow?

So where does community building start? Does it start at hosting tournaments? Does it start at creating loose groups to become better at things like voting? How do we get people to become active in anything that can improve the site? These are questions that Presidents and candidates have asked themselves.

To answer this question, look no further than the current split of Pro-Presidency and abolitionist members. No initiative or program will succeed if enough people are not behind it. This is why my main focus, as President, is getting the opposition to the Presidency as an institution involved with my administration.

This may be taken as a last-ditch effort to make the Presidency useful again. In many ways, it is. To make use of the position, abolition must be beaten in more than just a vote. We can't change the site by continuing to do what we've been doing. We must have the structural change we advocate for.
"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
5/12/2016 7:15:31 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
On Drama and Community Leadership

If I'm elected, my administration will become actively involved with moderation. Not only do I want to become involved in policy decisions, but I want my administration to be an organization that can help with snuffing out conflicts before moderators need to become involved. For the large part, something that this community is lacking is people who members can talk to so people don"t have to be warned or banned when things ultimately spiral out of control.

So, one of my new programs will be what I'm tentatively naming the Community Leadership Program. This program will be composed of established members who are willing to, at times, give advice to members in conflict or to directly help work out issues. A problem I often see is people not even trying to end their beefs with other members. With this program, I hope to see more members solve interpersonal issues so they can get back to what makes this site enjoyable.

As members of a debating site, the focal point is intellectual discussion. As far as I can tell, no serious member joined this site because they wanted to hack around all day - but the camaraderie of the site is a reason many stay. Excessive drama destroys those bonds - we start to care more about our comebacks in the insult game than we do getting a mental workout in a discussion on ethics. We need to keep our heads straight and not get caught up in the petty drama for too long.

There are two ways drama can affect the site. The first is constructive. The second leads to drama being exponential, excessive and toxic. Drama is pervasive - you can't ignore it. Fighting drama with stubborn approaches leads to drama becoming cyclical. What we can do with drama is accept that it will happen, and try to fix things calmly and peacefully.

After the Mikal incident and his resignation - which has brought us, dramatically, to the point where we are today - Innomen logged onto the site to share a few thoughts:

Truth is, drama can be harnessed and used for good on the site. It can be managed and provide a certain unity within different members. There can be a recruitment in working together in finding solutions through the site, and with the site members and it often has an ultimately positive effect on how people feel about DDO.

I speak from experience when I say this, and believe that it can be done again if there is a greater maturity in a core group of reliable members.

The truth about the presidency is, it can be a nothing irrelevant position, or it can be a meaningful one that actually has some power in making the place better. Again, I speak from experience. If a president is unfocused or is in it for their ego, well then you will have a meaningless president, but if you have someone who is active, with a clear sense of what he or she wants for the site, then the president will have meaning. For many it is a popularity contest, which is really sad, and points to the election of a people pleasing sycophant.

It all depends on what you want, and what you think a single person can bring to the site, its people and its culture.

innomen

The key to getting more people involved with the site is by establishing a common goal - making the site as great as it can be. The type of construction I want to see from this site is learning from our history and making the site better for all. I want a Presidential administration that is not afraid of drama, but will use it to better the experience of the average member. We can all solve our problems, and grow the site and let it be vibrant - but only if we work together. If I'm the President, uniting the users will be a top priority.

---

With that, you may post and ask any questions.
"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
5/12/2016 7:24:27 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
Announcement thread: http://www.debate.org...
"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
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2016 7:26:25 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/12/2016 7:24:27 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
Announcement thread: http://www.debate.org...

I am behind. I will post tonightish
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2016 7:27:36 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/12/2016 7:26:25 PM, TBR wrote:
At 5/12/2016 7:24:27 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
Announcement thread: http://www.debate.org...

I am behind. I will post tonightish

Cool. Just add this onto what was already on my platform entry.
"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
Dragon_of_Christ
Posts: 1,293
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2016 7:52:00 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/12/2016 7:13:43 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
***Please do not post until I finish (this will be two posts)***

My campaign's primary focus is redefining the Presidency. DDOers overwhelmingly agree that moderation makes the site better for all, but we can still greatly improve its ability to do good. To do that, we must ask ourselves what we value. There are differing philosophies about what moderation policy should look like. Some seek a laissez-faire policy where we have mostly free reign, and moderators only step in on extreme occasions. Some think that Max should bring the hammer down quicker. These philosophies are not easily balanced when creating policy.

Those in favor of a more lax policy tend to favor Imabench's "DDO Conventions" over Presidential representation. There's one great problem with this system - the moderator veto.

an idea is proposed in a thread that directly addresses how Airmax conducts his job as moderator, or is something that simply cannot be implemented, then Airmax will reserve the right to leave out the proposals from the official Convention thread once he makes the thread... When it comes to actual moderation itself (not including vote moderation), Airmax retains the right to nullify the proposal. This is essentially Airmax's veto power in the new system. Proposals to alter moderation are not flat out banned, Airmax simply retains the ability to veto such proposals. Airmax is also allowed to briefly explain why he omitted certain proposals from being voted on if he chooses to, but it is not necessarily required.

The DDO Convention system is supposed to take over the Presidency's spot as a check to the moderation. But under this system, Max can not only veto the majority opinion - which may be reasonable - but he can choose to outright not talk about the issues. If we are to ever give moderators a good enough input to improve moderation, we cannot simply let topics go ignored. Therefore, as a check to moderation, the abolition replacement plan fails.

But Airmax is a good guy.

He wouldn't ignore us.

So under this convention system, Max and any future mod can choose to not open discussion on vote moderation, the personal conduct policy, or single moderation decisions.

Coming Together

As the President, I will incorporate as many people into the administration as possible. I want abolitionists to put their two cents into any open or closed (PM) debates on any topics that are put on the table. If I work personally to make these people a part of the moderation process, a lot can happen to make the site better. The personal conduct policy can be changed to better reflect the view of the site. The debaters of this site can help perfect vote moderation.

Possibilities are endless if we don't tear each other apart. Being able to work towards a single goal helps bring people together - our common interest is making DDO better (/great again).

The Moderation Process

The President is involved with moderation. The President does not, obviously, have the ability to ban members, remove votes, or anything regarding hard power on the site. But, he has the power of being an advisor to the head of moderation - and the mandate of the democratic majority.

This system allows the membership base of the site to put their views into moderation"s decisions in an effective manner. Any attempt to remove this possibility is, in any event, shortsighted.

Under my administration, members will be able to submit topics relating to moderation-related business to me. From there, I will put topics through a panel to reduce redundancy. Then, broader points may be made into open forum discussions, using examples of the issue that are brought to my attention (e.g. voting policy). Anything that is not redundant but is too isolated to be a part of a broad discussion (e.g. individual moderation issues) will be resolved in private, whether in conjunction with a panel or directly with Max.

The panel for moderation issues will be open to anyone who wishes to join, but there will be limited spots - and the makeup of the panel will properly show the diversity of opinion on the site.

The State of the Presidency and the Community

The Presidency's most important remaining power lies in its ability to argue for the collective values of the site. This allows us to make sure DDO goes in the direction we want it to.

The power is important to harness - a leader who can unite members and get them to work together is extremely valuable for the future of the site. Should we resign ourselves to where the wind blows, or work for a better tomorrow?

So where does community building start? Does it start at hosting tournaments? Does it start at creating loose groups to become better at things like voting? How do we get people to become active in anything that can improve the site? These are questions that Presidents and candidates have asked themselves.

To answer this question, look no further than the current split of Pro-Presidency and abolitionist members. No initiative or program will succeed if enough people are not behind it. This is why my main focus, as President, is getting the opposition to the Presidency as an institution involved with my administration.

This may be taken as a last-ditch effort to make the Presidency useful again. In many ways, it is. To make use of the position, abolition must be beaten in more than just a vote. We can't change the site by continuing to do what we've been doing. We must have the structural change we advocate for.
Jesus loves you.

////////////

-Funny Links-
http://tinyurl.com...
http://tinyurl.com...

Stupid atheist remarks #: 6
Dragon_of_Christ
Posts: 1,293
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2016 7:53:51 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/12/2016 7:13:43 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
***Please do not post until I finish (this will be two posts)***

My campaign's primary focus is redefining the Presidency. DDOers overwhelmingly agree that moderation makes the site better for all, but we can still greatly improve its ability to do good. To do that, we must ask ourselves what we value. There are differing philosophies about what moderation policy should look like. Some seek a laissez-faire policy where we have mostly free reign, and moderators only step in on extreme occasions. Some think that Max should bring the hammer down quicker. These philosophies are not easily balanced when creating policy.

Those in favor of a more lax policy tend to favor Imabench's "DDO Conventions" over Presidential representation. There's one great problem with this system - the moderator veto.

an idea is proposed in a thread that directly addresses how Airmax conducts his job as moderator, or is something that simply cannot be implemented, then Airmax will reserve the right to leave out the proposals from the official Convention thread once he makes the thread... When it comes to actual moderation itself (not including vote moderation), Airmax retains the right to nullify the proposal. This is essentially Airmax's veto power in the new system. Proposals to alter moderation are not flat out banned, Airmax simply retains the ability to veto such proposals. Airmax is also allowed to briefly explain why he omitted certain proposals from being voted on if he chooses to, but it is not necessarily required.

The DDO Convention system is supposed to take over the Presidency's spot as a check to the moderation. But under this system, Max can not only veto the majority opinion - which may be reasonable - but he can choose to outright not talk about the issues. If we are to ever give moderators a good enough input to improve moderation, we cannot simply let topics go ignored. Therefore, as a check to moderation, the abolition replacement plan fails.

So under this convention system, Max and any future mod can choose to not open discussion on vote moderation, the personal conduct policy, or single moderation decisions.

Coming Together

As the President, I will incorporate as many people into the administration as possible. I want abolitionists to put their two cents into any open or closed (PM) debates on any topics that are put on the table. If I work personally to make these people a part of the moderation process, a lot can happen to make the site better. The personal conduct policy can be changed to better reflect the view of the site. The debaters of this site can help perfect vote moderation.

Possibilities are endless if we don't tear each other apart. Being able to work towards a single goal helps bring people together - our common interest is making DDO better (/great again).

The Moderation Process

The President is involved with moderation. The President does not, obviously, have the ability to ban members, remove votes, or anything regarding hard power on the site. But, he has the power of being an advisor to the head of moderation - and the mandate of the democratic majority.

This system allows the membership base of the site to put their views into moderation"s decisions in an effective manner. Any attempt to remove this possibility is, in any event, shortsighted.

Under my administration, members will be able to submit topics relating to moderation-related business to me. From there, I will put topics through a panel to reduce redundancy. Then, broader points may be made into open forum discussions, using examples of the issue that are brought to my attention (e.g. voting policy). Anything that is not redundant but is too isolated to be a part of a broad discussion (e.g. individual moderation issues) will be resolved in private, whether in conjunction with a panel or directly with Max.

The panel for moderation issues will be open to anyone who wishes to join, but there will be limited spots - and the makeup of the panel will properly show the diversity of opinion on the site.

The State of the Presidency and the Community

The Presidency's most important remaining power lies in its ability to argue for the collective values of the site. This allows us to make sure DDO goes in the direction we want it to.

The power is important to harness - a leader who can unite members and get them to work together is extremely valuable for the future of the site. Should we resign ourselves to where the wind blows, or work for a better tomorrow?

So where does community building start? Does it start at hosting tournaments? Does it start at creating loose groups to become better at things like voting? How do we get people to become active in anything that can improve the site? These are questions that Presidents and candidates have asked themselves.

To answer this question, look no further than the current split of Pro-Presidency and abolitionist members. No initiative or program will succeed if enough people are not behind it. This is why my main focus, as President, is getting the opposition to the Presidency as an institution involved with my administration.

This may be taken as a last-ditch effort to make the Presidency useful again. In many ways, it is. To make use of the position, abolition must be beaten in more than just a vote. We can't change the site by continuing to do what we've been doing. We must have the structural change we advocate for.

So by uniting the community you mean further strengthening the elite?

We need a better and more recognized middle class.

Abolition into a democratic system would create this.
Jesus loves you.

////////////

-Funny Links-
http://tinyurl.com...
http://tinyurl.com...

Stupid atheist remarks #: 6
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2016 7:56:35 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
Don't quote the entire page, thank you.
"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
imabench
Posts: 21,219
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2016 8:02:19 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/12/2016 7:13:43 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:

Those in favor of a more lax policy tend to favor Imabench's "DDO Conventions" over Presidential representation. There's one great problem with this system - the moderator veto.

" if an idea is proposed in a thread that directly addresses how Airmax conducts his job as moderator, or is something that simply cannot be implemented, then Airmax will reserve the right to leave out the proposals from the official Convention thread once he makes the thread... When it comes to actual moderation itself (not including vote moderation), Airmax retains the right to nullify the proposal. This is essentially Airmax's veto power in the new system. Proposals to alter moderation are not flat out banned, Airmax simply retains the ability to veto such proposals. Airmax is also allowed to briefly explain why he omitted certain proposals from being voted on if he chooses to, but it is not necessarily required."

The DDO Convention system is supposed to take over the Presidency's spot as a check to the moderation.

Timeout:

I never said that the DDO Convention System is meant to take over the Presidency's check to moderation, and the reason for that is because as far as I know: The president has NO check/power over moderation.

The president has authority only in areas where the mod allows it to have authority. There's nothing that Airmax could be prevented from doing simply by Bsh or any other future president saying 'no' to the idea. If Airmax wanted to ban me in 2 hours, what can the President do to stop him other than a long-winded 'that might not be a good idea because....' post in a PM? Nothing. If Airmax wanted to delete a thread or a debate, what can the president do to stop him? Nothing. If Airmax wanted to de-sticky a thread or do literally anything else the mods are allowed to do on the site, what can the president do to stop it?

Nothing.

The presidency holds no authority over Airmax and at best is just an honorary advisor role. I dont claim that the Convention system will preserve the check of power over the mods because such a check simply does not exist.

But under this system, Max can not only veto the majority opinion - which may be reasonable - but he can choose to outright not talk about the issues. If we are to ever give moderators a good enough input to improve moderation, we cannot simply let topics go ignored. Therefore, as a check to moderation, the abolition replacement plan fails.

The reason the veto-power was included in the system is one you just mentioned: because it can be reasonable for a mod to veto a proposed change to how the site is run based on impossibility or flat out being a bad/wrong idea. To not give Airmax veto-power in the system would mean to allow complete mob rule where any member can propose any change to roll back moderation or ban a disliked member, which could erase the last 3 years of progress moderation has made on the site. The veto power itself is a check on the power that mob-rule could have in the convention system, which a lot of people would naturally worry about since its not outlandish to believe that a prominent member could trick a bunch of boons into ramming a change DDO doesnt want down its throat (aka pulling a mikal).
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2016 8:09:58 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/12/2016 8:02:19 PM, imabench wrote:
At 5/12/2016 7:13:43 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:

Those in favor of a more lax policy tend to favor Imabench's "DDO Conventions" over Presidential representation. There's one great problem with this system - the moderator veto.

" if an idea is proposed in a thread that directly addresses how Airmax conducts his job as moderator, or is something that simply cannot be implemented, then Airmax will reserve the right to leave out the proposals from the official Convention thread once he makes the thread... When it comes to actual moderation itself (not including vote moderation), Airmax retains the right to nullify the proposal. This is essentially Airmax's veto power in the new system. Proposals to alter moderation are not flat out banned, Airmax simply retains the ability to veto such proposals. Airmax is also allowed to briefly explain why he omitted certain proposals from being voted on if he chooses to, but it is not necessarily required."

The DDO Convention system is supposed to take over the Presidency's spot as a check to the moderation.

Timeout:

I never said that the DDO Convention System is meant to take over the Presidency's check to moderation, and the reason for that is because as far as I know: The president has NO check/power over moderation.

The president has authority only in areas where the mod allows it to have authority. There's nothing that Airmax could be prevented from doing simply by Bsh or any other future president saying 'no' to the idea. If Airmax wanted to ban me in 2 hours, what can the President do to stop him other than a long-winded 'that might not be a good idea because....' post in a PM? Nothing. If Airmax wanted to delete a thread or a debate, what can the president do to stop him? Nothing. If Airmax wanted to de-sticky a thread or do literally anything else the mods are allowed to do on the site, what can the president do to stop it?

Nothing.

The presidency holds no authority over Airmax and at best is just an honorary advisor role. I dont claim that the Convention system will preserve the check of power over the mods because such a check simply does not exist.

The power of the President is that we have a chance to elect an advisor that Airmax goes to a lot. Airmax goes to the President on the most controversial of issues, as well as policies. Do we want a representative that will facilitate people taking advantage of this, or do we want a convention system where nothing of note really happens?

But under this system, Max can not only veto the majority opinion - which may be reasonable - but he can choose to outright not talk about the issues. If we are to ever give moderators a good enough input to improve moderation, we cannot simply let topics go ignored. Therefore, as a check to moderation, the abolition replacement plan fails.

The reason the veto-power was included in the system is one you just mentioned: because it can be reasonable for a mod to veto a proposed change to how the site is run based on impossibility or flat out being a bad/wrong idea. To not give Airmax veto-power in the system would mean to allow complete mob rule where any member can propose any change to roll back moderation or ban a disliked member, which could erase the last 3 years of progress moderation has made on the site. The veto power itself is a check on the power that mob-rule could have in the convention system, which a lot of people would naturally worry about since its not outlandish to believe that a prominent member could trick a bunch of boons into ramming a change DDO doesnt want down its throat (aka pulling a mikal).

There's more to the power than what your answer says. I understand fully the need for Airmax to have control over what happens. My problem lies in the fact that you're allowing a situation where Max can stop a controversial topic (like member conduct issues) from being discussed just because it is controversial. A huge part of this part of the platform is that we can't be afraid of drama, and the last person we need to push being afraid of drama is the head moderator (who will not always be Airmax).
"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
Dragon_of_Christ
Posts: 1,293
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2016 8:12:46 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/12/2016 7:56:35 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
Don't quote the entire page, thank you.

Sorry, now rebuttal.

I will erase it in my re-rebuttal.
Jesus loves you.

////////////

-Funny Links-
http://tinyurl.com...
http://tinyurl.com...

Stupid atheist remarks #: 6
imabench
Posts: 21,219
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2016 8:41:01 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/12/2016 8:09:58 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 5/12/2016 8:02:19 PM, imabench wrote:
At 5/12/2016 7:13:43 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:

Those in favor of a more lax policy tend to favor Imabench's "DDO Conventions" over Presidential representation. There's one great problem with this system - the moderator veto.

" if an idea is proposed in a thread that directly addresses how Airmax conducts his job as moderator, or is something that simply cannot be implemented, then Airmax will reserve the right to leave out the proposals from the official Convention thread once he makes the thread... When it comes to actual moderation itself (not including vote moderation), Airmax retains the right to nullify the proposal. This is essentially Airmax's veto power in the new system. Proposals to alter moderation are not flat out banned, Airmax simply retains the ability to veto such proposals. Airmax is also allowed to briefly explain why he omitted certain proposals from being voted on if he chooses to, but it is not necessarily required."

The DDO Convention system is supposed to take over the Presidency's spot as a check to the moderation.

Timeout:

I never said that the DDO Convention System is meant to take over the Presidency's check to moderation, and the reason for that is because as far as I know: The president has NO check/power over moderation.

The president has authority only in areas where the mod allows it to have authority. There's nothing that Airmax could be prevented from doing simply by Bsh or any other future president saying 'no' to the idea. If Airmax wanted to ban me in 2 hours, what can the President do to stop him other than a long-winded 'that might not be a good idea because....' post in a PM? Nothing. If Airmax wanted to delete a thread or a debate, what can the president do to stop him? Nothing. If Airmax wanted to de-sticky a thread or do literally anything else the mods are allowed to do on the site, what can the president do to stop it?

Nothing.

The presidency holds no authority over Airmax and at best is just an honorary advisor role. I dont claim that the Convention system will preserve the check of power over the mods because such a check simply does not exist.

The power of the President is that we have a chance to elect an advisor that Airmax goes to a lot.

Not really. Airmax can consult whoever he wants when it comes to handling issues on DDO, he's not tied to only being able to go to the President in any way, shape, or form. If Airmax does or doesnt respect a member enough to consult their advice, then whether or not the phrase 'DDO President' precedes his name isnt going to change anything.

Airmax goes to the President on the most controversial of issues, as well as policies. Do we want a representative that will facilitate people taking advantage of this, or do we want a convention system where nothing of note really happens?

The convention system wont somehow ban Airmax from being able to seek advice from others if thats what youre trying to imply..... He could consult any of the voting mods or even previous presidents he has worked with in the past for advice if he wishes, the lack of a presidency isnt going to change his options.

But under this system, Max can not only veto the majority opinion - which may be reasonable - but he can choose to outright not talk about the issues. If we are to ever give moderators a good enough input to improve moderation, we cannot simply let topics go ignored. Therefore, as a check to moderation, the abolition replacement plan fails.

The reason the veto-power was included in the system is one you just mentioned: because it can be reasonable for a mod to veto a proposed change to how the site is run based on impossibility or flat out being a bad/wrong idea. To not give Airmax veto-power in the system would mean to allow complete mob rule where any member can propose any change to roll back moderation or ban a disliked member, which could erase the last 3 years of progress moderation has made on the site. The veto power itself is a check on the power that mob-rule could have in the convention system, which a lot of people would naturally worry about since its not outlandish to believe that a prominent member could trick a bunch of boons into ramming a change DDO doesnt want down its throat (aka pulling a mikal).

There's more to the power than what your answer says. I understand fully the need for Airmax to have control over what happens. My problem lies in the fact that you're allowing a situation where Max can stop a controversial topic (like member conduct issues) from being discussed just because it is controversial.

Because we are and always have been at the complete mercy of deferring to his judgment, which most members will agree has almost never let us down. Airmax isnt going to suddenly be on the verge of becoming a tyrannical lord of the site where he shuts down proposals for whatever reason he wants if the presidency goes away.

To believe that this is a problem is to have a very low perception of Airmax's abilities to be a mod.

the last person we need to push being afraid of drama is the head moderator (who will not always be Airmax).

Do any of my 7 temp-bans indicate that Airmax is somehow afraid of getting involved in drama on the site? Any mod that comes after Airmax isnt going to come around for a very, very long time (in internet time), which means youre just pointing at the unknown and assuming there are scary monsters in it somewhere
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2016 1:40:43 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
I'll get back to this later.
"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
5/13/2016 4:56:18 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/12/2016 7:13:43 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
***Please do not post until I finish (this will be two posts)***

My campaign's primary focus is redefining the Presidency. DDOers overwhelmingly agree that moderation makes the site better for all, but we can still greatly improve its ability to do good. To do that, we must ask ourselves what we value. There are differing philosophies about what moderation policy should look like. Some seek a laissez-faire policy where we have mostly free reign, and moderators only step in on extreme occasions. Some think that Max should bring the hammer down quicker. These philosophies are not easily balanced when creating policy.

Those in favor of a more lax policy tend to favor Imabench's "DDO Conventions" over Presidential representation. There's one great problem with this system - the moderator veto.

an idea is proposed in a thread that directly addresses how Airmax conducts his job as moderator, or is something that simply cannot be implemented, then Airmax will reserve the right to leave out the proposals from the official Convention thread once he makes the thread... When it comes to actual moderation itself (not including vote moderation), Airmax retains the right to nullify the proposal. This is essentially Airmax's veto power in the new system. Proposals to alter moderation are not flat out banned, Airmax simply retains the ability to veto such proposals. Airmax is also allowed to briefly explain why he omitted certain proposals from being voted on if he chooses to, but it is not necessarily required.

The DDO Convention system is supposed to take over the Presidency's spot as a check to the moderation. But under this system, Max can not only veto the majority opinion - which may be reasonable - but he can choose to outright not talk about the issues. If we are to ever give moderators a good enough input to improve moderation, we cannot simply let topics go ignored. Therefore, as a check to moderation, the abolition replacement plan fails.

The moderator veto is an *amazing* part of the DDO conventions, because the "majority opinion" might often consist of trolls, et cetera. I've said before the community knows best what is good for it, but I was wrong -- it knows second best. Airmax is easily the person who knows best what's good for the community. He doesn't need a "check" -- he hasn't needed one for *three years.*
"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
5/13/2016 4:58:29 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/13/2016 4:56:18 AM, tejretics wrote:
At 5/12/2016 7:13:43 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
***Please do not post until I finish (this will be two posts)***

My campaign's primary focus is redefining the Presidency. DDOers overwhelmingly agree that moderation makes the site better for all, but we can still greatly improve its ability to do good. To do that, we must ask ourselves what we value. There are differing philosophies about what moderation policy should look like. Some seek a laissez-faire policy where we have mostly free reign, and moderators only step in on extreme occasions. Some think that Max should bring the hammer down quicker. These philosophies are not easily balanced when creating policy.

Those in favor of a more lax policy tend to favor Imabench's "DDO Conventions" over Presidential representation. There's one great problem with this system - the moderator veto.

an idea is proposed in a thread that directly addresses how Airmax conducts his job as moderator, or is something that simply cannot be implemented, then Airmax will reserve the right to leave out the proposals from the official Convention thread once he makes the thread... When it comes to actual moderation itself (not including vote moderation), Airmax retains the right to nullify the proposal. This is essentially Airmax's veto power in the new system. Proposals to alter moderation are not flat out banned, Airmax simply retains the ability to veto such proposals. Airmax is also allowed to briefly explain why he omitted certain proposals from being voted on if he chooses to, but it is not necessarily required.

The DDO Convention system is supposed to take over the Presidency's spot as a check to the moderation. But under this system, Max can not only veto the majority opinion - which may be reasonable - but he can choose to outright not talk about the issues. If we are to ever give moderators a good enough input to improve moderation, we cannot simply let topics go ignored. Therefore, as a check to moderation, the abolition replacement plan fails.

The moderator veto is an *amazing* part of the DDO conventions, because the "majority opinion" might often consist of trolls, et cetera. I've said before the community knows best what is good for it, but I was wrong -- it knows second best. Airmax is easily the person who knows best what's good for the community. He doesn't need a "check" -- he hasn't needed one for *three years.*

Trolls are definitely a part of the experience of the internet, but they do not affect the majority opinion by any stretch of the imagination.

Also, Airmax will not be a mod forever.
"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
5/13/2016 5:11:53 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/12/2016 8:41:01 PM, imabench wrote:
At 5/12/2016 8:09:58 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 5/12/2016 8:02:19 PM, imabench wrote:
At 5/12/2016 7:13:43 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
Timeout:

I never said that the DDO Convention System is meant to take over the Presidency's check to moderation, and the reason for that is because as far as I know: The president has NO check/power over moderation.

The president has authority only in areas where the mod allows it to have authority. There's nothing that Airmax could be prevented from doing simply by Bsh or any other future president saying 'no' to the idea. If Airmax wanted to ban me in 2 hours, what can the President do to stop him other than a long-winded 'that might not be a good idea because....' post in a PM? Nothing. If Airmax wanted to delete a thread or a debate, what can the president do to stop him? Nothing. If Airmax wanted to de-sticky a thread or do literally anything else the mods are allowed to do on the site, what can the president do to stop it?

Nothing.

The presidency holds no authority over Airmax and at best is just an honorary advisor role. I dont claim that the Convention system will preserve the check of power over the mods because such a check simply does not exist.

The power of the President is that we have a chance to elect an advisor that Airmax goes to a lot.

Not really. Airmax can consult whoever he wants when it comes to handling issues on DDO, he's not tied to only being able to go to the President in any way, shape, or form. If Airmax does or doesnt respect a member enough to consult their advice, then whether or not the phrase 'DDO President' precedes his name isnt going to change anything.

It actually does change a lot. Max has said himself that, before he everything went to sh!t, that he was willing to work with Mikal as the President of the community. Mikal, regardless of his contributions to various areas of the site, has never been Max's go-to guy on anything.

Airmax goes to the President on the most controversial of issues, as well as policies. Do we want a representative that will facilitate people taking advantage of this, or do we want a convention system where nothing of note really happens?

The convention system wont somehow ban Airmax from being able to seek advice from others if thats what youre trying to imply..... He could consult any of the voting mods or even previous presidents he has worked with in the past for advice if he wishes, the lack of a presidency isnt going to change his options.

Sometimes, there may be an issue of mods checking problems that concern them. Having an outside opinion can prove valuable.

The reason the veto-power was included in the system is one you just mentioned: because it can be reasonable for a mod to veto a proposed change to how the site is run based on impossibility or flat out being a bad/wrong idea. To not give Airmax veto-power in the system would mean to allow complete mob rule where any member can propose any change to roll back moderation or ban a disliked member, which could erase the last 3 years of progress moderation has made on the site. The veto power itself is a check on the power that mob-rule could have in the convention system, which a lot of people would naturally worry about since its not outlandish to believe that a prominent member could trick a bunch of boons into ramming a change DDO doesnt want down its throat (aka pulling a mikal).

There's more to the power than what your answer says. I understand fully the need for Airmax to have control over what happens. My problem lies in the fact that you're allowing a situation where Max can stop a controversial topic (like member conduct issues) from being discussed just because it is controversial.

Because we are and always have been at the complete mercy of deferring to his judgment, which most members will agree has almost never let us down. Airmax isnt going to suddenly be on the verge of becoming a tyrannical lord of the site where he shuts down proposals for whatever reason he wants if the presidency goes away.

To believe that this is a problem is to have a very low perception of Airmax's abilities to be a mod.

I have pretty high perceptions of him as a mod, and the problem is that he's a rare mod in terms of not fvcking up in judgement. BUT, that does not mean he only relies on his own thought process.

the last person we need to push being afraid of drama is the head moderator (who will not always be Airmax).

Do any of my 7 temp-bans indicate that Airmax is somehow afraid of getting involved in drama on the site? Any mod that comes after Airmax isnt going to come around for a very, very long time (in internet time), which means youre just pointing at the unknown and assuming there are scary monsters in it somewhere

That's exactly what I'm doing, but it's not wrong to do. He could be gone in 6 months, he could be gone in 5 years. When it comes to the point where Max has to go for whatever reasons - having established a precedent where the moderator have a community-given advisor will prove to be a positive for the health of the site.

In regards to Max being afraid of drama - he deals with a lot of bullsh!t. That's pretty obvious. But he likes to deal with it ONLY in private. The only time he ever deals with drama publicly is when he can't use PMs or the member is so extremely and chronically out of line that he needs to use publicity for his point (e.g. Jifpop). So, he may be inclined to prevent a lot of discussions that he will view as inducing drama. That really takes away from what the Conventions can do.
"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
Rosalie
Posts: 4,612
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2016 5:31:52 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/12/2016 7:13:43 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
***Please do not post until I finish (this will be two posts)***

My campaign's primary focus is redefining the Presidency..

Okay, I know this is your motto for your whole campaign.

But, in *your* opinion, not DDO members, but your's, why do you think we need to redefine it? What major issues do you have with the current presidency. Your quote above is simply insinuating that you don't agree what the presidency stands for, even when bsh took the role on. So why do you think it's so important to redefine it?
" We need more videos of cat's playing the piano on the internet" - My art professor.

"Criticism is easier to take when you realize that the only people who aren't criticized are those who don't take risks." - Donald Trump

Officially Mrs. 16Kadams 8-30-16
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2016 5:34:38 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/13/2016 5:31:52 AM, Rosalie wrote:
At 5/12/2016 7:13:43 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
***Please do not post until I finish (this will be two posts)***

My campaign's primary focus is redefining the Presidency..

Okay, I know this is your motto for your whole campaign.

But, in *your* opinion, not DDO members, but your's, why do you think we need to redefine it? What major issues do you have with the current presidency. Your quote above is simply insinuating that you don't agree what the presidency stands for, even when bsh took the role on. So why do you think it's so important to redefine it?

Because I have concern for its long-term survival and effective use, and that's not even getting past the abolition movement.
"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
Rosalie
Posts: 4,612
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2016 5:37:29 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/13/2016 5:34:38 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 5/13/2016 5:31:52 AM, Rosalie wrote:
At 5/12/2016 7:13:43 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
***Please do not post until I finish (this will be two posts)***

My campaign's primary focus is redefining the Presidency..

Okay, I know this is your motto for your whole campaign.

But, in *your* opinion, not DDO members, but your's, why do you think we need to redefine it? What major issues do you have with the current presidency. Your quote above is simply insinuating that you don't agree what the presidency stands for, even when bsh took the role on. So why do you think it's so important to redefine it?

Because I have concern for its long-term survival and effective use, and that's not even getting past the abolition movement.

Obviously.

But what about it's CURRENT standing, and policies etc..that make you feel the way you do, as in you feel the need to reform it?
Do you feel as if bsh isn't doing a good job?
" We need more videos of cat's playing the piano on the internet" - My art professor.

"Criticism is easier to take when you realize that the only people who aren't criticized are those who don't take risks." - Donald Trump

Officially Mrs. 16Kadams 8-30-16
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2016 5:58:01 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/13/2016 5:37:29 AM, Rosalie wrote:
At 5/13/2016 5:34:38 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 5/13/2016 5:31:52 AM, Rosalie wrote:
At 5/12/2016 7:13:43 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
***Please do not post until I finish (this will be two posts)***

My campaign's primary focus is redefining the Presidency..

Okay, I know this is your motto for your whole campaign.

But, in *your* opinion, not DDO members, but your's, why do you think we need to redefine it? What major issues do you have with the current presidency. Your quote above is simply insinuating that you don't agree what the presidency stands for, even when bsh took the role on. So why do you think it's so important to redefine it?

Because I have concern for its long-term survival and effective use, and that's not even getting past the abolition movement.

Obviously.

But what about it's CURRENT standing, and policies etc..that make you feel the way you do, as in you feel the need to reform it?
Do you feel as if bsh isn't doing a good job?

What do you do if you have concerns for the long-term viability of a system?
"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
Rosalie
Posts: 4,612
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2016 6:06:58 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/13/2016 5:58:01 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 5/13/2016 5:37:29 AM, Rosalie wrote:
At 5/13/2016 5:34:38 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 5/13/2016 5:31:52 AM, Rosalie wrote:
At 5/12/2016 7:13:43 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
***Please do not post until I finish (this will be two posts)***

My campaign's primary focus is redefining the Presidency..

Okay, I know this is your motto for your whole campaign.

But, in *your* opinion, not DDO members, but your's, why do you think we need to redefine it? What major issues do you have with the current presidency. Your quote above is simply insinuating that you don't agree what the presidency stands for, even when bsh took the role on. So why do you think it's so important to redefine it?

Because I have concern for its long-term survival and effective use, and that's not even getting past the abolition movement.

Obviously.

But what about it's CURRENT standing, and policies etc..that make you feel the way you do, as in you feel the need to reform it?
Do you feel as if bsh isn't doing a good job?

What do you do if you have concerns for the long-term viability of a system?

You reform it, how you see will benefit it.

You're still not awnsering my question though, please re-read it, and tell me what current issues you have with the way the presidency is, at the given moment.
" We need more videos of cat's playing the piano on the internet" - My art professor.

"Criticism is easier to take when you realize that the only people who aren't criticized are those who don't take risks." - Donald Trump

Officially Mrs. 16Kadams 8-30-16
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2016 6:28:04 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/13/2016 6:06:58 AM, Rosalie wrote:
At 5/13/2016 5:58:01 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 5/13/2016 5:37:29 AM, Rosalie wrote:
At 5/13/2016 5:34:38 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 5/13/2016 5:31:52 AM, Rosalie wrote:
At 5/12/2016 7:13:43 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
***Please do not post until I finish (this will be two posts)***

My campaign's primary focus is redefining the Presidency..

Okay, I know this is your motto for your whole campaign.

But, in *your* opinion, not DDO members, but your's, why do you think we need to redefine it? What major issues do you have with the current presidency. Your quote above is simply insinuating that you don't agree what the presidency stands for, even when bsh took the role on. So why do you think it's so important to redefine it?

Because I have concern for its long-term survival and effective use, and that's not even getting past the abolition movement.

Obviously.

But what about it's CURRENT standing, and policies etc..that make you feel the way you do, as in you feel the need to reform it?
Do you feel as if bsh isn't doing a good job?

What do you do if you have concerns for the long-term viability of a system?

You reform it, how you see will benefit it.

You're still not awnsering my question though, please re-read it, and tell me what current issues you have with the way the presidency is, at the given moment.

I've addressed why the community building aspects of the Presidency need reform. I talked about it in this thread already.
"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
Rosalie
Posts: 4,612
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2016 6:30:09 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/13/2016 6:28:04 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 5/13/2016 6:06:58 AM, Rosalie wrote:
At 5/13/2016 5:58:01 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 5/13/2016 5:37:29 AM, Rosalie wrote:
At 5/13/2016 5:34:38 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 5/13/2016 5:31:52 AM, Rosalie wrote:
At 5/12/2016 7:13:43 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
***Please do not post until I finish (this will be two posts)***

My campaign's primary focus is redefining the Presidency..

Okay, I know this is your motto for your whole campaign.

But, in *your* opinion, not DDO members, but your's, why do you think we need to redefine it? What major issues do you have with the current presidency. Your quote above is simply insinuating that you don't agree what the presidency stands for, even when bsh took the role on. So why do you think it's so important to redefine it?

Because I have concern for its long-term survival and effective use, and that's not even getting past the abolition movement.

Obviously.

But what about it's CURRENT standing, and policies etc..that make you feel the way you do, as in you feel the need to reform it?
Do you feel as if bsh isn't doing a good job?

What do you do if you have concerns for the long-term viability of a system?

You reform it, how you see will benefit it.

You're still not awnsering my question though, please re-read it, and tell me what current issues you have with the way the presidency is, at the given moment.

I've addressed why the community building aspects of the Presidency need reform. I talked about it in this thread already.

You're not answering my question directly...

I will explain or ask you in a PM later As for now, I must get some sleep.
" We need more videos of cat's playing the piano on the internet" - My art professor.

"Criticism is easier to take when you realize that the only people who aren't criticized are those who don't take risks." - Donald Trump

Officially Mrs. 16Kadams 8-30-16
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2016 6:32:07 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/13/2016 6:30:09 AM, Rosalie wrote:
At 5/13/2016 6:28:04 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 5/13/2016 6:06:58 AM, Rosalie wrote:
At 5/13/2016 5:58:01 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 5/13/2016 5:37:29 AM, Rosalie wrote:
At 5/13/2016 5:34:38 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 5/13/2016 5:31:52 AM, Rosalie wrote:
At 5/12/2016 7:13:43 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
***Please do not post until I finish (this will be two posts)***

My campaign's primary focus is redefining the Presidency..

Okay, I know this is your motto for your whole campaign.

But, in *your* opinion, not DDO members, but your's, why do you think we need to redefine it? What major issues do you have with the current presidency. Your quote above is simply insinuating that you don't agree what the presidency stands for, even when bsh took the role on. So why do you think it's so important to redefine it?

Because I have concern for its long-term survival and effective use, and that's not even getting past the abolition movement.

Obviously.

But what about it's CURRENT standing, and policies etc..that make you feel the way you do, as in you feel the need to reform it?
Do you feel as if bsh isn't doing a good job?

What do you do if you have concerns for the long-term viability of a system?

You reform it, how you see will benefit it.

You're still not awnsering my question though, please re-read it, and tell me what current issues you have with the way the presidency is, at the given moment.

I've addressed why the community building aspects of the Presidency need reform. I talked about it in this thread already.

You're not answering my question directly...

I will explain or ask you in a PM later As for now, I must get some sleep.

Read the last two paragraphs of the first post, and see if you really still need me to address your question.
"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
5/13/2016 10:44:00 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
I would like some questions aside from Bench and Rosalie.
"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
imabench
Posts: 21,219
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2016 10:45:27 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/13/2016 10:44:00 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
I would like some questions aside from Bench and Rosalie.

Somebody make a 'definitelynotimabench' account and ask something.

It will make me giggle
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2016 10:46:09 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/13/2016 10:45:27 PM, imabench wrote:
At 5/13/2016 10:44:00 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
I would like some questions aside from Bench and Rosalie.

Somebody make a 'definitelynotimabench' account and ask something.

It will make me giggle

Lol
"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
SolonKR
Posts: 4,041
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2016 10:47:33 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
As much as the whole "Redefining the Presidency" movement is important during this cycle (thus both major non-abolitionist campaigns prioritizing it), I'd like to draw attention to what I feel is almost just as important.

The Community Leadership Program, creating an impartial resource for people to resolve their problems, is something that will have massive benefit for the atmosphere on this site. Discussing moderation policy on the subject is very divisive, but this program is something uncontroversial that recognizes that personal conflicts don't necessarily have objectively right and wrong participants, they just have losers, as all conflicts result in unnecessary misery. In terms of utility for the site, it will be massively helpful in putting out flame wars before they spread. Even if we end up with conventions or a ticket that isn't us, it's really something I want to see added to the site and will lobby hard for. Major props to Harder for that platform plank (yeah, I'm running as his VP, but the point still stands).
SO to Bailey, the love of my life <3
PetersSmith
Posts: 5,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2016 11:27:55 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/12/2016 7:15:31 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
On Drama and Community Leadership

If I'm elected, my administration will become actively involved with moderation. Not only do I want to become involved in policy decisions, but I want my administration to be an organization that can help with snuffing out conflicts before moderators need to become involved. For the large part, something that this community is lacking is people who members can talk to so people don"t have to be warned or banned when things ultimately spiral out of control.

So, one of my new programs will be what I'm tentatively naming the Community Leadership Program. This program will be composed of established members who are willing to, at times, give advice to members in conflict or to directly help work out issues. A problem I often see is people not even trying to end their beefs with other members. With this program, I hope to see more members solve interpersonal issues so they can get back to what makes this site enjoyable.

How exactly are you going to choose these so-called "community moderators"? They will have no authority and it's highly unlikely "heated" members will listen to them. If you ignore this, then it'd be just asking a friend, which automatically brings into the question of bias, to tell their friend to stop a conflict with someone. And we all know how well that works out.
Empress of DDO (also Poll and Forum "Maintenance" Moderator)

"The two most important days in your life is the day you were born, and the day you find out why."
~Mark Twain

"Wow"
-Doge

"Don't believe everything you read on the internet just because there's a picture with a quote next to it."
~Abraham Lincoln

Guide to the Polls Section: http://www.debate.org...
SolonKR
Posts: 4,041
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2016 11:46:10 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/13/2016 11:27:55 PM, PetersSmith wrote:
Choosing them is as simple as finding the least controversial, most involved site members. Of course, there will inevitably be some conflicts of interest, but in that instance, it's just a matter of reassigning the case to another member, and of course any member can abstain from taking a case if they do not feel up to the task. The question isn't so much one of authority as it is a willingness to do it. Speaking as someone who has listened to many people vent on this site, people involved in drama are almost always more than willing to express their point of view, provided that someone is willing to listen.

Rather than telling people to just stop, these people will first be listeners. They'll gain an understanding of the situation, and provide advice to both involved parties how, even if they cannot reconcile their differences, they can stop engaging in a hostile manner. It obviously won't work for everyone, but it's a significant step in the right direction, and it's a step that can be taken before moderation warnings or sanctions have to be implemented. One of the major purposes of the program is to stop flame wars before they start, so anyone can bring up a concern with the program administrator and work toward a solution without any worry of mod intervention.
SO to Bailey, the love of my life <3