Total Posts:24|Showing Posts:1-24
Jump to topic:

\\=== DK/TUF: Elective Administration ===//

donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2016 4:37:00 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
\\====***== Details about the Elective Administration ==***====//

The idea of making the President a liaison between members and the Moderation has become a pretty big ordeal... I didn't think to mention such an idea because this role has already been a principle of most Presidencies. It's inherent to the role. Bringing it up would be like asking for Sweet Tea, and telling them to make it sweet... They already assumed that.

But I would like to expand on how the DK/TUF ticket approaches this role by going in depth on a goal we haven't expanded on a lot lately. The Elective Administration.

We brought this up in both the Original Thread (http://www.debate.org...) and the Official Platform thread (http://www.debate.org...).

\\===***== What is the Elective Administration ==***===//

The Elective Administration is given this name for a reason... Every administration is named after the President, because it's his/her Administration... But this one is named the Elective Administration because it's made by the community, and not by me.

Day 1, the Administration will have 3 members. The Vice President, the Lead Adviser, and an addition backup member. The Elective Administration is under the VP's control, not mine. This is an important role of the Vice President, since it makes him my counter, and not my minion. The Vice President would check my own influence.

When an issue arises, such as concerns that Airmax is a tyrant, each side would elect a member to the Elective Administration. The VP would organize this with one simple election thread... So assume there are three sides...
- Airmax is too strict.
- Airmax is just right.
- Airmax is too lenient.

So now the Elective Administration has 6 members. The first 3, and the 3 who represent the current issues. They would discuss the matter in a PM with Airmax, away from the drama, screaming, and insults of the forum. They would also discuss in public threads, and even do debates/podcasts/interviews, etc... All organized by the Vice President.

This serves three purposes. The first is that the Administration is reflective of what the site's concerned about, and reflects each party involved. It evolves to reflect what the site cares about, not what I care about. It also means that each topic is hit on strongly, because the administration members are focused on it. If it were just me being focused on it, and there were five issues going on, how would I focus fairly on each on? Or prevent burnout? Every topic gets a fair discussion. The Administration reflects the Community fairly and equally.

Secondly, the Administration acts as a liaison with the Moderation. This solves a major problem in 1Harder's plan... The problem is that, if the President believes Airmax is too lenient (using the prior example still), his opinion may/would prevent him from accurately representing all three sides. It can also led to the topic as a whole getting less attention if the President isn't interested in it, or is too busy with other issues. In the Elective Administration, both problems are evaded. And the VP, as a counter to the President, would make sure the President cared about the topic at hand...

The Third purpose is that this organizes the topic, and allows the Moderation to propose accurate options for voting by the community... Basically, think about the DDO Conventions if they happened on the spot, and not months after the topic died out or got lost in it's own overgrowth of threads, pms, and arguments. Also, like the DDO Convention if there wasn't 5-10 other issues you had to deal with in one day...

Now, after the Tyranical Moderation problem is dealt with, the members would stay a bit, and then leave the Administration, keeping it's attention focused on the problems at hand. Likewise, if the community wants something done, like a new tournament, they can elect a member at will to ensure it happens... Just host an one-the-spot election thread. This means that the Vice President's focus is on what the site wants. While the VP focuses on that, the President would focus on what the site needs, ensuring both positions are utilized in the Presidency.

So the Administration reflects what the site wants the Presidency to do. This is far more useful than just voting a single set of opinions into office during the Election, and being stuck with it. Instead, the set of opinions elected into office change as the Elective Administration changes, ensuring the focus and policies of the current Presidency reflects the focus, goals, and policies of the community in real time.

\\===***== Final Remarks ==***===//

The Elective Administration basically covers both the DDO Conventions, and the Liaison with the Moderation ideas. They act as a much more unbiased, fair, and actively involved liaison with the Moderation, and organize a much more accurate Convention... And I do want to say that this concept does not replace personal debate and interactions with Moderation. It's no different than how electing people to Congress doesn't stop you from debating the issues yourself before, during, or after the election.

I felt that, since the Elective Administration is a centerpiece of the DK/TUF ticket, it should be brought up in a separate thread dedicated to it... And as the topics it helps to cover become more prominent, it's importance in the election equally becomes more prominent.

Thanks for reading, I'd love to hear everyone's thoughts!

#SaveThePresidency
#DK/TUF2016
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2016 4:38:52 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
\\ ===***== TL:DR ==***===//

The EA is formed of three core members. When an issue comes around, the VP hosts a simple election thread asking people who they want to elect as their liaison with the other side, and with Moderation.

The elected members will help centralize the ordeal, host events like debate, podcasts, etc, and work with Airmax on a solution. Afterwards, they leave the Administration.

It's that simple. Don't let the size of the post make it appear otherwise. The EA's size and simplistic role (starting at 3 members, likely to stay below 8,) actually makes it the smallest, and less bureaucratic, administration in recent history.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2016 9:04:30 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/16/2016 4:37:00 PM, donald.keller wrote:
Secondly, the Administration acts as a liaison with the Moderation. This solves a major problem in 1Harder's plan... The problem is that, if the President believes Airmax is too lenient (using the prior example still), his opinion may/would prevent him from accurately representing all three sides. It can also led to the topic as a whole getting less attention if the President isn't interested in it, or is too busy with other issues. In the Elective Administration, both problems are evaded. And the VP, as a counter to the President, would make sure the President cared about the topic at hand...

Why even bother have a President?

This idea is a step back from the status quo - which would pretty disappointing if implemented. One of the most important qualities in a good leader is the ability to compromise. I'm not going to take hard positions on everything, and I've heard very compelling arguments for more lenient moderation (I'm generally of the neutral opinion) from people like Skep and Thett. I'm pretty open.

Second, it would be a lot easier to have a direct liaison to reduce clutter in the arguments to Airmax. The idea that Max is going to read through entire PM THREADS filled with argumentation for single issues would be insane. However, I can cut to the chase in a PM to Max with the pros and cons for each position with my own personal advice at the end of it all.
"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
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2016 9:24:22 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/16/2016 9:04:30 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 5/16/2016 4:37:00 PM, donald.keller wrote:
Secondly, the Administration acts as a liaison with the Moderation. This solves a major problem in 1Harder's plan... The problem is that, if the President believes Airmax is too lenient (using the prior example still), his opinion may/would prevent him from accurately representing all three sides. It can also led to the topic as a whole getting less attention if the President isn't interested in it, or is too busy with other issues. In the Elective Administration, both problems are evaded. And the VP, as a counter to the President, would make sure the President cared about the topic at hand...

Why even bother have a President?

This is a ridiculous question. You responded to a thread just a day ago that explains what the President would do (and there are still more to come). The EA doesn't replace the President... It does one job, while the President has many others. In case you forgot about that thread: http://www.debate.org...

This idea is a step back from the status quo - which would pretty disappointing if implemented. One of the most important qualities in a good leader is the ability to compromise. I'm not going to take hard positions on everything, and I've heard very compelling arguments for more lenient moderation (I'm generally of the neutral opinion) from people like Skep and Thett. I'm pretty open.

A "good leader" doesn't do job he can't reasonably do. If we have a Voting Reform, Moderation Reform, and Tournament Reform issue at the same time, what would you do? Remember each issue, give each it's due representation, and do so unbiasly with all sides? The EA makes sure each issue gets it's full representation, and that one person's opinion doesn't effect what sides get the best representation.

If it were just one person, what stops you from giving one side the best representation ever, and giving the other side poor representation? Why should someone who knows you disagree with them suddenly trust you? A good leader finds ways to serve the interests of each party. The EA is that way.

Second, it would be a lot easier to have a direct liaison to reduce clutter in the arguments to Airmax. The idea that Max is going to read through entire PM THREADS filled with argumentation for single issues would be insane. However, I can cut to the chase in a PM to Max with the pros and cons for each position with my own personal advice at the end of it all.

Airmax has to go through hundreds of posts over countless threads without the EA. And you representing the debate doesn't change that. You're assuming Airmax can fix the problems without having to scam through the debate. Like if you are the liaison, he'll never have to do that again. The EA centralizes what Airmax has to read, so he doesn't need to go through 5+ threads with hundreds of posts each.

You representing the debate wouldn't change the status quo. He'd still have to read through everything. He can't suddenly ignore the debate and let one person tell him how both sides feel. With the EA, Airmax's job becomes easier. He has one thread to read, and there are only a few people explaining their side, with TUF moderating it. There would be minimal clutter. People trust that the person representing them is doing so correctly, and people trust that the issue isn't being ignored for other issues.

Airmax needs the debate in order to work out the solution. The EA brings the debate in a clutter-free PM thread, so it's easier to read through as it develops. And the EA would host debates/podcasts/interviews that Airmax can read. You can't fulfill that by yourself because a debate can only truly exist if both sides are there to debate.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2016 9:33:59 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
DK, answer this. Don't link me to a thread that doesn't answer the meaning of the question(s):

Why should we have a President for any of this? You're not even moderating your own debates. You're just handing it to TUF, and 9 other people? Where's your leadership?
"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: 4,628
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2016 9:37:13 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/16/2016 9:33:59 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
DK, answer this. Don't link me to a thread that doesn't answer the meaning of the question(s):

Why should we have a President for any of this? You're not even moderating your own debates. You're just handing it to TUF, and 9 other people? Where's your leadership?

Question, is this regarding the VU?
" 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
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2016 9:37:40 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/16/2016 9:37:13 PM, Rosalie wrote:
At 5/16/2016 9:33:59 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
DK, answer this. Don't link me to a thread that doesn't answer the meaning of the question(s):

Why should we have a President for any of this? You're not even moderating your own debates. You're just handing it to TUF, and 9 other people? Where's your leadership?

Question, is this regarding the VU?

Didn't even cross my mind.
"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: 4,628
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2016 9:39:26 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/16/2016 9:37:40 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 5/16/2016 9:37:13 PM, Rosalie wrote:
At 5/16/2016 9:33:59 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
DK, answer this. Don't link me to a thread that doesn't answer the meaning of the question(s):

Why should we have a President for any of this? You're not even moderating your own debates. You're just handing it to TUF, and 9 other people? Where's your leadership?

Question, is this regarding the VU?

Didn't even cross my mind.

I know it's difficult for you to be serious, and not sarcastic...

But your accusations are quite faulty, considering you don't even debate, nor are you in the VU.
" 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
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2016 9:40:39 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/16/2016 9:39:26 PM, Rosalie wrote:
At 5/16/2016 9:37:40 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 5/16/2016 9:37:13 PM, Rosalie wrote:
At 5/16/2016 9:33:59 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
DK, answer this. Don't link me to a thread that doesn't answer the meaning of the question(s):

Why should we have a President for any of this? You're not even moderating your own debates. You're just handing it to TUF, and 9 other people? Where's your leadership?

Question, is this regarding the VU?

Didn't even cross my mind.

I know it's difficult for you to be serious, and not sarcastic...

But your accusations are quite faulty, considering you don't even debate, nor are you in the VU.

This thread has nothing to do with the VU.

Also, I don't debate often...and that matters...why?
"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
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2016 9:42:32 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/16/2016 9:33:59 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
DK, answer this. Don't link me to a thread that doesn't answer the meaning of the question(s):

I link very well answered your question. You asked "why have a president" if we had the Elective Administration, and I gave you link to one of many of the President's proposed roles... His reasons for still existing.

Why should we have a President for any of this? You're not even moderating your own debates. You're just handing it to TUF, and 9 other people? Where's your leadership?

I've been here in every argument. Every debate, I've been involved in, more than any other member supporting me. List one argument where I wasn't there. In the AMA, Original Thread, and Platform thread, I've responded to nearly every post (even JMK's massive post-long critique.) I've responded to all comments here and on the Social/Entertainment thread.

Go on. List one thread where I didn't take an active role in defending me and TUF's ticket. Lying about me isn't going to help demonize me.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2016 9:44:02 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/16/2016 9:39:26 PM, Rosalie wrote:
At 5/16/2016 9:37:40 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 5/16/2016 9:37:13 PM, Rosalie wrote:
At 5/16/2016 9:33:59 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
DK, answer this. Don't link me to a thread that doesn't answer the meaning of the question(s):

Why should we have a President for any of this? You're not even moderating your own debates. You're just handing it to TUF, and 9 other people? Where's your leadership?

Question, is this regarding the VU?

Didn't even cross my mind.

I know it's difficult for you to be serious, and not sarcastic...

But your accusations are quite faulty, considering you don't even debate, nor are you in the VU.

He's talking about debating in defense of me and TUF's ticket. Despite how I've made up the majority of replies to people challenging my platform, and attacking me.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2016 9:46:22 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/16/2016 9:42:32 PM, donald.keller wrote:
At 5/16/2016 9:33:59 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
DK, answer this. Don't link me to a thread that doesn't answer the meaning of the question(s):

I link very well answered your question. You asked "why have a president" if we had the Elective Administration, and I gave you link to one of many of the President's proposed roles... His reasons for still existing.

Why should we have a President for any of this? You're not even moderating your own debates. You're just handing it to TUF, and 9 other people? Where's your leadership?

I've been here in every argument. Every debate, I've been involved in, more than any other member supporting me. List one argument where I wasn't there. In the AMA, Original Thread, and Platform thread, I've responded to nearly every post (even JMK's massive post-long critique.) I've responded to all comments here and on the Social/Entertainment thread.

Go on. List one thread where I didn't take an active role in defending me and TUF's ticket. Lying about me isn't going to help demonize me.

Not lying about you - I think you misunderstood the question. Don't be too quick to climb on a high horse when one isn't next to you.

The question - and actually answer it - what is the President even doing with moderation under your administration? What is the point of even attaching the Presidency to the EA? Why not just abolish the Presidency and establish this through the Convention?
"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: 4,628
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2016 9:47:08 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/16/2016 9:44:02 PM, donald.keller wrote:
At 5/16/2016 9:39:26 PM, Rosalie wrote:
At 5/16/2016 9:37:40 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 5/16/2016 9:37:13 PM, Rosalie wrote:
At 5/16/2016 9:33:59 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
DK, answer this. Don't link me to a thread that doesn't answer the meaning of the question(s):

Why should we have a President for any of this? You're not even moderating your own debates. You're just handing it to TUF, and 9 other people? Where's your leadership?

Question, is this regarding the VU?

Didn't even cross my mind.

I know it's difficult for you to be serious, and not sarcastic...

But your accusations are quite faulty, considering you don't even debate, nor are you in the VU.

He's talking about debating in defense of me and TUF's ticket. Despite how I've made up the majority of replies to people challenging my platform, and attacking me.

Yeah, I got that now, I got confused with something else he said above.

And I can concur that you've responded yourself more than anyone else regarding your platform.
I find it funny how he is making up lies, and attacking you, when he accused me of doing the same thing when I was running, but yet I was being truthful. :p
" 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
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2016 9:48:03 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/16/2016 9:47:08 PM, Rosalie wrote:
At 5/16/2016 9:44:02 PM, donald.keller wrote:
At 5/16/2016 9:39:26 PM, Rosalie wrote:
At 5/16/2016 9:37:40 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 5/16/2016 9:37:13 PM, Rosalie wrote:
At 5/16/2016 9:33:59 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
DK, answer this. Don't link me to a thread that doesn't answer the meaning of the question(s):

Why should we have a President for any of this? You're not even moderating your own debates. You're just handing it to TUF, and 9 other people? Where's your leadership?

Question, is this regarding the VU?

Didn't even cross my mind.

I know it's difficult for you to be serious, and not sarcastic...

But your accusations are quite faulty, considering you don't even debate, nor are you in the VU.

He's talking about debating in defense of me and TUF's ticket. Despite how I've made up the majority of replies to people challenging my platform, and attacking me.

Yeah, I got that now, I got confused with something else he said above.

And I can concur that you've responded yourself more than anyone else regarding your platform.
I find it funny how he is making up lies, and attacking you, when he accused me of doing the same thing when I was running, but yet I was being truthful. :p

You - read. Post 12. This has nothing to do with public affairs.
"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
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2016 9:55:37 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/16/2016 9:46:22 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 5/16/2016 9:42:32 PM, donald.keller wrote:
At 5/16/2016 9:33:59 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
DK, answer this. Don't link me to a thread that doesn't answer the meaning of the question(s):

I link very well answered your question. You asked "why have a president" if we had the Elective Administration, and I gave you link to one of many of the President's proposed roles... His reasons for still existing.

Why should we have a President for any of this? You're not even moderating your own debates. You're just handing it to TUF, and 9 other people? Where's your leadership?

I've been here in every argument. Every debate, I've been involved in, more than any other member supporting me. List one argument where I wasn't there. In the AMA, Original Thread, and Platform thread, I've responded to nearly every post (even JMK's massive post-long critique.) I've responded to all comments here and on the Social/Entertainment thread.

Go on. List one thread where I didn't take an active role in defending me and TUF's ticket. Lying about me isn't going to help demonize me.

Not lying about you - I think you misunderstood the question. Don't be too quick to climb on a high horse when one isn't next to you.

Accusing someone of "climbing on a high horse" because they are defending themselves is a petty tactic. Especially when your attack is vague.

The question - and actually answer it - what is the President even doing with moderation under your administration? What is the point of even attaching the Presidency to the EA? Why not just abolish the Presidency and establish this through the Convention?

The VP runs the EA... Someone to host the Election thread, and moderate the sides. So to establish it under the Conventions would still requires a presidential-like election every 6 months. So there's that... And the President serves MANY other goals that I outlined in the Social/Entertainment Thread and the Platform thread. The Presidency still has many roles to fulfill in me and TUF's ticket. But being the sole liaison of everyone's issues is not one of them. There are too many issues with that (as I outlined in my first response to you).

Let's take off the baby guards for a moment and explain exactly why having just the President represent people's concerns by himself is not a good idea... To fulfill that role, he must be completely open to other opinions, and able to compromise. I've been with you in the current Administration for months, and can say, after all of our conflicts there, that you are capable of neither. That's why one person shouldn't have that role to themselves. A group, each member representing each side, is the only way to fulfill that role. That is simple honesty.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2016 10:01:41 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/16/2016 9:55:37 PM, donald.keller wrote:
At 5/16/2016 9:46:22 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 5/16/2016 9:42:32 PM, donald.keller wrote:
At 5/16/2016 9:33:59 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
DK, answer this. Don't link me to a thread that doesn't answer the meaning of the question(s):

I link very well answered your question. You asked "why have a president" if we had the Elective Administration, and I gave you link to one of many of the President's proposed roles... His reasons for still existing.

Why should we have a President for any of this? You're not even moderating your own debates. You're just handing it to TUF, and 9 other people? Where's your leadership?

I've been here in every argument. Every debate, I've been involved in, more than any other member supporting me. List one argument where I wasn't there. In the AMA, Original Thread, and Platform thread, I've responded to nearly every post (even JMK's massive post-long critique.) I've responded to all comments here and on the Social/Entertainment thread.

Go on. List one thread where I didn't take an active role in defending me and TUF's ticket. Lying about me isn't going to help demonize me.

Not lying about you - I think you misunderstood the question. Don't be too quick to climb on a high horse when one isn't next to you.

Accusing someone of "climbing on a high horse" because they are defending themselves is a petty tactic. Especially when your attack is vague.

You thought the attack was vague, but you jumped away regardless and called me a liar? Such a vague question should be easy to deflect without resorting to such replies.

The question - and actually answer it - what is the President even doing with moderation under your administration? What is the point of even attaching the Presidency to the EA? Why not just abolish the Presidency and establish this through the Convention?

The VP runs the EA... Someone to host the Election thread, and moderate the sides. So to establish it under the Conventions would still requires a presidential-like election every 6 months. So there's that... And the President serves MANY other goals that I outlined in the Social/Entertainment Thread and the Platform thread. The Presidency still has many roles to fulfill in me and TUF's ticket. But being the sole liaison of everyone's issues is not one of them. There are too many issues with that (as I outlined in my first response to you).

So you don't have the energy or time to do things the sitting President does? Bsh does community stuff and advises Max. It's not impossible.

Also, are representatives staying for life? You're going to need new elections regardless of the President.

Let's take off the baby guards for a moment and explain exactly why having just the President represent people's concerns by himself is not a good idea... To fulfill that role, he must be completely open to other opinions, and able to compromise. I've been with you in the current Administration for months, and can say, after all of our conflicts there, that you are capable of neither. That's why one person shouldn't have that role to themselves. A group, each member representing each side, is the only way to fulfill that role. That is simple honesty.

I had a disagreement with you that I wouldn't budge on...but you took personal offense because it implicated the VU. And if you want, I could litigate that issue publicly.

Also, watch yourself, DK.
"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
5/16/2016 10:20:51 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
DK: yes or no - do you want me to make a thread on our long disagreement on that issue? I have no problem discussing it and the implications of applying the policy to the site - as well as its implications on your ability as a leader.
"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
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2016 10:40:20 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/16/2016 10:01:41 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 5/16/2016 9:55:37 PM, donald.keller wrote:
At 5/16/2016 9:46:22 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 5/16/2016 9:42:32 PM, donald.keller wrote:
At 5/16/2016 9:33:59 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
DK, answer this. Don't link me to a thread that doesn't answer the meaning of the question(s):

I link very well answered your question. You asked "why have a president" if we had the Elective Administration, and I gave you link to one of many of the President's proposed roles... His reasons for still existing.

Why should we have a President for any of this? You're not even moderating your own debates. You're just handing it to TUF, and 9 other people? Where's your leadership?

I've been here in every argument. Every debate, I've been involved in, more than any other member supporting me. List one argument where I wasn't there. In the AMA, Original Thread, and Platform thread, I've responded to nearly every post (even JMK's massive post-long critique.) I've responded to all comments here and on the Social/Entertainment thread.

Go on. List one thread where I didn't take an active role in defending me and TUF's ticket. Lying about me isn't going to help demonize me.

Not lying about you - I think you misunderstood the question. Don't be too quick to climb on a high horse when one isn't next to you.

Accusing someone of "climbing on a high horse" because they are defending themselves is a petty tactic. Especially when your attack is vague.

You thought the attack was vague, but you jumped away regardless and called me a liar? Such a vague question should be easy to deflect without resorting to such replies.

An attack can look actually how you think it looks, but actually be vague once the person explains that they meant something else.

The question - and actually answer it - what is the President even doing with moderation under your administration? What is the point of even attaching the Presidency to the EA? Why not just abolish the Presidency and establish this through the Convention?

The VP runs the EA... Someone to host the Election thread, and moderate the sides. So to establish it under the Conventions would still requires a presidential-like election every 6 months. So there's that... And the President serves MANY other goals that I outlined in the Social/Entertainment Thread and the Platform thread. The Presidency still has many roles to fulfill in me and TUF's ticket. But being the sole liaison of everyone's issues is not one of them. There are too many issues with that (as I outlined in my first response to you).

So you don't have the energy or time to do things the sitting President does? Bsh does community stuff and advises Max. It's not impossible.

Who said I didn't have the energy? It's about having the focus and unbias position needed to fairly address every side of every issue to Airmax... Advising is far different. And Bsh hardly has that kind of energy. He has a 12 men administration doing everything, while he moderates them... The EA is the Mod-liaison version of that. It's why Bsh did so well. He focused on finding a way around his inability to do everything.

Also, are representatives staying for life? You're going to need new elections regardless of the President.

This comment makes me believe you didn't read the thread fully, because I wrote this: "Now, after the Tyranical Moderation problem is dealt with, the members would stay a bit, and then leave the Administration, keeping it's attention focused on the problems at hand."

Let's take off the baby guards for a moment and explain exactly why having just the President represent people's concerns by himself is not a good idea... To fulfill that role, he must be completely open to other opinions, and able to compromise. I've been with you in the current Administration for months, and can say, after all of our conflicts there, that you are capable of neither. That's why one person shouldn't have that role to themselves. A group, each member representing each side, is the only way to fulfill that role. That is simple honesty.

I had a disagreement with you that I wouldn't budge on...but you took personal offense because it implicated the VU. And if you want, I could litigate that issue publicly.

Hardly true. I was actually talking about Bsh implementing my idea of having a budget. And of removing the terms "official" and "unoffical" from everything. And every opinion I gave. My comments on the VU was that I wouldn't be against Presidential support, but that I have no opinion. Claiming I took personal offense to you not budging is a blatant lie. We can make this a public issue, but we've already stretched our contracts with Bsh to their limits. You can to ask him. I have the thread up right now, and I can see the two only comments I made on it.

Also, watch yourself, DK.

You compromised on nothing in the Administration, with the exception of things you already agreed with. This is why one guy shouldn't act as liaison for every party and their beliefs.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2016 11:03:38 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/16/2016 10:40:20 PM, donald.keller wrote:
At 5/16/2016 10:01:41 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 5/16/2016 9:55:37 PM, donald.keller wrote:
At 5/16/2016 9:46:22 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 5/16/2016 9:42:32 PM, donald.keller wrote:
At 5/16/2016 9:33:59 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
DK, answer this. Don't link me to a thread that doesn't answer the meaning of the question(s):

I link very well answered your question. You asked "why have a president" if we had the Elective Administration, and I gave you link to one of many of the President's proposed roles... His reasons for still existing.

Why should we have a President for any of this? You're not even moderating your own debates. You're just handing it to TUF, and 9 other people? Where's your leadership?

I've been here in every argument. Every debate, I've been involved in, more than any other member supporting me. List one argument where I wasn't there. In the AMA, Original Thread, and Platform thread, I've responded to nearly every post (even JMK's massive post-long critique.) I've responded to all comments here and on the Social/Entertainment thread.

Go on. List one thread where I didn't take an active role in defending me and TUF's ticket. Lying about me isn't going to help demonize me.

Not lying about you - I think you misunderstood the question. Don't be too quick to climb on a high horse when one isn't next to you.

Accusing someone of "climbing on a high horse" because they are defending themselves is a petty tactic. Especially when your attack is vague.

You thought the attack was vague, but you jumped away regardless and called me a liar? Such a vague question should be easy to deflect without resorting to such replies.

An attack can look actually how you think it looks, but actually be vague once the person explains that they meant something else.

The question - and actually answer it - what is the President even doing with moderation under your administration? What is the point of even attaching the Presidency to the EA? Why not just abolish the Presidency and establish this through the Convention?

The VP runs the EA... Someone to host the Election thread, and moderate the sides. So to establish it under the Conventions would still requires a presidential-like election every 6 months. So there's that... And the President serves MANY other goals that I outlined in the Social/Entertainment Thread and the Platform thread. The Presidency still has many roles to fulfill in me and TUF's ticket. But being the sole liaison of everyone's issues is not one of them. There are too many issues with that (as I outlined in my first response to you).

So you don't have the energy or time to do things the sitting President does? Bsh does community stuff and advises Max. It's not impossible.

Who said I didn't have the energy? It's about having the focus and unbias position needed to fairly address every side of every issue to Airmax... Advising is far different. And Bsh hardly has that kind of energy. He has a 12 men administration doing everything, while he moderates them... The EA is the Mod-liaison version of that. It's why Bsh did so well. He focused on finding a way around his inability to do everything.

Also, are representatives staying for life? You're going to need new elections regardless of the President.

This comment makes me believe you didn't read the thread fully, because I wrote this: "Now, after the Tyranical Moderation problem is dealt with, the members would stay a bit, and then leave the Administration, keeping it's attention focused on the problems at hand."

So you think the EA will have no use after awhile?

Let's take off the baby guards for a moment and explain exactly why having just the President represent people's concerns by himself is not a good idea... To fulfill that role, he must be completely open to other opinions, and able to compromise. I've been with you in the current Administration for months, and can say, after all of our conflicts there, that you are capable of neither. That's why one person shouldn't have that role to themselves. A group, each member representing each side, is the only way to fulfill that role. That is simple honesty.

I had a disagreement with you that I wouldn't budge on...but you took personal offense because it implicated the VU. And if you want, I could litigate that issue publicly.

Hardly true. I was actually talking about Bsh implementing my idea of having a budget. And of removing the terms "official" and "unoffical" from everything. And every opinion I gave. My comments on the VU was that I wouldn't be against Presidential support, but that I have no opinion. Claiming I took personal offense to you not budging is a blatant lie. We can make this a public issue, but we've already stretched our contracts with Bsh to their limits. You can to ask him. I have the thread up right now, and I can see the two only comments I made on it.

Really? You're the one who brought the administrative panel up. All I did was say I was willing to litigate it publicly, if you want the full picture available.

Also, watch yourself, DK.

You compromised on nothing in the Administration, with the exception of things you already agreed with. This is why one guy shouldn't act as liaison for every party and their beliefs.

First, someone in an advisory panel needs not be the great compromiser. I gave and defended my point of view in the way I best felt would help Bsh.
"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
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2016 9:45:47 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
For people who where confused by the drama, this is one of the three main focuses of my Platform. The other two are:
- Voting Reform
- Social/Entertainment Programs.

Let's keep focused on the actual issues at play. One Platform v another.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
Hayd
Posts: 4,022
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/24/2016 4:39:00 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/23/2016 9:45:47 PM, donald.keller wrote:
For people who where confused by the drama, this is one of the three main focuses of my Platform. The other two are:
- Voting Reform
- Social/Entertainment Programs.

Let's keep focused on the actual issues at play. One Platform v another.

I thought you guys dropped voting reform, that's what tej said
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/24/2016 4:41:37 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/24/2016 4:39:00 AM, Hayd wrote:
At 5/23/2016 9:45:47 PM, donald.keller wrote:
For people who where confused by the drama, this is one of the three main focuses of my Platform. The other two are:
- Voting Reform
- Social/Entertainment Programs.

Let's keep focused on the actual issues at play. One Platform v another.

I thought you guys dropped voting reform, that's what tej said

We dropped the original idea I had, long before I announced our candidacy. I kept the rest of the ideas.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
Hayd
Posts: 4,022
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/24/2016 4:55:35 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/24/2016 4:41:37 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 5/24/2016 4:39:00 AM, Hayd wrote:
At 5/23/2016 9:45:47 PM, donald.keller wrote:
For people who where confused by the drama, this is one of the three main focuses of my Platform. The other two are:
- Voting Reform
- Social/Entertainment Programs.

Let's keep focused on the actual issues at play. One Platform v another.

I thought you guys dropped voting reform, that's what tej said

We dropped the original idea I had, long before I announced our candidacy. I kept the rest of the ideas.

Tej said you are only increasing awareness of voting standards. That's it
http://www.debate.org...
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/24/2016 4:56:58 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/24/2016 4:55:35 AM, Hayd wrote:
At 5/24/2016 4:41:37 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 5/24/2016 4:39:00 AM, Hayd wrote:
At 5/23/2016 9:45:47 PM, donald.keller wrote:
For people who where confused by the drama, this is one of the three main focuses of my Platform. The other two are:
- Voting Reform
- Social/Entertainment Programs.

Let's keep focused on the actual issues at play. One Platform v another.

I thought you guys dropped voting reform, that's what tej said

We dropped the original idea I had, long before I announced our candidacy. I kept the rest of the ideas.

Tej said you are only increasing awareness of voting standards. That's it
http://www.debate.org...

To the many different standards. An options-friendly approach. I wrote about this in my Platform thread.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --