Total Posts:45|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Vote for Wylted to be the next DDO President!

dsjpk5
Posts: 3,011
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2015 12:16:57 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
For too long, we members of the religious forum community have been left out of the seats of power on this website. Well, that would all change if we banded together and voted for Wylted to be the next DDO President. Finally, we would have the ability to make real change around here. Finally, our voices would be heard! Please join me in electing Wylted as the next DDO President!

If anyone is interested in reading Wylted's campaign platform, you can find it here:

http://www.debate.org...
If that was the only issue, then vote moderation could be avoided more often, since a vote in which the voter does explain sufficiently how at least one point a debater made swung their vote, would be considered sufficient. -Airmax
tstor
Posts: 1,467
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2015 3:31:45 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/15/2015 12:16:57 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
Yeah, ONLY our voices would be heard according to him:
"The reason for this, is because I'm running for you guys. I'm specifically trying to make this a better site for the religious sub forum. By doing this, I am completely ignoring the needs and wants of the rest of the site. You guys come first, and actually are my only concern. I'm the first religion forum candidate, and I'm going to need your full support. I need close to 100% of the active members on this part of the site to vote, and vote in my favor. If this is the main portion of the site you visit, you should absolutely be voting for me, since my entire platform is there to help you guys out. Not a single piece of my platform is designed with any other portions of this site in mind. Like I said, I'm completely disregarding everyone else."

He is running to be president of the entire website. Only caring for 1/18 of the forums is not really that great of an idea.
"The afternoon came down as imperceptibly as age comes to a happy man. A little gold entered into the sunlight. The bay became bluer and dimpled with shore-wind ripples. Those lonely fishermen who believe that the fish bite at high tide left their rocks, and their places were taken by others, who were convinced that the fish bite at low tide." (John Steinbeck; Tortilla Flat, 1935)
dsjpk5
Posts: 3,011
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2015 3:56:34 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/15/2015 3:31:45 PM, tstor wrote:
At 11/15/2015 12:16:57 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
Yeah, ONLY our voices would be heard according to him:
"The reason for this, is because I'm running for you guys. I'm specifically trying to make this a better site for the religious sub forum. By doing this, I am completely ignoring the needs and wants of the rest of the site. You guys come first, and actually are my only concern. I'm the first religion forum candidate, and I'm going to need your full support. I need close to 100% of the active members on this part of the site to vote, and vote in my favor. If this is the main portion of the site you visit, you should absolutely be voting for me, since my entire platform is there to help you guys out. Not a single piece of my platform is designed with any other portions of this site in mind. Like I said, I'm completely disregarding everyone else."

He is running to be president of the entire website. Only caring for 1/18 of the forums is not really that great of an idea.

Hey, he may not be everyone's candidate,but he's OUR candidate. He may or may not win, but I'm supporting him because he's supporting us. I think you should too.
If that was the only issue, then vote moderation could be avoided more often, since a vote in which the voter does explain sufficiently how at least one point a debater made swung their vote, would be considered sufficient. -Airmax
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,641
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2015 4:02:35 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/15/2015 12:16:57 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
For too long, we members of the religious forum community have been left out of the seats of power on this website. Well, that would all change if we banded together and voted for Wylted to be the next DDO President. Finally, we would have the ability to make real change around here. Finally, our voices would be heard!

Funny stuff. The "President" is just an impotent figure head with no power to do anything. Real change? LOL.

Please join me in electing Wylted as the next DDO President!

If anyone is interested in reading Wylted's campaign platform, you can find it here:

http://www.debate.org...
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
dsjpk5
Posts: 3,011
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2015 5:22:42 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/15/2015 4:02:35 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 11/15/2015 12:16:57 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
For too long, we members of the religious forum community have been left out of the seats of power on this website. Well, that would all change if we banded together and voted for Wylted to be the next DDO President. Finally, we would have the ability to make real change around here. Finally, our voices would be heard!

Funny stuff. The "President" is just an impotent figure head with no power to do anything. Real change? LOL.


Well then, there's no reason not to vote for him. After all, you shouldn't be afraid he could damage the website!

#TeamWylted

Please join me in electing Wylted as the next DDO President!

If anyone is interested in reading Wylted's campaign platform, you can find it here:

http://www.debate.org...
If that was the only issue, then vote moderation could be avoided more often, since a vote in which the voter does explain sufficiently how at least one point a debater made swung their vote, would be considered sufficient. -Airmax
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2015 5:50:15 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Not growing up in a US high school system, I really don't understand the election of popular members as president.

Doesn't a president 'preside'? Isn't it therefore essentially an executive coordination role?

What then are the executive functions being coordinated, and who is responsible for them?

And given that any site dedicated to contentious discussion will attract its share of intellectuals, armchair philosophers, zealots, narcissists, sadists and ratbags -- all sharing common disk storage -- what executive functions does such a disparate group require, beyond administration and social mediation?

My question isn't why vote for Wylted, but why vote at all?
dee-em
Posts: 6,490
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2015 10:15:10 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/15/2015 5:50:15 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
Not growing up in a US high school system, I really don't understand the election of popular members as president.

Doesn't a president 'preside'? Isn't it therefore essentially an executive coordination role?

What then are the executive functions being coordinated, and who is responsible for them?

And given that any site dedicated to contentious discussion will attract its share of intellectuals, armchair philosophers, zealots, narcissists, sadists and ratbags -- all sharing common disk storage -- what executive functions does such a disparate group require, beyond administration and social mediation?

My question isn't why vote for Wylted, but why vote at all?

You and me can't vote anyway. The rules require that you have to have taken part in debates and reached a certain rating. We are second-class citizens. (Not that I care).
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2015 10:16:43 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/15/2015 10:15:10 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 11/15/2015 5:50:15 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
Not growing up in a US high school system, I really don't understand the election of popular members as president.

Doesn't a president 'preside'? Isn't it therefore essentially an executive coordination role?

What then are the executive functions being coordinated, and who is responsible for them?

And given that any site dedicated to contentious discussion will attract its share of intellectuals, armchair philosophers, zealots, narcissists, sadists and ratbags -- all sharing common disk storage -- what executive functions does such a disparate group require, beyond administration and social mediation?

My question isn't why vote for Wylted, but why vote at all?

You and me can't vote anyway. The rules require that you have to have taken part in debates and reached a certain rating. We are second-class citizens. (Not that I care).

Oh, I prefer to think of us as first-class citizens riding in the baggage car, Dee-Em. :D
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,641
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2015 10:39:41 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/15/2015 5:22:42 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 11/15/2015 4:02:35 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 11/15/2015 12:16:57 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
For too long, we members of the religious forum community have been left out of the seats of power on this website. Well, that would all change if we banded together and voted for Wylted to be the next DDO President. Finally, we would have the ability to make real change around here. Finally, our voices would be heard!

Funny stuff. The "President" is just an impotent figure head with no power to do anything. Real change? LOL.


Well then, there's no reason not to vote for him. After all, you shouldn't be afraid he could damage the website!

Perhaps, but there is ample reason contained in my post not to vote. Period. And, I can think of a million more reasons.

Team Wylted has yet to offer any reason to vote, let alone vote for him.

You say, "Real Change", yet no outline of a plan has been presented. Amateurs.

#TeamWylted

Please join me in electing Wylted as the next DDO President!

If anyone is interested in reading Wylted's campaign platform, you can find it here:

http://www.debate.org...
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2015 10:42:32 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/15/2015 4:02:35 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 11/15/2015 12:16:57 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
For too long, we members of the religious forum community have been left out of the seats of power on this website. Well, that would all change if we banded together and voted for Wylted to be the next DDO President. Finally, we would have the ability to make real change around here. Finally, our voices would be heard!

Funny stuff. The "President" is just an impotent figure head with no power to do anything. Real change? LOL.

We've discussed this before, and I've described how you're wrong. If you'd like, I can go over it with you again.
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


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

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

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

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,641
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2015 1:23:03 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/15/2015 10:42:32 PM, bsh1 wrote:
At 11/15/2015 4:02:35 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 11/15/2015 12:16:57 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
For too long, we members of the religious forum community have been left out of the seats of power on this website. Well, that would all change if we banded together and voted for Wylted to be the next DDO President. Finally, we would have the ability to make real change around here. Finally, our voices would be heard!

Funny stuff. The "President" is just an impotent figure head with no power to do anything. Real change? LOL.

We've discussed this before, and I've described how you're wrong. If you'd like, I can go over it with you again.

I recall you describing how powerless you were to do anything.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
dsjpk5
Posts: 3,011
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2015 1:43:06 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/15/2015 10:39:41 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 11/15/2015 5:22:42 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 11/15/2015 4:02:35 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 11/15/2015 12:16:57 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
For too long, we members of the religious forum community have been left out of the seats of power on this website. Well, that would all change if we banded together and voted for Wylted to be the next DDO President. Finally, we would have the ability to make real change around here. Finally, our voices would be heard!

Funny stuff. The "President" is just an impotent figure head with no power to do anything. Real change? LOL.


Well then, there's no reason not to vote for him. After all, you shouldn't be afraid he could damage the website!

Perhaps, but there is ample reason contained in my post not to vote. Period. And, I can think of a million more reasons.

Team Wylted has yet to offer any reason to vote, let alone vote for him.

I'm sure he will, or you could ask him.

You say, "Real Change", yet no outline of a plan has been presented. Amateurs.


Well, since I'm not a part of his campaign, you shouldn't expect me to outline a plan.

#TeamWylted

Please join me in electing Wylted as the next DDO President!

If anyone is interested in reading Wylted's campaign platform, you can find it here:

http://www.debate.org...
If that was the only issue, then vote moderation could be avoided more often, since a vote in which the voter does explain sufficiently how at least one point a debater made swung their vote, would be considered sufficient. -Airmax
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2015 6:03:04 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/15/2015 10:42:32 PM, bsh1 wrote:
At 11/15/2015 4:02:35 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
Funny stuff. The "President" is just an impotent figure head with no power to do anything. Real change? LOL.
We've discussed this before, and I've described how you're wrong. If you'd like, I can go over it with you again.

Bish, thank you for your contributions to the site during your tenure as president. I'm aware you have been active, and can attest that it has had benefit, though I'm less clear on how that activity is presidential: to me it looked like thoughtful advocacy.

With that tenure drawing to a close, and given the confusion in this thread (mine and others) would you care to comment on what you think the role is for, how you feel it benefits the site, and what characteristics you think a good site president needs?
johnlubba
Posts: 2,892
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2015 6:33:21 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/16/2015 6:03:04 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 11/15/2015 10:42:32 PM, bsh1 wrote:
At 11/15/2015 4:02:35 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
Funny stuff. The "President" is just an impotent figure head with no power to do anything. Real change? LOL.
We've discussed this before, and I've described how you're wrong. If you'd like, I can go over it with you again.

Bish, thank you for your contributions to the site during your tenure as president. I'm aware you have been active, and can attest that it has had benefit, though I'm less clear on how that activity is presidential: to me it looked like thoughtful advocacy.

With that tenure drawing to a close, and given the confusion in this thread (mine and others) would you care to comment on what you think the role is for, how you feel it benefits the site, and what characteristics you think a good site president needs?

It's bsh1 not Bish, you fool, are you trying to be offensive or does it come naturally.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2015 6:41:19 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/16/2015 6:33:21 PM, johnlubba wrote:
At 11/16/2015 6:03:04 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 11/15/2015 10:42:32 PM, bsh1 wrote:
At 11/15/2015 4:02:35 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
Funny stuff. The "President" is just an impotent figure head with no power to do anything. Real change? LOL.
We've discussed this before, and I've described how you're wrong. If you'd like, I can go over it with you again.

Bish, thank you for your contributions to the site during your tenure as president. I'm aware you have been active, and can attest that it has had benefit, though I'm less clear on how that activity is presidential: to me it looked like thoughtful advocacy.

With that tenure drawing to a close, and given the confusion in this thread (mine and others) would you care to comment on what you think the role is for, how you feel it benefits the site, and what characteristics you think a good site president needs?

It's bsh1 not Bish, you fool, are you trying to be offensive or does it come naturally.

Hi John!

I took my spelling from Bsh's sig, in which he wrote "I'm a Bish." My thought was, either he is Bish, in which case I've guessed right, or he's a Bish called Bsh1, in which case I've been calling him the equivalent of 'Human', to which I hope anyone called Bsh1 (a clonish name if I ever heard one) wouldn't take offense.

But in answer to your broader question: no, I need not try to be offensive. As an Australian, it comes naturally to me, but thank you for your concern.

(Also.. perhaps you'd best not drink any more tonight? Or if you do, not post any more?)
johnlubba
Posts: 2,892
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2015 6:49:53 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/16/2015 6:41:19 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 11/16/2015 6:33:21 PM, johnlubba wrote:
At 11/16/2015 6:03:04 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 11/15/2015 10:42:32 PM, bsh1 wrote:
At 11/15/2015 4:02:35 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
Funny stuff. The "President" is just an impotent figure head with no power to do anything. Real change? LOL.
We've discussed this before, and I've described how you're wrong. If you'd like, I can go over it with you again.

Bish, thank you for your contributions to the site during your tenure as president. I'm aware you have been active, and can attest that it has had benefit, though I'm less clear on how that activity is presidential: to me it looked like thoughtful advocacy.

With that tenure drawing to a close, and given the confusion in this thread (mine and others) would you care to comment on what you think the role is for, how you feel it benefits the site, and what characteristics you think a good site president needs?

It's bsh1 not Bish, you fool, are you trying to be offensive or does it come naturally.

Hi John!

I took my spelling from Bsh's sig, in which he wrote "I'm a Bish." My thought was, either he is Bish, in which case I've guessed right, or he's a Bish called Bsh1, in which case I've been calling him the equivalent of 'Human', to which I hope anyone called Bsh1 (a clonish name if I ever heard one) wouldn't take offense.

But in answer to your broader question: no, I need not try to be offensive. As an Australian, it comes naturally to me, but thank you for your concern.

(Also.. perhaps you'd best not drink any more tonight? Or if you do, not post any more?)

Another ignorant, arrogant, and dumb stupid claim,

1: don't bother with lengthy boring replies to me, I find your posts nauseating.
2: I haven't been drinking, So don't make arrogant and ignorant claims, Truth be told, I actually now despise you and have zero respect for you, ZERO. You pulled a low blow and a cheap shot on me last time and I won't forgive, unlike the Christians worldview you so desire to destroy.

In my opinion you are a weasel, a low life, scumbag and a horrid addition to humanity.

Please refer to one when responding.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2015 6:55:26 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/16/2015 6:49:53 PM, johnlubba wrote:
At 11/16/2015 6:41:19 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 11/16/2015 6:33:21 PM, johnlubba wrote:
At 11/16/2015 6:03:04 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 11/15/2015 10:42:32 PM, bsh1 wrote:
At 11/15/2015 4:02:35 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
Funny stuff. The "President" is just an impotent figure head with no power to do anything. Real change? LOL.
We've discussed this before, and I've described how you're wrong. If you'd like, I can go over it with you again.

Bish, thank you for your contributions to the site during your tenure as president. I'm aware you have been active, and can attest that it has had benefit, though I'm less clear on how that activity is presidential: to me it looked like thoughtful advocacy.

With that tenure drawing to a close, and given the confusion in this thread (mine and others) would you care to comment on what you think the role is for, how you feel it benefits the site, and what characteristics you think a good site president needs?

It's bsh1 not Bish, you fool, are you trying to be offensive or does it come naturally.

Hi John!

I took my spelling from Bsh's sig, in which he wrote "I'm a Bish." My thought was, either he is Bish, in which case I've guessed right, or he's a Bish called Bsh1, in which case I've been calling him the equivalent of 'Human', to which I hope anyone called Bsh1 (a clonish name if I ever heard one) wouldn't take offense.

But in answer to your broader question: no, I need not try to be offensive. As an Australian, it comes naturally to me, but thank you for your concern.

(Also.. perhaps you'd best not drink any more tonight? Or if you do, not post any more?)


Another ignorant, arrogant, and dumb stupid claim,

1: don't bother with lengthy boring replies to me, I find your posts nauseating.
2: I haven't been drinking, So don't make arrogant and ignorant claims, Truth be told, I actually now despise you and have zero respect for you, ZERO. You pulled a low blow and a cheap shot on me last time and I won't forgive, unlike the Christians worldview you so desire to destroy.

In my opinion you are a weasel, a low life, scumbag and a horrid addition to humanity.

Please refer to one when responding.

John, are you okay? We haven't corresponded in weeks, and nothing I've posted in that time was about you or addressed to you. If you need to give me a piece of your mind, go right ahead. But may I suggest you either do it as mail, or start a new thread.

In the meantime, is everything okay with you? Something has triggered your serial outbursts, and I'm worried for you.
johnlubba
Posts: 2,892
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2015 6:58:07 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/16/2015 6:55:26 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 11/16/2015 6:49:53 PM, johnlubba wrote:
At 11/16/2015 6:41:19 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 11/16/2015 6:33:21 PM, johnlubba wrote:
At 11/16/2015 6:03:04 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 11/15/2015 10:42:32 PM, bsh1 wrote:
At 11/15/2015 4:02:35 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
Funny stuff. The "President" is just an impotent figure head with no power to do anything. Real change? LOL.
We've discussed this before, and I've described how you're wrong. If you'd like, I can go over it with you again.

Bish, thank you for your contributions to the site during your tenure as president. I'm aware you have been active, and can attest that it has had benefit, though I'm less clear on how that activity is presidential: to me it looked like thoughtful advocacy.

With that tenure drawing to a close, and given the confusion in this thread (mine and others) would you care to comment on what you think the role is for, how you feel it benefits the site, and what characteristics you think a good site president needs?

It's bsh1 not Bish, you fool, are you trying to be offensive or does it come naturally.

Hi John!

I took my spelling from Bsh's sig, in which he wrote "I'm a Bish." My thought was, either he is Bish, in which case I've guessed right, or he's a Bish called Bsh1, in which case I've been calling him the equivalent of 'Human', to which I hope anyone called Bsh1 (a clonish name if I ever heard one) wouldn't take offense.

But in answer to your broader question: no, I need not try to be offensive. As an Australian, it comes naturally to me, but thank you for your concern.

(Also.. perhaps you'd best not drink any more tonight? Or if you do, not post any more?)


Another ignorant, arrogant, and dumb stupid claim,

1: don't bother with lengthy boring replies to me, I find your posts nauseating.
2: I haven't been drinking, So don't make arrogant and ignorant claims, Truth be told, I actually now despise you and have zero respect for you, ZERO. You pulled a low blow and a cheap shot on me last time and I won't forgive, unlike the Christians worldview you so desire to destroy.

In my opinion you are a weasel, a low life, scumbag and a horrid addition to humanity.

Please refer to one when responding.

John, are you okay? We haven't corresponded in weeks, and nothing I've posted in that time was about you or addressed to you. If you need to give me a piece of your mind, go right ahead. But may I suggest you either do it as mail, or start a new thread.

In the meantime, is everything okay with you? Something has triggered your serial outbursts, and I'm worried for you.

Did I mention deceitful dishonest, misleading, twofaced, untrustworthy rat.

If I didn't, there you go.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2015 7:00:21 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/16/2015 6:58:07 PM, johnlubba wrote:
At 11/16/2015 6:55:26 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 11/16/2015 6:49:53 PM, johnlubba wrote:
At 11/16/2015 6:41:19 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 11/16/2015 6:33:21 PM, johnlubba wrote:
At 11/16/2015 6:03:04 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 11/15/2015 10:42:32 PM, bsh1 wrote:
At 11/15/2015 4:02:35 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
Funny stuff. The "President" is just an impotent figure head with no power to do anything. Real change? LOL.
We've discussed this before, and I've described how you're wrong. If you'd like, I can go over it with you again.

Bish, thank you for your contributions to the site during your tenure as president. I'm aware you have been active, and can attest that it has had benefit, though I'm less clear on how that activity is presidential: to me it looked like thoughtful advocacy.

With that tenure drawing to a close, and given the confusion in this thread (mine and others) would you care to comment on what you think the role is for, how you feel it benefits the site, and what characteristics you think a good site president needs?

It's bsh1 not Bish, you fool, are you trying to be offensive or does it come naturally.

Hi John!

I took my spelling from Bsh's sig, in which he wrote "I'm a Bish." My thought was, either he is Bish, in which case I've guessed right, or he's a Bish called Bsh1, in which case I've been calling him the equivalent of 'Human', to which I hope anyone called Bsh1 (a clonish name if I ever heard one) wouldn't take offense.

But in answer to your broader question: no, I need not try to be offensive. As an Australian, it comes naturally to me, but thank you for your concern.

(Also.. perhaps you'd best not drink any more tonight? Or if you do, not post any more?)


Another ignorant, arrogant, and dumb stupid claim,

1: don't bother with lengthy boring replies to me, I find your posts nauseating.
2: I haven't been drinking, So don't make arrogant and ignorant claims, Truth be told, I actually now despise you and have zero respect for you, ZERO. You pulled a low blow and a cheap shot on me last time and I won't forgive, unlike the Christians worldview you so desire to destroy.

In my opinion you are a weasel, a low life, scumbag and a horrid addition to humanity.

Please refer to one when responding.

John, are you okay? We haven't corresponded in weeks, and nothing I've posted in that time was about you or addressed to you. If you need to give me a piece of your mind, go right ahead. But may I suggest you either do it as mail, or start a new thread.

In the meantime, is everything okay with you? Something has triggered your serial outbursts, and I'm worried for you.

Did I mention deceitful dishonest, misleading, twofaced, untrustworthy rat.

If I didn't, there you go.

Feel free to mention what you like, John. But perhaps you could respect the forum and other members by either PMing it -- or if you really need to make it public, putting it in your own thread.
bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2015 7:12:34 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/16/2015 6:03:04 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 11/15/2015 10:42:32 PM, bsh1 wrote:
At 11/15/2015 4:02:35 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
Funny stuff. The "President" is just an impotent figure head with no power to do anything. Real change? LOL.
We've discussed this before, and I've described how you're wrong. If you'd like, I can go over it with you again.

Bish, thank you for your contributions to the site during your tenure as president. I'm aware you have been active, and can attest that it has had benefit, though I'm less clear on how that activity is presidential: to me it looked like thoughtful advocacy.

Sure. The question of why my activities are "Presidential" is a common one, and one I will address below.

With that tenure drawing to a close, and given the confusion in this thread (mine and others) would you care to comment on what you think the role is for, how you feel it benefits the site, and what characteristics you think a good site president needs?

My current term is coming to a close, and I am currently seeking reelection to a second term. But, I can certainly explain the role of my office. I think we can subdivide it into a few major umbrella areas:

1. Site Liaison to Moderation
2. Site Liaison to Juggle
3. Community-Organizer

The first two points are fairly self-explanatory. The President represents the community and their interests to the moderation and to Juggle (Juggle being the company that owns DDO). Currently, Juggle isn't doing much with DDO, so the President-Juggle relationship is on hold, but when Juggle's focus shifts back to DDO, that relationship kicks back into gear. So, the President, while not a mod, can often provide feedback to the moderators on their decisions or actively advise them during the decision-making process. The President can also bring community grievances to the moderators to ask for redress, and can work with mods on other moderation issues. For example, I've been negotiating a voting reform program with moderation that is nearly completed. With Juggle, the President usually collaborates with them to explain what on the site needs updating or fixing from a technical standpoint, and what new features might be an asset to the site, and popular among the users.

The third point is, I think, the most visible and, in terms of time invested, the most important role a President plays. Community organizing has two parts, in general, including those programs for which the President is responsible, and those programs that the President uses the bully pulpit to achieve. The President's administration, for instance, runs and manages the tournament system on the site, the new member mentorship program, etc. These are programs that are specifically designated to the President's authority. Then, there are initiatives like the forum revival initiative, that are not standing programs, but which are more like grassroots efforts. The President often coordinates these kinds of initiatives. The President, in his role as a community organizer, also has a certain gravitas that allows them to spark discussion that might not otherwise have been had. When a normal user complains about something, there complaint may often sail under the radar or not be acted upon. The President however has a certain ex officio soft power that makes his complaints more likely to be taken seriously. So, the President can often bring attention to issues or mobilize the community around something better than an average user can.

So, the President has more soft power/influence than a normal user, which enables them to get more done. The President is also a representative, and having a single representative makes it easier for the parties with whom the President negotiates. It is easier to negotiate and conduct business with one person than dozens, and having fewer people involved means that in areas where confidentiality is important, there is a reduced likelihood that sensitive information will be released.
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


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

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

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

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2015 7:16:00 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/16/2015 6:33:21 PM, johnlubba wrote:
At 11/16/2015 6:03:04 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 11/15/2015 10:42:32 PM, bsh1 wrote:
At 11/15/2015 4:02:35 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
Funny stuff. The "President" is just an impotent figure head with no power to do anything. Real change? LOL.
We've discussed this before, and I've described how you're wrong. If you'd like, I can go over it with you again.

Bish, thank you for your contributions to the site during your tenure as president. I'm aware you have been active, and can attest that it has had benefit, though I'm less clear on how that activity is presidential: to me it looked like thoughtful advocacy.

With that tenure drawing to a close, and given the confusion in this thread (mine and others) would you care to comment on what you think the role is for, how you feel it benefits the site, and what characteristics you think a good site president needs?

It's bsh1 not Bish, you fool, are you trying to be offensive or does it come naturally.

Either are correct. Most people pronounce my name "bish one" and most people just shorten it to "bish." I think it's kind of funny, and it's a running joke that it sounds like a certain other, more insulting term. So, when my sig says "I am a Bish," it's jocular wordplay. But "b-s-h one" or "bish one" or "b-s-h" or "bish" are all fine with me.
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


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

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

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

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2015 7:20:17 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/16/2015 7:12:34 PM, bsh1 wrote:
At 11/16/2015 6:03:04 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 11/15/2015 10:42:32 PM, bsh1 wrote:
At 11/15/2015 4:02:35 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
Funny stuff. The "President" is just an impotent figure head with no power to do anything. Real change? LOL.
We've discussed this before, and I've described how you're wrong. If you'd like, I can go over it with you again.

Bish, thank you for your contributions to the site during your tenure as president. I'm aware you have been active, and can attest that it has had benefit, though I'm less clear on how that activity is presidential: to me it looked like thoughtful advocacy.

Sure. The question of why my activities are "Presidential" is a common one, and one I will address below.

With that tenure drawing to a close, and given the confusion in this thread (mine and others) would you care to comment on what you think the role is for, how you feel it benefits the site, and what characteristics you think a good site president needs?

My current term is coming to a close, and I am currently seeking reelection to a second term. But, I can certainly explain the role of my office. I think we can subdivide it into a few major umbrella areas:

1. Site Liaison to Moderation
2. Site Liaison to Juggle
3. Community-Organizer

The first two points are fairly self-explanatory. The President represents the community and their interests to the moderation and to Juggle (Juggle being the company that owns DDO). Currently, Juggle isn't doing much with DDO, so the President-Juggle relationship is on hold, but when Juggle's focus shifts back to DDO, that relationship kicks back into gear. So, the President, while not a mod, can often provide feedback to the moderators on their decisions or actively advise them during the decision-making process. The President can also bring community grievances to the moderators to ask for redress, and can work with mods on other moderation issues. For example, I've been negotiating a voting reform program with moderation that is nearly completed. With Juggle, the President usually collaborates with them to explain what on the site needs updating or fixing from a technical standpoint, and what new features might be an asset to the site, and popular among the users.

The third point is, I think, the most visible and, in terms of time invested, the most important role a President plays. Community organizing has two parts, in general, including those programs for which the President is responsible, and those programs that the President uses the bully pulpit to achieve. The President's administration, for instance, runs and manages the tournament system on the site, the new member mentorship program, etc. These are programs that are specifically designated to the President's authority. Then, there are initiatives like the forum revival initiative, that are not standing programs, but which are more like grassroots efforts. The President often coordinates these kinds of initiatives. The President, in his role as a community organizer, also has a certain gravitas that allows them to spark discussion that might not otherwise have been had. When a normal user complains about something, there complaint may often sail under the radar or not be acted upon. The President however has a certain ex officio soft power that makes his complaints more likely to be taken seriously. So, the President can often bring attention to issues or mobilize the community around something better than an average user can.

So, the President has more soft power/influence than a normal user, which enables them to get more done. The President is also a representative, and having a single representative makes it easier for the parties with whom the President negotiates. It is easier to negotiate and conduct business with one person than dozens, and having fewer people involved means that in areas where confidentiality is important, there is a reduced likelihood that sensitive information will be released.

That's very helpful, B thank you.

May I ask: to what extent do you feel a President would be needed, if the moderation were more visible, active and committed?

Would a more effective structure be to have more active, forum-focused moderation, and volunteer forum-level organisers?

I realise my perspective might be coloured by the fact that I only participate in two forums (one of them renowned for its ratbaggery.) But it strikes me that a President may be something of a 'them' concept: site-owners wanting 'them' to represent 'themselves'. In some sites, forum owners, moderators and members treat themselves as an 'us' -- a community of interest, practice, etc... where people have different roles, but they're part of the same community.

When there's an 'us', there's no need for 'them-based' advocacy.

And moreover, when there's an 'us', any 'us' can volunteer to organise stuff.

Your thoughts?
johnlubba
Posts: 2,892
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2015 7:21:18 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/16/2015 7:00:21 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 11/16/2015 6:58:07 PM, johnlubba wrote:
At 11/16/2015 6:55:26 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 11/16/2015 6:49:53 PM, johnlubba wrote:
At 11/16/2015 6:41:19 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 11/16/2015 6:33:21 PM, johnlubba wrote:
At 11/16/2015 6:03:04 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 11/15/2015 10:42:32 PM, bsh1 wrote:
At 11/15/2015 4:02:35 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
Funny stuff. The "President" is just an impotent figure head with no power to do anything. Real change? LOL.
We've discussed this before, and I've described how you're wrong. If you'd like, I can go over it with you again.

Bish, thank you for your contributions to the site during your tenure as president. I'm aware you have been active, and can attest that it has had benefit, though I'm less clear on how that activity is presidential: to me it looked like thoughtful advocacy.

With that tenure drawing to a close, and given the confusion in this thread (mine and others) would you care to comment on what you think the role is for, how you feel it benefits the site, and what characteristics you think a good site president needs?

It's bsh1 not Bish, you fool, are you trying to be offensive or does it come naturally.

Hi John!

I took my spelling from Bsh's sig, in which he wrote "I'm a Bish." My thought was, either he is Bish, in which case I've guessed right, or he's a Bish called Bsh1, in which case I've been calling him the equivalent of 'Human', to which I hope anyone called Bsh1 (a clonish name if I ever heard one) wouldn't take offense.

But in answer to your broader question: no, I need not try to be offensive. As an Australian, it comes naturally to me, but thank you for your concern.

(Also.. perhaps you'd best not drink any more tonight? Or if you do, not post any more?)


Another ignorant, arrogant, and dumb stupid claim,

1: don't bother with lengthy boring replies to me, I find your posts nauseating.
2: I haven't been drinking, So don't make arrogant and ignorant claims, Truth be told, I actually now despise you and have zero respect for you, ZERO. You pulled a low blow and a cheap shot on me last time and I won't forgive, unlike the Christians worldview you so desire to destroy.

In my opinion you are a weasel, a low life, scumbag and a horrid addition to humanity.

Please refer to one when responding.

John, are you okay? We haven't corresponded in weeks, and nothing I've posted in that time was about you or addressed to you. If you need to give me a piece of your mind, go right ahead. But may I suggest you either do it as mail, or start a new thread.

In the meantime, is everything okay with you? Something has triggered your serial outbursts, and I'm worried for you.

Did I mention deceitful dishonest, misleading, twofaced, untrustworthy rat.

If I didn't, there you go.

Feel free to mention what you like, John. But perhaps you could respect the forum and other members by either PMing it -- or if you really need to make it public, putting it in your own thread.

Don't tell me what to do you rat.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2015 7:30:48 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/16/2015 7:21:18 PM, johnlubba wrote:
At 11/16/2015 7:00:21 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 11/16/2015 6:58:07 PM, johnlubba wrote:
At 11/16/2015 6:55:26 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 11/16/2015 6:49:53 PM, johnlubba wrote:
At 11/16/2015 6:41:19 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 11/16/2015 6:33:21 PM, johnlubba wrote:
At 11/16/2015 6:03:04 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 11/15/2015 10:42:32 PM, bsh1 wrote:
At 11/15/2015 4:02:35 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
Funny stuff. The "President" is just an impotent figure head with no power to do anything. Real change? LOL.
We've discussed this before, and I've described how you're wrong. If you'd like, I can go over it with you again.

Bish, thank you for your contributions to the site during your tenure as president. I'm aware you have been active, and can attest that it has had benefit, though I'm less clear on how that activity is presidential: to me it looked like thoughtful advocacy.

With that tenure drawing to a close, and given the confusion in this thread (mine and others) would you care to comment on what you think the role is for, how you feel it benefits the site, and what characteristics you think a good site president needs?

It's bsh1 not Bish, you fool, are you trying to be offensive or does it come naturally.

Hi John!

I took my spelling from Bsh's sig, in which he wrote "I'm a Bish." My thought was, either he is Bish, in which case I've guessed right, or he's a Bish called Bsh1, in which case I've been calling him the equivalent of 'Human', to which I hope anyone called Bsh1 (a clonish name if I ever heard one) wouldn't take offense.

But in answer to your broader question: no, I need not try to be offensive. As an Australian, it comes naturally to me, but thank you for your concern.

(Also.. perhaps you'd best not drink any more tonight? Or if you do, not post any more?)


Another ignorant, arrogant, and dumb stupid claim,

1: don't bother with lengthy boring replies to me, I find your posts nauseating.
2: I haven't been drinking, So don't make arrogant and ignorant claims, Truth be told, I actually now despise you and have zero respect for you, ZERO. You pulled a low blow and a cheap shot on me last time and I won't forgive, unlike the Christians worldview you so desire to destroy.

In my opinion you are a weasel, a low life, scumbag and a horrid addition to humanity.

Please refer to one when responding.

John, are you okay? We haven't corresponded in weeks, and nothing I've posted in that time was about you or addressed to you. If you need to give me a piece of your mind, go right ahead. But may I suggest you either do it as mail, or start a new thread.

In the meantime, is everything okay with you? Something has triggered your serial outbursts, and I'm worried for you.

Did I mention deceitful dishonest, misleading, twofaced, untrustworthy rat.

If I didn't, there you go.

Feel free to mention what you like, John. But perhaps you could respect the forum and other members by either PMing it -- or if you really need to make it public, putting it in your own thread.

Don't tell me what to do you rat.

John, I realise you don't want my support, and you have some 144 members on your friends list, so I don't know whom to contact. So this is to other DDO members: if you see this post and are a friend of John's, please send John a note and ask if he's okay.

John, you're acting out. Please pick up the phone and call somebody.
bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2015 7:31:54 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/16/2015 7:20:17 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
That's very helpful, B thank you.

May I ask: to what extent do you feel a President would be needed, if the moderation were more visible, active and committed?

Yes, because the moderation on DDO is unelected, and that's unlikely to change. Part of the advisory role of the President entails acting as a check (albeit a weak one) to moderation. They are able to disagree with moderation in private, ensure that private moderation takes place in a fair way, and can take disagreements public in cases of abuse.

Would a more effective structure be to have more active, forum-focused moderation, and volunteer forum-level organisers?

What do you mean by a volunteer moderation system?

I realise my perspective might be coloured by the fact that I only participate in two forums (one of them renowned for its ratbaggery.) But it strikes me that a President may be something of a 'them' concept: site-owners wanting 'them' to represent 'themselves'.

Would this not imply that I am a site owner or moderator?

In some sites, forum owners, moderators and members treat themselves as an 'us' -- a community of interest, practice, etc... where people have different roles, but they're part of the same community.

If the "us" participates in site elections, I don't see why this system is necessarily not an "us" system.

And moreover, when there's an 'us', any 'us' can volunteer to organise stuff.

People can still organize things individually. The President however, by virtue of the office, has more visibility and is more able to effectively draw attention to programs.
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


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

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

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

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2015 7:38:40 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/15/2015 10:15:10 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 11/15/2015 5:50:15 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
Not growing up in a US high school system, I really don't understand the election of popular members as president.

Doesn't a president 'preside'? Isn't it therefore essentially an executive coordination role?

What then are the executive functions being coordinated, and who is responsible for them?

And given that any site dedicated to contentious discussion will attract its share of intellectuals, armchair philosophers, zealots, narcissists, sadists and ratbags -- all sharing common disk storage -- what executive functions does such a disparate group require, beyond administration and social mediation?

My question isn't why vote for Wylted, but why vote at all?

You and me can't vote anyway. The rules require that you have to have taken part in debates and reached a certain rating. We are second-class citizens. (Not that I care).

As President, I worked with moderation to change those standards. The current voting standards are these:

Members must have 2 months of minimum membership on the site, and must also meet one of the following bullets:

- 1,000 posts
- 5 debates without any forfeits AND 100 posts
- 3 debates without any forfeits AND 50 poll or opinion topics/questions that haven't been deleted by mods AND 100 posts
- 500 posts AND 50 poll or opinion topics/questions that haven't been deleted by mods


So you and Ruv are both eligible voters.
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


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

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

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

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
dee-em
Posts: 6,490
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2015 10:01:19 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/16/2015 7:38:40 PM, bsh1 wrote:
At 11/15/2015 10:15:10 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 11/15/2015 5:50:15 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
Not growing up in a US high school system, I really don't understand the election of popular members as president.

Doesn't a president 'preside'? Isn't it therefore essentially an executive coordination role?

What then are the executive functions being coordinated, and who is responsible for them?

And given that any site dedicated to contentious discussion will attract its share of intellectuals, armchair philosophers, zealots, narcissists, sadists and ratbags -- all sharing common disk storage -- what executive functions does such a disparate group require, beyond administration and social mediation?

My question isn't why vote for Wylted, but why vote at all?

You and me can't vote anyway. The rules require that you have to have taken part in debates and reached a certain rating. We are second-class citizens. (Not that I care).

As President, I worked with moderation to change those standards. The current voting standards are these:

Members must have 2 months of minimum membership on the site, and must also meet one of the following bullets:

- 1,000 posts
- 5 debates without any forfeits AND 100 posts
- 3 debates without any forfeits AND 50 poll or opinion topics/questions that haven't been deleted by mods AND 100 posts
- 500 posts AND 50 poll or opinion topics/questions that haven't been deleted by mods


So you and Ruv are both eligible voters.

Good. I will definitely vote.

I seem to recall that the rules were different at the last election and required some level of debating to have occurred. Or perhaps I misread them. These rules sound far more reasonable.
bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2015 10:12:17 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/16/2015 10:01:19 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 11/16/2015 7:38:40 PM, bsh1 wrote:
At 11/15/2015 10:15:10 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 11/15/2015 5:50:15 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
Not growing up in a US high school system, I really don't understand the election of popular members as president.

Doesn't a president 'preside'? Isn't it therefore essentially an executive coordination role?

What then are the executive functions being coordinated, and who is responsible for them?

And given that any site dedicated to contentious discussion will attract its share of intellectuals, armchair philosophers, zealots, narcissists, sadists and ratbags -- all sharing common disk storage -- what executive functions does such a disparate group require, beyond administration and social mediation?

My question isn't why vote for Wylted, but why vote at all?

You and me can't vote anyway. The rules require that you have to have taken part in debates and reached a certain rating. We are second-class citizens. (Not that I care).

As President, I worked with moderation to change those standards. The current voting standards are these:

Members must have 2 months of minimum membership on the site, and must also meet one of the following bullets:

- 1,000 posts
- 5 debates without any forfeits AND 100 posts
- 3 debates without any forfeits AND 50 poll or opinion topics/questions that haven't been deleted by mods AND 100 posts
- 500 posts AND 50 poll or opinion topics/questions that haven't been deleted by mods


So you and Ruv are both eligible voters.

Good. I will definitely vote.

I seem to recall that the rules were different at the last election and required some level of debating to have occurred. Or perhaps I misread them. These rules sound far more reasonable.

Yeah. I discussed the issue with Max, and those were standards I had proposed before, and he agreed to adopt them for future elections. That's one of the things I was able to accomplish while in office.
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


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

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

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

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2015 10:31:35 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/16/2015 7:31:54 PM, bsh1 wrote:
At 11/16/2015 7:20:17 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
That's very helpful, B thank you.
May I ask: to what extent do you feel a President would be needed, if the moderation were more visible, active and committed?
Yes, because the moderation on DDO is unelected, and that's unlikely to change.
As I imagine you know, that's usual on a privately-owned site. It's normally only club-owned sites that elect officers.

Part of the advisory role of the President entails acting as a check (albeit a weak one) to moderation.
How does that differ from ordinary member commentary and critique, e.g. in the DDO commentary forum? What additional expertise or insight does it bring? What value do you feel it adds?

Would a more effective structure be to have more active, forum-focused moderation, and volunteer forum-level organisers?
What do you mean by a volunteer moderation system?
Sorry -- I meant two separate ideas there:
1) Dedicated, active moderation focused on each forum; and
2) Volunteer organisers in each forum.

As an example, the Religion forum is full of members critiquing one another's values, committed beliefs and life-choices. Very few discussions are dispassionate; few remain polite; most arguments are long on rhetoric but short on research and honesty; the forum is full of insulting outbursts by frustrated and resentful members; and trawled by sadists and narcissists whose sole entertainment is to find sensitive members and push their buttons.

It seems to me that dedicated, active moderation could do more than flick the most egregious offenders. It could set and enforce much clearer rules of engagement; help keep members aware of the very personal context in which they're arguing; help remind members to substantiate their claims with evidence; and uninvite mischief-makers.

On the other side of it, there's an awful lot of worhwhile religious topics that never seem to be discussed here -- perhaps because it's so hard to discuss anything constructively. For example, in the time I've participated I can recall only one conversation about religious art: it was between two atheists who both love religious art, and none of our theistic colleagues participated -- perhaps because they don't feel comfortable talking about religious art to atheists in the present climate. I've seen one conversation about religious music -- again, it was two atheists who both like religious music. Yet religious art and music permeate culture, and attract a range of views that cross lines of belief.

Something is wrong with this picture. :)

But it seems to me that advocacy and volunteerism won't be effective until the moderation is visible, active, and committed to better quality, more constructive discourse. I know you participate in this forum at times, B. What's your take?

I realise my perspective might be coloured by the fact that I only participate in two forums (one of them renowned for its ratbaggery.) But it strikes me that a President may be something of a 'them' concept: site-owners wanting 'them' to represent 'themselves'.
Would this not imply that I am a site owner or moderator?
That wasn't my thinking. It seems to me that there's responsibility and accountability, and they're different. All the responsibility in the world -- yours or that of any volunteer -- won't compensate for general lack of member accountability: to the forum, to fellow members, and the site vision. When there is no accountability, members can do what they like, and best efforts suffer disincentive because even good ideas for conversations become platforms for axe-grinding, point-scoring and other ratbaggery.

The job of moderation is to enforce accountability to site policy and vision. Without it, special responsibility seems to me largely wasted good will.

In some sites, forum owners, moderators and members treat themselves as an 'us' -- a community of interest, practice, etc... where people have different roles, but they're part of the same community.
If the "us" participates in site elections, I don't see why this system is necessarily not an "us" system.
As far as I can see, a President has no special executive power, while the moderators have little visible intellectual investment in the forums I frequent.

To be clear what I mean by executive: relating to or having the power to put plans or actions into effect. As I understand it (please correct me if I'm wrong), the President's role has additional responsibility but no additional power.

I agree that the role has a higher profile with an elected member, and I agree that this can translate to exemplary behaviour, greater awareness and better outcomes, but I think that's most effective if members are accountable for acting in good faith in the first place.

Or let me ask it the other way: can any amount of member organisation, advocacy and good will compensate for moderation that isn't intellectually invested in forum outcomes?

And moreover, when there's an 'us', any 'us' can volunteer to organise stuff.
People can still organize things individually. The President however, by virtue of the office, has more visibility and is more able to effectively draw attention to programs.
Yes -- I agree, B. If the moderation were visible, active, committed and intellectually invested, then I could well imagine the President coordinating with forum-level volunteers across the site. And that would help support the kind of stuff I saw you seeking to do a few weeks back -- citing good discussions across forums for the benefit of interested members.

So I suppose I'm not arguing against a member-elected executive structure per se. I'm asking how effective that structure can be if the moderation isn't visibly invested in producing good intellectual outcomes for the site.

This isn't a rhetorical question, B. I'm asking for your views here, after almost a year in the job. :)
bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2015 11:02:15 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/16/2015 10:31:35 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 11/16/2015 7:31:54 PM, bsh1 wrote:
At 11/16/2015 7:20:17 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
That's very helpful, B thank you.
May I ask: to what extent do you feel a President would be needed, if the moderation were more visible, active and committed?
Yes, because the moderation on DDO is unelected, and that's unlikely to change.
As I imagine you know, that's usual on a privately-owned site. It's normally only club-owned sites that elect officers.

Part of the advisory role of the President entails acting as a check (albeit a weak one) to moderation.
How does that differ from ordinary member commentary and critique, e.g. in the DDO commentary forum? What additional expertise or insight does it bring? What value do you feel it adds?

As I said in my original response, not all members of the site can be privy to lots of moderation decisions, because it would compromise the confidential nature of those decision and the information discussed in them. The President is thus in a special position, because he simply is able to oversee more of moderation's activities than average users, and if something egregious were to occur, he could (within some limits) to his grievances to the usership more broadly.

It also adds value in that the DDO President, since he is more involved in moderation activities, can offer advise to influence moderation decisions. Again, it is impractical and unwise to allow all users to make these kinds of decisions collectively or to allow all users to offer their thoughts on every decision, and so condensing this responsibility to one person--who acts as a community representative--is useful.

Would a more effective structure be to have more active, forum-focused moderation, and volunteer forum-level organisers?
What do you mean by a volunteer moderation system?
Sorry -- I meant two separate ideas there:
1) Dedicated, active moderation focused on each forum; and

This would be pointless, because only a few forums are active, and only 1 or 2 are really troublesome. We already have a moderator who assists for one of those troubled forums, so it seems like additional, unnecessary bureaucracy to add even more moderators where they're not needed.

2) Volunteer organisers in each forum.

People can volunteer to help out in the status quo. The President, however, has unique soft power to mobilize volunteer initiatives more effectively, and to bring those initiatives greater attention. Again, the President commands the bully pulpit.

As an example, the Religion forum is full of members critiquing one another's values, committed beliefs and life-choices. Very few discussions are dispassionate; few remain polite; most arguments are long on rhetoric but short on research and honesty; the forum is full of insulting outbursts by frustrated and resentful members; and trawled by sadists and narcissists whose sole entertainment is to find sensitive members and push their buttons.

You should report any conversations you find insulting, and moderation can work on those issues. But, you cannot moderate people for being "dispassionate" or for lacking research. Neither of those things violate the TOS, and people are fully within their rights to make biased, unresearched statements. Free speech is an important principle on a debating site, even if that principle protects those kinds of remarks. You can only penalize people for actually violating the TOS, and you can only expect moderation to act on those violations when they are reported.

It seems to me that dedicated, active moderation could do more than flick the most egregious offenders. It could set and enforce much clearer rules of engagement; help keep members aware of the very personal context in which they're arguing; help remind members to substantiate their claims with evidence; and uninvite mischief-makers.

What your describing, to me, sounds more like overactive moderation. First, it requires a massive time commitment from unpaid moderators. Second, it seems to tread close to violating the principle of free speech essential to a site committed to debate. If a statement is unsubstantiated, it is not the job of moderation to ask them to substantiate it, it is the job of the people with whom the poster was discussing to call the poster out on their lack of substantiation.

The rules regarding personal attacks are pretty clear as-is. And, moderation here likes to give people chances to redeem themselves, which I generally approve of.

But it seems to me that advocacy and volunteerism won't be effective until the moderation is visible, active, and committed to better quality, more constructive discourse. I know you participate in this forum at times, B. What's your take?

Again, moderation's job is to prevent personal attacks and violation of the TOS. Moderation's job is not to encourage people to make more substantive posts, nor should it be moderation's job, IMO. Users have to, themselves, make the effort to be substantive and to encourage others to be substantive, and to call people out when they fail at this. It's a cultural issue, not a moderation issue, and to involve the mods would be overbearing.

In some sites, forum owners, moderators and members treat themselves as an 'us' -- a community of interest, practice, etc... where people have different roles, but they're part of the same community.
If the "us" participates in site elections, I don't see why this system is necessarily not an "us" system.
As far as I can see, a President has no special executive power, while the moderators have little visible intellectual investment in the forums I frequent.

I've explained my thoughts on the role of moderation, already.

To be clear what I mean by executive: relating to or having the power to put plans or actions into effect. As I understand it (please correct me if I'm wrong), the President's role has additional responsibility but no additional power.

It does have additional power regarding those programs placed under its auspices, like the tournament program.
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


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

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

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

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...