The Lifestream Forums

The Lifestream Forums (https://thelifestream.net/oldforums/index.php)
-   Forum News & Information (https://thelifestream.net/oldforums/forumdisplay.php?f=22)
-   -   Onto the topic of voting (but not the voting, just yet) (https://thelifestream.net/oldforums/showthread.php?t=11709)

Ryushikaze 06/19/2012 03:44 PM

Onto the topic of voting (but not the voting, just yet)
 
No, it's not vote time just yet, but given we have two mod spots to fill, a standard poll won't do the job.

So, a few options.
Multiple choice poll. You'd be limited to two votes, any abuse of the system would be stripped.

Public write in Poll. Write in your two choices. Can't vote for the same person twice, since they can't have two mod spots.

Private write in- Same as above, but private, if folks want it. I doubt you do, but it's there.

Two Standard Polls in quick succession. All Nominees are on the first ballot. Whoever is voted highest is removed from the second one. Voting can either be public or private for this as well.

If you have another method, feel free to suggest it.

Rumpelstiltskin 06/19/2012 03:52 PM

Why happening with the voting out?

Ghost X 06/19/2012 04:03 PM

I think the poll should be anonymous, like any good election.

Flintlock 06/19/2012 04:07 PM

What happened to the suggestion that each mod would get their own vote? That allows people to indicate who they don't want to become one, as well as who they do.

Tifabelle 06/19/2012 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ryushikaze (Post 451564)
Multiple choice poll. You'd be limited to two votes, any abuse of the system would be stripped.

Out of your suggestions, this would be the one I'd go with.

Although originally when I had pictured it, I thought each mod/candidate would get their own thread/poll. That was before each got a Q&A thread. And people could either support or not support that person, and the people with the most support would be the ones to get the green light. So idk if that would be a thing you'd want to do.

Oh and private. Definitely should be a private vote.

Quote:

No, it's not vote time just yet, but given we have two mod spots to fill, a standard poll won't do the job.

Quick question about this. Two? or three? Cause I couldn't help but notice Force put into the Retired Staff category. With Tenny & Force gone, you'd have to fill those two, plus the one you wanted before any of the staff left. idk if you feel like you need that many, but just asking.

Octo 06/19/2012 04:20 PM

I'd like 3 new mods ideally, that way hopefully, we can get wider variety of personalities and everybody will be pleased with at least one choice. Also, there is a chance that those elected might need/want to step down after a while and this saves us the trouble of having to do all this again in a few months time.

Oh and whatever option, private is definitely the way to go. During these Q&A sessions I've noticed that its the same people asking questions, now maybe thats because other members were going to ask the same questions but have been saved the trouble, but It could also be because they don't feel comfortable doing it.

Also, its probably better if Mods don't know who did or didn't vote for them to prevent accusations of bias in future.

Sheva Alomar 06/19/2012 04:27 PM

Imho, we should do three mods total. Kristen has a good point, as well as Octo.

I'll gladly volunteer myself to take the votes.

CK 06/19/2012 04:28 PM

Don't do it adri will rig the voting.

Ryushikaze 06/19/2012 05:05 PM

At the moment, we're -officially- looking at two, but this is entirely seat of pants, so the total is subject to change. That's not to contradict Adri, just a note that shit's still progressing. Expect updates.

As for the individual private votes for mods on a nominee by nominee basis, it would have to continue on beyond the initial round of voting, unless there is a clear swing towards only two particular moderators, and would drag out these proceedings even longer.

If that is what you all prefer, however, we can swing that.

Flintlock 06/19/2012 05:43 PM

An abbreviated version of that would be to give everyone a choice of giving a + or - vote to each nominee, or not voting for them at all. Then select the two candidates with the biggest net score. It would have to be done through PMs.

The problem with most of the voting systems you suggested as I see it is that a nominee who has a solid core of support but is disliked by a majority will do better than someone who everyone would be happy with but is not the first or second choice of many.

Tifabelle 06/19/2012 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flintlock (Post 451605)
An abbreviated version of that would be to give everyone a choice of giving a + or - vote to each nominee, or not voting for them at all. Then select the two candidates with the biggest net score. It would have to be done through PMs.

That's sort of how we do the awards nominees. It's a lot of work, ngl. I think making individual threads for each person would be less work.

Oh I just want to comment on something too. I really encourage everyone to vote, even if it's a "no" on a candidate. Don't be afraid to put up a vote that you're for or against someone if it's how you really feel. I don't want people to feel they should abstain if they don't want someone as a mod. Unless you really are undecided on a person. :monster:

Octo 06/19/2012 05:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Redfield (Post 451612)
Oh I just want to comment on something too. I really encourage everyone to vote, even if it's a "no" on a candidate. Don't be afraid to put up a vote that you're for or against someone if it's how you really feel. I don't want people to feel they should abstain if they don't want someone as a mod. Unless you really are undecided on a person. :monster:

http://www.blogfordemocracy.org/wp-c...ote_or_die.jpg

Seriously, I agree 100%. I want everyone to vote, even those who think it might not concern them because they only look at the FFVII forums or something.

In fact maybe we should add something somewhere prominent to let people know these votes are happening? People who don't check the feedback forum might not even know about them?

CK 06/19/2012 07:00 PM

An announcement would do the trick since they show up at the top of every forum and sub forum iirc.

Cookie Monster 06/19/2012 07:13 PM

Just have two or three polls one after the other guys. Not that hard.

Makoeyes987 06/19/2012 07:20 PM

Let's just hope it doesn't go the way of the TLS voting and awards :monster:

I guess we'll just make sure Force isn't the one counting. XD

Ryushikaze 06/19/2012 08:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goliath (Post 451646)
Just have two or three polls one after the other guys. Not that hard.

Wasn't saying they would be. Just longish, since everyone needs time to vote.

Ryushikaze 06/19/2012 08:53 PM

Right, so here's the current system I am thinking of to give every nominee their fair shake, give everyone their confidentiality, and hopefully get through this without wasting too terribly much time.

After the conclusion of the Q and A period, probably that will be Thursday, a list of all the moderator nominations will be posted.
Each member who wishes to vote can take that list and PM it to a member of staff to be selected who will process the votes. Top 2/3 nominees go forward. That voting takes 2 days. Next round, repeat of the same, until it is winnowed to the last 3 moderators.

Voting itself will take the form of PMing the list to the selected member of staff with a +, -, or equals next to the nominee name, for approve, disapprove, and ambivalence/ do not care.
Additional notes can be added to these messages as desired, but are not required.

Does this sound acceptable to everyone? Any suggestions or improvements you would like to add?

Cookie Monster 06/19/2012 09:56 PM

I still don't understand why everyone has to go through the trouble of PMing people. Last time we did this, we used polls. We're making things more complicated than they need to be. But, whatever.

Rumpelstiltskin 06/19/2012 10:00 PM

Gonna agree with my main hombre here.
Pming your yes and no's seems rather ridiculous when it's easier just to put up polls.
At least then members can watch the progression also.

Tifabelle 06/19/2012 10:01 PM

I mean, if other people agree with that, then I'll concede. But it seems to me it would be a whole lot less trouble to just make individual threads. It's still private. And tbh, I think more people would be inclined to participate in the polls than to PM someone. idk, that's my two cents, let anyone else weigh in on it.

Joe 06/19/2012 10:09 PM

Sending a PM takes about as much time as making a post or two (something we all do) so honestly it's just as simple as putting up a poll. If we make a poll however, I'd put my two cents and say that it ought to be private.

We want people voting on the nominees merits. If the poll is public then it encourages strategic voting which really shouldn't be the case here.

Either way, it's all easy enough.

Cookie Monster 06/19/2012 10:13 PM

There's a problem with creating individual polls. There are going to be several morons that'll cast votes in every thread, which could lead to multiple people tying for positions.

Iirc, polls have always been private when it comes to these sorts of things. And polls lessen the chance of human error which could occur with PMs.

Flintlock 06/19/2012 10:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goliath (Post 451762)
There's a problem with creating individual polls. There are going to be several morons that'll cast votes in every thread, which could lead to multiple people tying for positions.

And, iirc, polls have always been private when it comes to these sorts of things. And polls lessen the chance of human error which could occur with PMs.

I thought the whole idea was that you could vote in individual polls? That way you can vote either yes or no for everyone. The candidates with the greatest number of net positive votes would become staff. Otherwise there really would be no point in having multiple polls :)

Tifabelle 06/19/2012 10:20 PM

yeah, there's definitely pros and cons to both of the options. So it's just a matter of which appears to be the lesser of two evils.

imo though Road, everyone should have an opinion on each candidate. Although, I can see how it would be a problem because there's no weight to say I prefer one more than another. But in that regard, the polls vs the PM both have that same issue. I could PM the list with + next to each candidate all the same as voting "yes" in every poll.

Tifabelle 06/19/2012 10:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flintlock (Post 451765)
I thought the whole idea was that you could vote in individual polls? That way you can vote either yes or no for everyone. The candidates with the greatest number of net positive votes would become staff. Otherwise there really would be no point in having multiple polls :)

I actually agree with you Flint. But what Road is saying though is this. Let's just say everyone voted yes on every candidate. Well then all the candidates are tied. Then what?

Although in the case of a tie, I guess I'd leave it up to either current staff or yop by himself to cast the final say.

Flintlock 06/19/2012 10:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Redfield (Post 451768)
I actually agree with you Flint. But what Road is saying though is this. Let's just say everyone voted yes on every candidate. Well then all the candidates are tied. Then what?

Then... rock paper scissors? :monster:

Seriously though, I think that's pretty unlikely, but even if nobody voted "no" for any candidates, some people would probably get more yes votes than others. And if there really is a tie, Yop or the admins together can choose from the tied candidates.

Cookie Monster 06/19/2012 10:28 PM

We simply have one poll with everyone on it, and leave that up for 3 days or so. The winner gets the position. Rinse and repeat two more times.

Tifabelle 06/19/2012 10:30 PM

yeah. Bottom line is that I'm still in favor of the polls, but I can see the pros and cons of both sides.

Dawnbreaker 06/20/2012 01:07 AM

As much as a PM would appear to be a better way of doing things, IMO, there's too much leeway to run the risk of something getting missed or mixed up. Then, instead of avoiding drama, that's all you'll get.

Polls are pretty straightforward. No misconceptions.

looneymoon 06/20/2012 03:06 AM

I guess it would be a bad idea to vote ironically wouldn't it?
Because that could very potentially bite me in the ass :sadpanda:

but how am I going to get votes lest it be for the ironic ones :sadpanda:

Splintered 06/20/2012 03:13 AM

I want PM's. There are certain aspects of public spectacles of the moderation process that never sat right to me. So I think that at least the votes should be purely secret.

I don't want members looking at the numbers and thinking "so close" or "he's losing I'll vote for him because I can't think of a second person" "what a fucking popularity contest, I bet those two votes are from her friends" or "joke vote lol, look at me" but most importantly, I don't want people to look at those votes and see that if they didn't get any votes or almost none at all feel like shit. Yeah it's tough love. But this mod shit can get extremely sour and if you can take the few minutes to avoid that extra discomfort. I'd like that.

Vendel 06/20/2012 04:44 AM

A vote on how to vote......?

Octo 06/20/2012 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diamond Pickaxe (Post 451862)
A vote on how to vote......?

INCEPTION!

Is it even possible to have a non-PM poll, where the results are kept secret until the end? Because I want people to vote for who they want, and not just who they think might get in based on what the numbers look like to them at the time of voting y'know? Because thats a transitory thing anyway.

http://www.learnmyself.com/personality.asp?p=new-poll

^This site is probably crap I dunno, but something along those lines could work? They have the option for results to remain secret etc etc.

Theres probably other similar sites out there? :/

Madame Mayor 06/20/2012 01:57 PM

I kind of like that idea Octo, except I'd be worried it could be taken advantage of (people voting multiple times from different computers or something).

I don't care about threads with voting, doing the whole round 1-2-3(?) thing sounds alright. Extra rounds means you don't need to worry if your second choice isn't in second place because you can vote for them next time around.

I guess I still prefer individual voting threads for individual candidates because I don't just want to see how many people say yes, and yes over the other candidates, I want to see the people who say 'no I don't feel comfortable with this person having mod powers'. What I'd worry about in the poll with everyone on it thing is 'so-and-so is in the lead, and I really don't feel like they should be a mod, so I'll vote for [blank] because they wouldn't be as bad but I also don't really support them as a mod'.

I don't see it as a 'most votes [yes] wins' thing either, but more of a 'lets look at these results' and then staff make the final decision based on these results.

Voting would obviously be anonymus, if poll results can be hidden until you've voted as well that would also be preferrable (ya you could ask people who have voted but if you'll put that much effort into lol oh well).

Ghost X 06/20/2012 02:03 PM

Quote:

Voting would obviously be anonymus, if poll results can be hidden until you've voted as well that would also be preferrable
:monster:

Madame Mayor 06/20/2012 02:06 PM

Well it was in response to this:

Quote:

Because I want people to vote for who they want, and not just who they think might get in based on what the numbers look like to them at the time of voting y'know?

Ryushikaze 06/20/2012 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Madame Mayor (Post 451916)
I kind of like that idea Octo, except I'd be worried it could be taken advantage of (people voting multiple times from different computers or something).

I don't care about threads with voting, doing the whole round 1-2-3(?) thing sounds alright. Extra rounds means you don't need to worry if your second choice isn't in second place because you can vote for them next time around.

I guess I still prefer individual voting threads for individual candidates because I don't just want to see how many people say yes, and yes over the other candidates, I want to see the people who say 'no I don't feel comfortable with this person having mod powers'. What I'd worry about in the poll with everyone on it thing is 'so-and-so is in the lead, and I really don't feel like they should be a mod, so I'll vote for [blank] because they wouldn't be as bad but I also don't really support them as a mod'.

I don't see it as a 'most votes [yes] wins' thing either, but more of a 'lets look at these results' and then staff make the final decision based on these results.

Voting would obviously be anonymus, if poll results can be hidden until you've voted as well that would also be preferrable (ya you could ask people who have voted but if you'll put that much effort into lol oh well).

This is why I proposed the +/- ballot, as it lets you weigh for and against each nominee all at once, would be conducted in secret, yet with a paper trail that could be followed if needed, and wouldn't be prone to 'oh, let's shore those numbers up,' or other reaction voting, since this is a serious poll.

I'll check if VB polls can be hidden until closed under our current setup, however.

Octo 06/20/2012 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Madame Mayor (Post 451916)
I kind of like that idea Octo, except I'd be worried it could be taken advantage of (people voting multiple times from different computers or something)

Yeah that could be an issue....Also, are we able to put anything in place to stop people creating new accounts just to vote? I don't like the idea of Vigara4U.com2184 skewing the results :lol:

Hisako 06/21/2012 09:53 AM

I'm sure we could just exclude votes from members that have joined the forum after the polls are put up. :wacky:

My memory is hazy on this but I'm fairly sure there's something available in vB that can keep poll results hidden.

There has to be something. :monster:

Lex 06/21/2012 02:26 PM

I thought transparency was the best idea until I read the above posts. Now I'm definitely thinking it'll be better to keep the results hidden at least until after the voting is finished. I really don't care how we actually vote, just that it gets done, it's traceable to each username (so there's no funny business) and that the results stay hidden until after the vote takes place.

The Q & A threads are a really good way to form an opinion on each prospective mod IMO, so a poll wouldn't bother me at all. Unlike say the character battles or the music tournament, I don't think there's a need for any poster to vote and then write up a post explaining that vote. That can be done anywhere on the forum, and I also don't think it should have a place anywhere near the actual voting thread itself. I say that for the same reason I support keeping the results anonymous until after it's over.

Ryushikaze 06/21/2012 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Someone named Octo (Post 451929)
Yeah that could be an issue....Also, are we able to put anything in place to stop people creating new accounts just to vote? I don't like the idea of Vigara4U.com2184 skewing the results :lol:

Quote:

Originally Posted by BRIAN BLESSED (Post 452140)
I'm sure we could just exclude votes from members that have joined the forum after the polls are put up. :wacky:

My memory is hazy on this but I'm fairly sure there's something available in vB that can keep poll results hidden.

There has to be something. :monster:

Currently, we can make voters anonymous, but not the running tally of votes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prince Lex (Post 452161)
I thought transparency was the best idea until I read the above posts. Now I'm definitely thinking it'll be better to keep the results hidden at least until after the voting is finished. I really don't care how we actually vote, just that it gets done, it's traceable to each username (so there's no funny business) and that the results stay hidden until after the vote takes place.

The Q & A threads are a really good way to form an opinion on each prospective mod IMO, so a poll wouldn't bother me at all. Unlike say the character battles or the music tournament, I don't think there's a need for any poster to vote and then write up a post explaining that vote. That can be done anywhere on the forum, and I also don't think it should have a place anywhere near the actual voting thread itself. I say that for the same reason I support keeping the results anonymous until after it's over.

Right, does anyone have any major problems with PMing a particular member of staff their votes, and keeping a copy of that PM for your paper trail?
Because that strikes me as the most elegant solution to this whole brouhaha that allows multiple votes and for and against votes, is confidential yet trackable, and lets us make sure that nonsense votes are kept to a minimum.

Tifabelle 06/21/2012 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ryushikaze (Post 452184)
Right, does anyone have any major problems with PMing a particular member of staff their votes, and keeping a copy of that PM for your paper trail?
Because that strikes me as the most elegant solution to this whole brouhaha that allows multiple votes and for and against votes, is confidential yet trackable, and lets us make sure that nonsense votes are kept to a minimum.

meh, but ok. Is it possible for a second staff member to double check the tallies to avoid any counting errors?

Ryushikaze 06/21/2012 05:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Redfield (Post 452186)
meh, but ok. Is it possible for a second staff member to double check the tallies to avoid any counting errors?

Well, if you want, we could use the new forum for voting, so that all of staff and you yourself could see the voting. That makes things slightly less confidential, but if everyone's okay with that, it lets everyone on staff check the math of whoever does the tallying.

Alternately, you can just PM a second member of staff your votes.

Flintlock 06/21/2012 06:10 PM

That suggestion sounds like a fairly good one, though total anonymity would be better still. I think it's getting near to the time when someone needs to make an executive decision on this, and to be honest, I'll be fine with anything.

Tifabelle 06/21/2012 06:47 PM

Ryu, just have everyone PM one staff member with their votes. Then that staff members forwards them to one other staff member to check the math.

or just let it be up to one person, idc

Ryushikaze 06/21/2012 08:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flintlock (Post 452205)
That suggestion sounds like a fairly good one, though total anonymity would be better still.

I'll call Diebold.

Quote:

I think it's getting near to the time when someone needs to make an executive decision on this, and to be honest, I'll be fine with anything.
I'm aware of the time, yes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Redfield (Post 452228)
Ryu, just have everyone PM one staff member with their votes. Then that staff members forwards them to one other staff member to check the math.

or just let it be up to one person, idc

I was thinking PMing two specified staff members so there were guaranteed three people who could confirm a particular vote.
Now if you'll excuse me, I need to go lasso a member or two of staff to be on hand to tally.

Rumpelstiltskin 06/21/2012 08:42 PM

So are we gonna have a vote to decide how to vote or not to vote but really were gonna vote to make a decision on what form of voting is best?

Ryushikaze 06/21/2012 09:15 PM

No, that would be a bit absurd, and too late at this point anyways.

Expect some more updates on this later.

The Man 06/21/2012 09:21 PM

I'll be willing to help count votes if need be. I've run several contests involving voting in the past without much trouble, for what that's worth.

Rumpelstiltskin 06/21/2012 09:32 PM

It ain't exactly rocket science.

Fangu 06/21/2012 09:33 PM

Tell that to Force

nyah nyah nyah

Madame Mayor 06/21/2012 09:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fangu (Post 452291)
Tell that to Force

nyah nyah nyah

HEY




that was going to be my joke :monster:

Omega 06/22/2012 01:30 AM

That would require dragging him back to the forum from parts unknown, wouldn't it?

probably got lost spelunking in a dank cave full of bats and wet things and DARK

Alex 06/22/2012 01:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Abbelard Whisker (Post 452313)
That would require dragging him back to the forum from parts unknown, wouldn't it?

probably got lost spelunking in a dank cave full of bats and wet things and DARK

You ready the team, I'll get the spelunking gear.

Omega 06/22/2012 01:36 AM

The mushrooms recharged my batteries!

Alex 06/22/2012 01:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adelaide Wanker (Post 452316)
The mushrooms recharged my batteries!

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/image...48_cave416.jpg

The descent will be perilous.

Ghost X 06/22/2012 03:43 AM

What you have against Adelaide? :monster:

Flintlock 06/22/2012 08:04 AM

...what the hell are you all talking about?

<-- n00b


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:31 PM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
https://thelifestream.net/oldforums/printthread.php?s=c34aa0e63d4dcd26e2393fa5b51697cd&t=11709&pp=60
thelifestream.net
crawl=CC-MAIN-2022-40
59173
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:5JQTR64LEVC6YLAJ4P4X7SNYMWYTZ4BX
<urn:uuid:aeca2be8-63a2-4d02-bf0f-468c955266ed>
2022-09-28T13:31:35Z
95.211.238.150
application/xhtml+xml
sha1:H2JMSOQ3BILXNWD57WLG674LHUFF5KR2
<urn:uuid:46ea5c66-d4bc-4218-af76-6390caaea0a7>
https://thelifestream.net/oldforums/printthread.php?s=c34aa0e63d4dcd26e2393fa5b51697cd&t=11709&pp=60
response
<urn:uuid:182c99f5-75cf-4d5e-af78-03278417fdba>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2022-40
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for September/October 2022
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-88
software: Apache Nutch 1.19 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.4-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: https://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/