Don't really need one you are quite capable of making up your Fairy Tales on your own. My posts are there before your team declared saying we needed a vote on teams. The Steve I know would be anti this shoe in as he was in saying the nomination period should be extended and all forum members should be emailed.Steve B wrote:your starting to sound like Hetman to meHarvey Williamson wrote:ok wow you could have claimed - where was that in the rules? If you think none of the above = scrap team concept then you really should be part of a Soviet election.Steve B wrote:correctmhull wrote:You can vote against the process in the election poll. So it's not being rammed through. Otherwise you would have no option to vote against the process. I don't understand why you keep repeating something you know is not true.Harvey Williamson wrote:What we have here is the thing being rammed through.
actually as we were the ONLY team to even offer themselves to the members we could have claimed a win right then and there
but an option was put on the ballot to offer to scrap the team concept altogether
hardly ramming anything through
did you give him your pass word or something to log on here?
point is IF that would have happened ..then THAT would have been ramming something through
here's how i think things would have transpired had the situation been reversed
you post a team with a philosophy of disallowing links
no one else contests your team
the TCADMIN posts the ballot offering the option to scrape teams and have a standard election
right now and all day long you would be whining about how unfair that was and no where was it mentioned that this would happen and how we are all communists and liars
you can have the last word
as usual
Steve
July moderator elections - new format
Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw
-
- Posts: 2010
- Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 11:12 pm
- Location: Whitchurch. Shropshire, UK.
- Full name: Harvey Williamson
Re: July moderator elections - new format
-
- Posts: 20943
- Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 7:30 pm
- Location: Birmingham, AL
Re: July moderator elections - new format
Here's a modified idea that could work, if the current one does not.Steve B wrote:your starting to sound like Hetman to meHarvey Williamson wrote:ok wow you could have claimed - where was that in the rules? If you think none of the above = scrap team concept then you really should be part of a Soviet election.Steve B wrote:correctmhull wrote:You can vote against the process in the election poll. So it's not being rammed through. Otherwise you would have no option to vote against the process. I don't understand why you keep repeating something you know is not true.Harvey Williamson wrote:What we have here is the thing being rammed through.
actually as we were the ONLY team to even offer themselves to the members we could have claimed a win right then and there
but an option was put on the ballot to offer to scrap the team concept altogether
hardly ramming anything through
did you give him your pass word or something to log on here?
point is IF that would have happened ..then THAT would have been ramming something through
here's how i think things would have transpired had the situation been reversed
you post a team with a philosophy of disallowing links
no one else contests your team
the TCADMIN posts the ballot offering the option to scrape teams and have a standard election
right now and all day long you would be whining about how unfair that was and no where was it mentioned that this would happen and how we are all communists and liars
you can have the last word
as usual
Steve
Go back to individual nominations. Then allow a group of 3 people to run together as a team, with individuals that are not in teams. You either vote for the team with one vote, or you vote for any other 3 candidates as we have always done. That would seem to offer the best of both worlds...
-
- Posts: 2010
- Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 11:12 pm
- Location: Whitchurch. Shropshire, UK.
- Full name: Harvey Williamson
Re: July moderator elections - new format
Good idea. I did think about something like this but am not sure the forum poll software would allow it. How do you stop someone voting for a team and 2 individuals?bob wrote:Here's a modified idea that could work, if the current one does not.Steve B wrote:your starting to sound like Hetman to meHarvey Williamson wrote:ok wow you could have claimed - where was that in the rules? If you think none of the above = scrap team concept then you really should be part of a Soviet election.Steve B wrote:correctmhull wrote:You can vote against the process in the election poll. So it's not being rammed through. Otherwise you would have no option to vote against the process. I don't understand why you keep repeating something you know is not true.Harvey Williamson wrote:What we have here is the thing being rammed through.
actually as we were the ONLY team to even offer themselves to the members we could have claimed a win right then and there
but an option was put on the ballot to offer to scrap the team concept altogether
hardly ramming anything through
did you give him your pass word or something to log on here?
point is IF that would have happened ..then THAT would have been ramming something through
here's how i think things would have transpired had the situation been reversed
you post a team with a philosophy of disallowing links
no one else contests your team
the TCADMIN posts the ballot offering the option to scrape teams and have a standard election
right now and all day long you would be whining about how unfair that was and no where was it mentioned that this would happen and how we are all communists and liars
you can have the last word
as usual
Steve
Go back to individual nominations. Then allow a group of 3 people to run together as a team, with individuals that are not in teams. You either vote for the team with one vote, or you vote for any other 3 candidates as we have always done. That would seem to offer the best of both worlds...
-
- Posts: 6401
- Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 8:30 pm
- Location: Chicago, Illinois, USA
Re: July moderator elections - new format
How about we stick to the teams?bob wrote:Here's a modified idea that could work, if the current one does not.Steve B wrote:your starting to sound like Hetman to meHarvey Williamson wrote:ok wow you could have claimed - where was that in the rules? If you think none of the above = scrap team concept then you really should be part of a Soviet election.Steve B wrote:correctmhull wrote:You can vote against the process in the election poll. So it's not being rammed through. Otherwise you would have no option to vote against the process. I don't understand why you keep repeating something you know is not true.Harvey Williamson wrote:What we have here is the thing being rammed through.
actually as we were the ONLY team to even offer themselves to the members we could have claimed a win right then and there
but an option was put on the ballot to offer to scrap the team concept altogether
hardly ramming anything through
did you give him your pass word or something to log on here?
point is IF that would have happened ..then THAT would have been ramming something through
here's how i think things would have transpired had the situation been reversed
you post a team with a philosophy of disallowing links
no one else contests your team
the TCADMIN posts the ballot offering the option to scrape teams and have a standard election
right now and all day long you would be whining about how unfair that was and no where was it mentioned that this would happen and how we are all communists and liars
you can have the last word
as usual
Steve
Go back to individual nominations. Then allow a group of 3 people to run together as a team, with individuals that are not in teams. You either vote for the team with one vote, or you vote for any other 3 candidates as we have always done. That would seem to offer the best of both worlds...
Next time, there will be enough time and no problem.
Miguel
-
- Posts: 20943
- Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 7:30 pm
- Location: Birmingham, AL
Re: July moderator elections - new format
I could only think of two choices when I thought about this.Harvey Williamson wrote:Good idea. I did think about something like this but am not sure the forum poll software would allow it. How do you stop someone voting for a team and 2 individuals?bob wrote:Here's a modified idea that could work, if the current one does not.Steve B wrote:your starting to sound like Hetman to meHarvey Williamson wrote:ok wow you could have claimed - where was that in the rules? If you think none of the above = scrap team concept then you really should be part of a Soviet election.Steve B wrote:correctmhull wrote:You can vote against the process in the election poll. So it's not being rammed through. Otherwise you would have no option to vote against the process. I don't understand why you keep repeating something you know is not true.Harvey Williamson wrote:What we have here is the thing being rammed through.
actually as we were the ONLY team to even offer themselves to the members we could have claimed a win right then and there
but an option was put on the ballot to offer to scrap the team concept altogether
hardly ramming anything through
did you give him your pass word or something to log on here?
point is IF that would have happened ..then THAT would have been ramming something through
here's how i think things would have transpired had the situation been reversed
you post a team with a philosophy of disallowing links
no one else contests your team
the TCADMIN posts the ballot offering the option to scrape teams and have a standard election
right now and all day long you would be whining about how unfair that was and no where was it mentioned that this would happen and how we are all communists and liars
you can have the last word
as usual
Steve
Go back to individual nominations. Then allow a group of 3 people to run together as a team, with individuals that are not in teams. You either vote for the team with one vote, or you vote for any other 3 candidates as we have always done. That would seem to offer the best of both worlds...
(1) forum software would have to handle the case;
(2) the names would be listed separately, but a team could say "If we are not the top three vote-getters, none of us will serve and the next 3 in rank will get the job.
And a third that just came to mind...
(3) same as (2) except that the team can agree to be split, hoping the team members are the top 3, but those in the top 3 still agree to serve even if they lose one or two team mates...
I could deal with any of those...
-
- Posts: 20943
- Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 7:30 pm
- Location: Birmingham, AL
Re: July moderator elections - new format
I was talking about "next time" since the current election is almost finished.michiguel wrote:How about we stick to the teams?bob wrote:Here's a modified idea that could work, if the current one does not.Steve B wrote:your starting to sound like Hetman to meHarvey Williamson wrote:ok wow you could have claimed - where was that in the rules? If you think none of the above = scrap team concept then you really should be part of a Soviet election.Steve B wrote:correctmhull wrote:You can vote against the process in the election poll. So it's not being rammed through. Otherwise you would have no option to vote against the process. I don't understand why you keep repeating something you know is not true.Harvey Williamson wrote:What we have here is the thing being rammed through.
actually as we were the ONLY team to even offer themselves to the members we could have claimed a win right then and there
but an option was put on the ballot to offer to scrap the team concept altogether
hardly ramming anything through
did you give him your pass word or something to log on here?
point is IF that would have happened ..then THAT would have been ramming something through
here's how i think things would have transpired had the situation been reversed
you post a team with a philosophy of disallowing links
no one else contests your team
the TCADMIN posts the ballot offering the option to scrape teams and have a standard election
right now and all day long you would be whining about how unfair that was and no where was it mentioned that this would happen and how we are all communists and liars
you can have the last word
as usual
Steve
Go back to individual nominations. Then allow a group of 3 people to run together as a team, with individuals that are not in teams. You either vote for the team with one vote, or you vote for any other 3 candidates as we have always done. That would seem to offer the best of both worlds...
Next time, there will be enough time and no problem.
Miguel
-
- Posts: 2010
- Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 11:12 pm
- Location: Whitchurch. Shropshire, UK.
- Full name: Harvey Williamson
Re: July moderator elections - new format
2 and 3 are workable with the current software and would work with the election rules we have used before this election. Although it could be a bit confusing if there were multiple teams.bob wrote:I could only think of two choices when I thought about this.Harvey Williamson wrote:Good idea. I did think about something like this but am not sure the forum poll software would allow it. How do you stop someone voting for a team and 2 individuals?bob wrote:Here's a modified idea that could work, if the current one does not.Steve B wrote:your starting to sound like Hetman to meHarvey Williamson wrote:ok wow you could have claimed - where was that in the rules? If you think none of the above = scrap team concept then you really should be part of a Soviet election.Steve B wrote:correctmhull wrote:You can vote against the process in the election poll. So it's not being rammed through. Otherwise you would have no option to vote against the process. I don't understand why you keep repeating something you know is not true.Harvey Williamson wrote:What we have here is the thing being rammed through.
actually as we were the ONLY team to even offer themselves to the members we could have claimed a win right then and there
but an option was put on the ballot to offer to scrap the team concept altogether
hardly ramming anything through
did you give him your pass word or something to log on here?
point is IF that would have happened ..then THAT would have been ramming something through
here's how i think things would have transpired had the situation been reversed
you post a team with a philosophy of disallowing links
no one else contests your team
the TCADMIN posts the ballot offering the option to scrape teams and have a standard election
right now and all day long you would be whining about how unfair that was and no where was it mentioned that this would happen and how we are all communists and liars
you can have the last word
as usual
Steve
Go back to individual nominations. Then allow a group of 3 people to run together as a team, with individuals that are not in teams. You either vote for the team with one vote, or you vote for any other 3 candidates as we have always done. That would seem to offer the best of both worlds...
(1) forum software would have to handle the case;
(2) the names would be listed separately, but a team could say "If we are not the top three vote-getters, none of us will serve and the next 3 in rank will get the job.
And a third that just came to mind...
(3) same as (2) except that the team can agree to be split, hoping the team members are the top 3, but those in the top 3 still agree to serve even if they lose one or two team mates...
I could deal with any of those...
1 may be possible with some tweaks to the forum software.
-
- Posts: 6073
- Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 9:34 pm
- Location: Scotland
Re: July moderator elections - new format
Get Paul to decide......Harvey Williamson wrote:2 and 3 are workable with the current software and would work with the election rules we have used before this election. Although it could be a bit confusing if there were multiple teams.bob wrote:I could only think of two choices when I thought about this.Harvey Williamson wrote:Good idea. I did think about something like this but am not sure the forum poll software would allow it. How do you stop someone voting for a team and 2 individuals?bob wrote:Here's a modified idea that could work, if the current one does not.Steve B wrote:your starting to sound like Hetman to meHarvey Williamson wrote:ok wow you could have claimed - where was that in the rules? If you think none of the above = scrap team concept then you really should be part of a Soviet election.Steve B wrote:correctmhull wrote:You can vote against the process in the election poll. So it's not being rammed through. Otherwise you would have no option to vote against the process. I don't understand why you keep repeating something you know is not true.Harvey Williamson wrote:What we have here is the thing being rammed through.
actually as we were the ONLY team to even offer themselves to the members we could have claimed a win right then and there
but an option was put on the ballot to offer to scrap the team concept altogether
hardly ramming anything through
did you give him your pass word or something to log on here?
point is IF that would have happened ..then THAT would have been ramming something through
here's how i think things would have transpired had the situation been reversed
you post a team with a philosophy of disallowing links
no one else contests your team
the TCADMIN posts the ballot offering the option to scrape teams and have a standard election
right now and all day long you would be whining about how unfair that was and no where was it mentioned that this would happen and how we are all communists and liars
you can have the last word
as usual
Steve
Go back to individual nominations. Then allow a group of 3 people to run together as a team, with individuals that are not in teams. You either vote for the team with one vote, or you vote for any other 3 candidates as we have always done. That would seem to offer the best of both worlds...
(1) forum software would have to handle the case;
(2) the names would be listed separately, but a team could say "If we are not the top three vote-getters, none of us will serve and the next 3 in rank will get the job.
And a third that just came to mind...
(3) same as (2) except that the team can agree to be split, hoping the team members are the top 3, but those in the top 3 still agree to serve even if they lose one or two team mates...
I could deal with any of those...
1 may be possible with some tweaks to the forum software.
http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=35397
-
- Posts: 5804
- Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 9:19 am
- Location: The Cherokee Nation
- Full name: Sam Hull
Re: July moderator elections - new format
Harvey,Harvey Williamson wrote: When the poll started and when I voted the philosophy was not available. Surely it should have been posted well in advance of the poll opening? Evertything is being rushed why?
I love you man, but this incessant pissing and moaning is making me wonder if something else is impinging on your usual sense of well-being. I encourage you to take more time to read before writing.
The election poll runs for four full days, yet you "rushed" to vote in the first few minutes without reading the poll and without waiting for any philosophy to be posted. Then you accuse ME of rushing a poll that has been in the works for over a month and a half. Sorry, but if this thing caught you with your hands in the air and your pants around your ankles, that's your fault. Read more carefully and thoughtfully, and you won't be surprised when things that have been announced in advance actually happen.
To answer your other monotonous refrains, I read this board every day, and all suggestions and comments (including many past discussions) were carefully weighed and evaluated. Apparently you judge my presence here by whether or not I post; that would be a mistake on your part. Faulting me for things that pertain only to the world of your imagination erodes your own credibility more than mine.
This time around we're trying out a variation based on a great many member suggestions, looking for the best way to democratically choose mods for the board. It doesn't mean the terrifying specter of Soviet communism has engulfed Talkchess just because everything wasn't done to your personal liking.
-Sam-
-
- Posts: 4186
- Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 9:31 pm
- Location: Sulu Sea
Re: July moderator elections - new format
Come on Sam,
whenever someone says something about your moves, you always cite him/her for complaining/etc. ( in this latest - Harvey Williamson. )
why don't you answer the issue
instead of
sidestepping by accusing the poster of blabity-bla.
( maybe it's time you changed this technique. it's getting worn-out )
whenever someone says something about your moves, you always cite him/her for complaining/etc. ( in this latest - Harvey Williamson. )
why don't you answer the issue
instead of
sidestepping by accusing the poster of blabity-bla.
( maybe it's time you changed this technique. it's getting worn-out )
.
.
................. Mu Shin ..........................
.
................. Mu Shin ..........................