July moderator elections - new format

[Harvey Williamson]

This non soviet style poll should be considered http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=35368

actually i just voted in that one and didn't even bother to read the whole poll title
i now realize it included the CTF also
oh well..sigh
the poll question could have been worded could have been worded better me thinks
Steve

Steve not often I would dare to call you a liar but as the poll expired ages ago what you say is clearly untrue. However if you think the election is a joke then so be it.

Nope. It's operational because I just used it and I saw the count change too.

Which poll are you talking about? The one I started says expired to me?

[Graham Banks]

This non soviet style poll should be considered http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=35368

actually i just voted in that one and didn't even bother to read the whole poll title
i now realize it included the CTF also
oh well..sigh
the poll question could have been worded could have been worded better me thinks
Steve

Steve not often I would dare to call you a liar but as the poll expired ages ago what you say is clearly untrue. However if you think the election is a joke then so be it.

Nope. It's operational because I just used it and I saw the count change too.

Haven't seen any change in the count for that particular poll since it expired. Strange.

[Steve B]

This non soviet style poll should be considered http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=35368

actually i just voted in that one and didn't even bother to read the whole poll title
i now realize it included the CTF also
oh well..sigh
the poll question could have been worded could have been worded better me thinks
Steve

Steve not often I would dare to call you a liar but as the poll expired ages ago what you say is clearly untrue. However if you think the election is a joke then so be it.

Nope. It's operational because I just used it and I saw the count change too.

Haven't seen any change in the count for that particular poll since it expired. Strange.

again

when i said i just voted in that one...
i didnt mean i just now voted in it
i meant i just voted and did not read it
i voted in the poll when it first appeared
i voted NO btw

Steve

[Graham Banks]

when i said i just voted in that one...
i didnt mean i just now voted in it
i meant i just voted and did not read it

Yes - that's the way that I interpreted your post too.

[Harvey Williamson]

again

when i said i just voted in that one...
i didnt mean i just now voted in it
i meant i just voted and did not read it
i voted in the poll when it first appeared
i voted NO btw

Steve

George would be proud of this Newspeak.

[Harvey Williamson]

This non soviet style poll should be considered http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=35368

actually i just voted in that one and didn't even bother to read the whole poll title
i now realize it included the CTF also
oh well..sigh
the poll question could have been worded could have been worded better me thinks
Steve

Steve not often I would dare to call you a liar but as the poll expired ages ago what you say is clearly untrue. However if you think the election is a joke then so be it.

when i said i just voted in that one i didnt mean i just now voted in it
i meant i just voted and did not read it
i was trying to be facetious Harvey and illustrate to you how easy it is to pick anything apart if one puts his mind to it
it was a satire of your entire day of posting here
the truth of the matter is that you are simply trying to cast some sort of shadow on the election for fear that we will win and allow links


i can take being called a liar by you
its not the first time someone called me a liar here and i imagine it wont be the last
i do admit that coming from you.. it surprises me.. but i guess
we all live and learn

Steve

I guess you already forgot you asked for more time for teams to be formed and now just want to win at any cost then go ahead. Please when you win make your 1st action the deletion of my account here.

[mhull]

Yes he just popped up after not logging in for ages and started a poll. Steve was all for a longer nomination period.

I don't assume that all suggestions must be adopted if one is to avoid the label of "Soviet style".

I guess Sam just wants to get it over with. Yes it is Soviet style - you are a candidate you are biased. Can Sam not speak for himself or are you now his Soviet style proxy?

You guess. You think he thinks. He didn't allow more time. Therefore he's a Soviet. Yeah, sure.

BTW, I'm not a candidate. I wasn't even going to be an alternate on any team, but I guess Sam's "Soviet Style" of arm twisting persuaded me to be an alternate at the last moment after he assured me I'd never have to do anything. Apparently they couldn't find anyone at all willing to be the alternate for their team and without an alternate (YOUR IDEA), there would be nobody running for mod in CTF. So I capitulated after this terrible torture of the Soviet Style that had accommodated your suggestion of an alternate. It's basically your freaking fault, man. You are blameworthy.

So you are a candidate but in true Soviet style you deny it? As you are now the official pravda style spokesman for Sam can you explain why a few more days were not made available?

I don't know. Is "I don't know" a standard Pravda Style response?

why sam did not repond to candidates asking for more time?

I don't know what his reasons were. I know what mine would be, which I've already stated, vis that the issue as been beat to death for weeks and anyone remotely interested had plenty of time to form a team of 3, but then your lame-brained idea of an alternate (which the Soviet tyrant Sam Hull accepted for some stupid reason he has also not explained), threw a spanner in the works. Finding 4 is a near impossibility, much less 8 on the same side of the board. Heck we rarely have 8 individuals running per side in the first place. You'd be lucky to get two teams per side if you gave them 6 months!

I'd say your suggestion of an alternate was an attempt to sabotage the process so you could then criticize Talkchess which of course you are now doing.

Why no poll amongst eligeble voters to see if they wanted this system?

The current poll/election is doing precisely that. Not only do you not read the poll instructions, you don't even read your own stuff before hitting the "submit" button.

Why no email to all members? I am sure the email could have been sent to just eligible voters and if not who cares as those not eligible can not vote.

Because it would be redundant. Only active members can vote and since they're active, there's no need to send them an email for an election they already know about. It seems you require a long list of grievances for "effect" rather than for actual validity.

Maybe not Soviet style but Sam wanting an easy life prevented all this. He is not the only one with a day job with no connection to CCC. If he does not have time to do the job I could take over I guess no election would be required?

Ah, so Hiarcs want's to do a hostile takeover of Talkchess. It's all becoming clear now.

[Harvey Williamson]

Yes he just popped up after not logging in for ages and started a poll. Steve was all for a longer nomination period.

I don't assume that all suggestions must be adopted if one is to avoid the label of "Soviet style".

I guess Sam just wants to get it over with. Yes it is Soviet style - you are a candidate you are biased. Can Sam not speak for himself or are you now his Soviet style proxy?

You guess. You think he thinks. He didn't allow more time. Therefore he's a Soviet. Yeah, sure.

BTW, I'm not a candidate. I wasn't even going to be an alternate on any team, but I guess Sam's "Soviet Style" of arm twisting persuaded me to be an alternate at the last moment after he assured me I'd never have to do anything. Apparently they couldn't find anyone at all willing to be the alternate for their team and without an alternate (YOUR IDEA), there would be nobody running for mod in CTF. So I capitulated after this terrible torture of the Soviet Style that had accommodated your suggestion of an alternate. It's basically your freaking fault, man. You are blameworthy.

So you are a candidate but in true Soviet style you deny it? As you are now the official pravda style spokesman for Sam can you explain why a few more days were not made available?

I don't know. Is "I don't know" a standard Pravda Style response?

why sam did not repond to candidates asking for more time?

I don't know what his reasons were. I know what mine would be, which I've already stated, vis that the issue as been beat to death for weeks and anyone remotely interested had plenty of time to form a team of 3, but then your lame-brained idea of an alternate (which the Soviet tyrant Sam Hull accepted for some stupid reason he has also not explained), threw a spanner in the works. Finding 4 is a near impossibility, much less 8 on the same side of the board. Heck we rarely have 8 individuals running per side in the first place. You'd be lucky to get two teams per side if you gave them 6 months!

I'd say your suggestion of an alternate was an attempt to sabotage the process so you could then criticize Talkchess which of course you are now doing.

Why no poll amongst eligeble voters to see if they wanted this system?

The current poll/election is doing precisely that. Not only do you not read the poll instructions, you don't even read your own stuff before hitting the "submit" button.

Why no email to all members? I am sure the email could have been sent to just eligible voters and if not who cares as those not eligible can not vote.

Because it would be redundant. Only active members can vote and since they're active, there's no need to send them an email for an election they already know about. It seems you require a long list of grievances for "effect" rather than for actual validity.

Maybe not Soviet style but Sam wanting an easy life prevented all this. He is not the only one with a day job with no connection to CCC. If he does not have time to do the job I could take over I guess no election would be required?

Ah, so Hiarcs want's to do a hostile takeover of Talkchess. It's all becoming clear now.

Lets have an election for the TCadmin - then you can not make accusations like that

[bob]

Personally I think the one team in the running is a good one, but having one choice will make a lot of people unhappy, I expect.

Why there was no vote or even poll held regarding the new election format, before it was put into effect, I can't fathom. I certainly had doubts about the possibility of getting multiple teams organized on short notice.

Even assuming the current slate wins, I'd like to a see a re-examination of the election format and the possibility of reverting it to individuals vs teams.

--Jon

I think this is problematic either way. For example, one could put together a slate of candidates, and then each candidate could say something like "I will serve if elected, unless xxx, yyy or zzz are also elected. I can/will not serve with them as our moderation philosophies are too diverse. That turns into a can of worms trying to figure out who will serve together.

This approach should work, but it requires communication and discussion to form a team. Steve, Fernando and I had maybe a hundred emails in correspondence as we formed the team, found a fourth member, and then formalized our moderation philosophy. We wanted to be sure we could work together effectively before "signing up."

Everything about moderating is work without pay. Just choosing 3 random people may well work out (it has in the past) or not (also happened in the past). This could work, if enough are interested in actually doing the work of a moderator.

[bob]

I did not read it I just voted. If the 2nd option, which would have been good, is do you want an individual election that is what it should have said.

Instead Sam totally ignored the concerns and requests for a longer nomination period which you supported and just went ahead in good old 'Soviet' style.

The idea for the teams has been at the top for many weeks. That is plenty of time for teams to form. I was wondering why it took so long for any teams to register and why we had to wait so long for the election.

Actually our team had corresponded well before the deadline. We just didn't post anything or notify tcadmin until we saw a deadline...

So your "Soviet style" insinuation comes across as mean spirited.

I remember when I studied Politics being told in the USSR they have elections you can vote for or against the candidate. Of course nobody will take note of who votes against!

In actual fact i doubt sam read any of the concerns. He was late starting the poll had probably not read any of the threads and just though I will go ahead anyway.

Your putting thoughts into other peoples heads and then condemning them for thinking that way is extremely unfriendly.