July moderator elections - new format

[Harvey Williamson]

I think, a lot more people are willing/able to moderate, than are willing to go into a 100-email series of discussions about how they will do this as a team. Plus even if you do that, there is always going to be some situation that comes up that you haven't discussed in advance, and then you can get into some serious disagreement, just as 3 random people could.

But at least, I think there should be a vote on the voting system. A clear-cut one just on the system for election, separate from the election itself.

While a team can always have a disagreement about a specific action, it will not be anywhere near what happened this term where there was a complete disagreement on basic moderation philosophy. A team could hardly approach the discord seen this term, IMHO. Most of our emails were between the three primary members while we were searching for an alternate, and were related to polishing the philosophy statement to try to be as clear as possible to anyone wanting to vote for us, so that they would know exactly how we planned on handling most (not all, of course, but most) issues that come up.

This is a good exercise as well, to get everything firmly fixed, mentally, so that you know what you said you would do, and you were happy with that when you said it, which should result in very little back-pedalling. Once you see your ideas in writing, they take on a more static meaning that gives you a chance to see if you really mean what you wrote or if you might want to change something after seeing it in black and white.

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?

sorry this is bullshit
every election we have ever had here had moderation philosophies posted only when mods accepted their nominations and when the vote began
our statement was posted a few hours after the poll opened
i sent it in to Sam at 600 am in the morning MY Time
he posted it when he logged on
a matter of hours from the poll opening to the statement posted

you are now posting paranoid nonsense
you have been posting nonsense all day long
Steve

The only 1 full of shit is you - I guess it is the scent of unelected power. The last election mine was posted days in advance of the polls opening. As was yours the last time you stood here.

your right
in the past accepting nominees could post a statement once they accepted their nominations
my mistake..
no nomination process with team elections so the statements were posted when teams declared
still ..personally i consider all of your complaints today as thinly veiled attempts to undermine the election process in an effort to prevent links should we win
if i were moderating right now i would be voting to begin issuing you warnings
dont know how the others would feel about it but you know where i stand right now
Steve

Really funny - you a few days ago supported more time and emailing all members now you have a shoe in you forget all that. Maybe you should be warned for making a post that is totally untrue as I have just proved.

[Steve B]

I think, a lot more people are willing/able to moderate, than are willing to go into a 100-email series of discussions about how they will do this as a team. Plus even if you do that, there is always going to be some situation that comes up that you haven't discussed in advance, and then you can get into some serious disagreement, just as 3 random people could.

But at least, I think there should be a vote on the voting system. A clear-cut one just on the system for election, separate from the election itself.

While a team can always have a disagreement about a specific action, it will not be anywhere near what happened this term where there was a complete disagreement on basic moderation philosophy. A team could hardly approach the discord seen this term, IMHO. Most of our emails were between the three primary members while we were searching for an alternate, and were related to polishing the philosophy statement to try to be as clear as possible to anyone wanting to vote for us, so that they would know exactly how we planned on handling most (not all, of course, but most) issues that come up.

This is a good exercise as well, to get everything firmly fixed, mentally, so that you know what you said you would do, and you were happy with that when you said it, which should result in very little back-pedalling. Once you see your ideas in writing, they take on a more static meaning that gives you a chance to see if you really mean what you wrote or if you might want to change something after seeing it in black and white.

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?

sorry this is bullshit
every election we have ever had here had moderation philosophies posted only when mods accepted their nominations and when the vote began
our statement was posted a few hours after the poll opened
i sent it in to Sam at 600 am in the morning MY Time
he posted it when he logged on
a matter of hours from the poll opening to the statement posted

you are now posting paranoid nonsense
you have been posting nonsense all day long
Steve

The only 1 full of shit is you - I guess it is the scent of unelected power. The last election mine was posted days in advance of the polls opening. As was yours the last time you stood here.

your right
in the past accepting nominees could post a statement once they accepted their nominations
my mistake..
no nomination process with team elections so the statements were posted when teams declared
still ..personally i consider all of your complaints today as thinly veiled attempts to undermine the election process in an effort to prevent links should we win
if i were moderating right now i would be voting to begin issuing you warnings
dont know how the others would feel about it but you know where i stand right now
Steve

Really funny - you a few days ago supported more time and emailing all members now you have a shoe in you forget all that. Maybe you should be warned for making a post that is totally untrue as I have just proved.

i did support it
not everything i support came to pass
i also wanted a one year term
didnt come to pass

thats the third time you called me a liar
i admit my mistakes
how about you?

[Harvey Williamson]

I think, a lot more people are willing/able to moderate, than are willing to go into a 100-email series of discussions about how they will do this as a team. Plus even if you do that, there is always going to be some situation that comes up that you haven't discussed in advance, and then you can get into some serious disagreement, just as 3 random people could.

But at least, I think there should be a vote on the voting system. A clear-cut one just on the system for election, separate from the election itself.

While a team can always have a disagreement about a specific action, it will not be anywhere near what happened this term where there was a complete disagreement on basic moderation philosophy. A team could hardly approach the discord seen this term, IMHO. Most of our emails were between the three primary members while we were searching for an alternate, and were related to polishing the philosophy statement to try to be as clear as possible to anyone wanting to vote for us, so that they would know exactly how we planned on handling most (not all, of course, but most) issues that come up.

This is a good exercise as well, to get everything firmly fixed, mentally, so that you know what you said you would do, and you were happy with that when you said it, which should result in very little back-pedalling. Once you see your ideas in writing, they take on a more static meaning that gives you a chance to see if you really mean what you wrote or if you might want to change something after seeing it in black and white.

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?

sorry this is bullshit
every election we have ever had here had moderation philosophies posted only when mods accepted their nominations and when the vote began
our statement was posted a few hours after the poll opened
i sent it in to Sam at 600 am in the morning MY Time
he posted it when he logged on
a matter of hours from the poll opening to the statement posted

you are now posting paranoid nonsense
you have been posting nonsense all day long
Steve

The only 1 full of shit is you - I guess it is the scent of unelected power. The last election mine was posted days in advance of the polls opening. As was yours the last time you stood here.

your right
in the past accepting nominees could post a statement once they accepted their nominations
my mistake..
no nomination process with team elections so the statements were posted when teams declared
still ..personally i consider all of your complaints today as thinly veiled attempts to undermine the election process in an effort to prevent links should we win
if i were moderating right now i would be voting to begin issuing you warnings
dont know how the others would feel about it but you know where i stand right now
Steve

Really funny - you a few days ago supported more time and emailing all members now you have a shoe in you forget all that. Maybe you should be warned for making a post that is totally untrue as I have just proved.

i did support it
not everything i support came to pass
i also wanted a one year term
didnt come to pass

thats the third time you called me a liar
i admit my mistakes
how about you?

So when you support these things it is fine if I do I should be warned lol. As far as I remember I said it once where are the other 2 times?

[Steve B]

I think, a lot more people are willing/able to moderate, than are willing to go into a 100-email series of discussions about how they will do this as a team. Plus even if you do that, there is always going to be some situation that comes up that you haven't discussed in advance, and then you can get into some serious disagreement, just as 3 random people could.

But at least, I think there should be a vote on the voting system. A clear-cut one just on the system for election, separate from the election itself.

While a team can always have a disagreement about a specific action, it will not be anywhere near what happened this term where there was a complete disagreement on basic moderation philosophy. A team could hardly approach the discord seen this term, IMHO. Most of our emails were between the three primary members while we were searching for an alternate, and were related to polishing the philosophy statement to try to be as clear as possible to anyone wanting to vote for us, so that they would know exactly how we planned on handling most (not all, of course, but most) issues that come up.

This is a good exercise as well, to get everything firmly fixed, mentally, so that you know what you said you would do, and you were happy with that when you said it, which should result in very little back-pedalling. Once you see your ideas in writing, they take on a more static meaning that gives you a chance to see if you really mean what you wrote or if you might want to change something after seeing it in black and white.

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?

sorry this is bullshit
every election we have ever had here had moderation philosophies posted only when mods accepted their nominations and when the vote began
our statement was posted a few hours after the poll opened
i sent it in to Sam at 600 am in the morning MY Time
he posted it when he logged on
a matter of hours from the poll opening to the statement posted

you are now posting paranoid nonsense
you have been posting nonsense all day long
Steve

The only 1 full of shit is you - I guess it is the scent of unelected power. The last election mine was posted days in advance of the polls opening. As was yours the last time you stood here.

your right
in the past accepting nominees could post a statement once they accepted their nominations
my mistake..
no nomination process with team elections so the statements were posted when teams declared
still ..personally i consider all of your complaints today as thinly veiled attempts to undermine the election process in an effort to prevent links should we win
if i were moderating right now i would be voting to begin issuing you warnings
dont know how the others would feel about it but you know where i stand right now
Steve

Really funny - you a few days ago supported more time and emailing all members now you have a shoe in you forget all that. Maybe you should be warned for making a post that is totally untrue as I have just proved.

i did support it
not everything i support came to pass
i also wanted a one year term
didn't come to pass

that's the third time you called me a liar
i admit my mistakes
how about you?

So when you support these things it is fine if I do I should be warned lol. As far as I remember I said it once where are the other 2 times?

i supported those things yes... but i didn't cry like an infant that cant get his way because i didnt get them and i dont try to undermine an entire election because i didnt get them

here is the real joke
if the situation were reversed and the only team standing were one that would not allow links
you know as well as i do that you would have no complaints whatsoever
true or false?

[Harvey Williamson]

I think, a lot more people are willing/able to moderate, than are willing to go into a 100-email series of discussions about how they will do this as a team. Plus even if you do that, there is always going to be some situation that comes up that you haven't discussed in advance, and then you can get into some serious disagreement, just as 3 random people could.

But at least, I think there should be a vote on the voting system. A clear-cut one just on the system for election, separate from the election itself.

While a team can always have a disagreement about a specific action, it will not be anywhere near what happened this term where there was a complete disagreement on basic moderation philosophy. A team could hardly approach the discord seen this term, IMHO. Most of our emails were between the three primary members while we were searching for an alternate, and were related to polishing the philosophy statement to try to be as clear as possible to anyone wanting to vote for us, so that they would know exactly how we planned on handling most (not all, of course, but most) issues that come up.

This is a good exercise as well, to get everything firmly fixed, mentally, so that you know what you said you would do, and you were happy with that when you said it, which should result in very little back-pedalling. Once you see your ideas in writing, they take on a more static meaning that gives you a chance to see if you really mean what you wrote or if you might want to change something after seeing it in black and white.

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?

sorry this is bullshit
every election we have ever had here had moderation philosophies posted only when mods accepted their nominations and when the vote began
our statement was posted a few hours after the poll opened
i sent it in to Sam at 600 am in the morning MY Time
he posted it when he logged on
a matter of hours from the poll opening to the statement posted

you are now posting paranoid nonsense
you have been posting nonsense all day long
Steve

The only 1 full of shit is you - I guess it is the scent of unelected power. The last election mine was posted days in advance of the polls opening. As was yours the last time you stood here.

your right
in the past accepting nominees could post a statement once they accepted their nominations
my mistake..
no nomination process with team elections so the statements were posted when teams declared
still ..personally i consider all of your complaints today as thinly veiled attempts to undermine the election process in an effort to prevent links should we win
if i were moderating right now i would be voting to begin issuing you warnings
dont know how the others would feel about it but you know where i stand right now
Steve

Really funny - you a few days ago supported more time and emailing all members now you have a shoe in you forget all that. Maybe you should be warned for making a post that is totally untrue as I have just proved.

i did support it
not everything i support came to pass
i also wanted a one year term
didn't come to pass

that's the third time you called me a liar
i admit my mistakes
how about you?

So when you support these things it is fine if I do I should be warned lol. As far as I remember I said it once where are the other 2 times?

i supported those things yes... but i didn't cry like an infant that cant get his way because i didnt get them and i dont try to undermine an entire election because i didnt get them

here is the real joke
if the situation were reversed and the only team standing were one that would not allow links
you know as well as i do that you would have no complaints whatsoever
true or false?

totally false my views were clear before any team was known. I wanted a poll to see if eligible voters wanted teams (I have no problem with the concept). What we have here is the thing being rammed through.

[mhull]

What we have here is the thing being rammed through.

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]

What we have here is the thing being rammed through.

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.

It is totally true. 4 days only for teams to declare. No poll of the membership to see if they wanted this. Option 2 in the poll could have been made more clear. None of the above is not the same as 'no i want the old fashioned elections' or words to that effect.

[Steve B]

What we have here is the thing being rammed through.

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.

correct
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

[Harvey Williamson]

What we have here is the thing being rammed through.

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.

correct
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

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]

What we have here is the thing being rammed through.

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.

correct
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

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.

your starting to sound like Hetman to me
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