Democratic Forum

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Resurrexi' date='04 June 2010 - 07:38 PM' timestamp='1275694682' post='2123852']
I actually like the idea of mod elections, but I also like the idea of random allotment. I think it would be cool to try both options in order to find which works better.
[/quote]
I see an electoral system as being inferior. I imagine a concentration of power in the more socially adept and/or manipulative/power hungry members, the influence of propaganda, cliques, cult of personality, fraudulent votes, et cetera. For what a message board is, and what moderation entails, I believe that spreading it out as much as possible is ideal. Elections = unnecessary drama and making the role something of a big deal which might encourage counterproductive attitudes; an appropriate allotment approach would make it kind of commonplace and non-controversial and without the power elements such as social prestige, etc.. But still, I agree that it would be fun to experiment with electoral models too, maybe I'm totally wrong and it will prove to be better in practice. You haven't specified the particulars of a system you may have in mind so it is impossible for me to really judge.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='04 June 2010 - 06:48 PM' timestamp='1275695326' post='2123859']
I see an electoral system as being inferior. I imagine a concentration of power in the more socially adept and/or manipulative/power hungry members, the influence of propaganda, cliques, cult of personality, fraudulent votes, et cetera. For what a message board is, and what moderation entails, I believe that spreading it out as much as possible is ideal. Elections = unnecessary drama. But still, I agree that it would be fun to experiment with that approach too, maybe I'm totally wrong and it will prove to be better in practice.
[/quote]

w00t

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Resurrexi' date='04 June 2010 - 07:50 PM' timestamp='1275695418' post='2123860']
w00t
[/quote]
wow, w00ting is so fun.

w00t!!!

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='Hilde' date='04 June 2010 - 03:48 PM' timestamp='1275688090' post='2123809']
What if someone didn't follow the constitution?
[/quote]

Then it wouldn't be much different from the USA's method of governing. Unless, the constitution actually means something.

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='04 June 2010 - 04:07 PM' timestamp='1275689274' post='2123814']
Here's one possible scenario out of many that I think would be worth trying.

At any given time there is a pseudo-random chance, the non-random factor being the needs of the board at the time, that a currently signed in member will be given the moderator torch, as it were. The goal being an active moderator on duty as much as possible. The vast majority of the time a member with the moderator torch will simply go about their business and will not exercise those powers and responsibilities in any way. Any moderator action must be well justified and have a proper precedent. If someone posts spam, porn, or something else clearly considered offensive or unacceptable by the community that user will be justified in taking action. For 'grey area' offenses the community will discuss and vote on the necessity of moderator action similar to what is the case now when a user reports a post, except that everything is 100% open to all (in this case it is in fact the community at large making the decision and the person with the torch is simply implementing that decision). All members are perfectly free to opt out of moderator duties if they so desire. But the real key is that the community can disqualify a member from moderator duties if they have abused that power in some way. I also imagine the specifics of the software to be designed in a way that will discourage abuse--secondary discussion.

In effect, the bestowal of moderator responsibility and power is voluntary, kept fair based on the element of random chance, is very much temporary, and is balanced by the community in the sense that eligibility for this responsibility can be lost by irresponsible action. Further, the community might define prerequisites for the eligibility of new members; perhaps a minimum number of posts.
[/quote]

hmm like that. Switched vote from indifferent to good idea.

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='04 June 2010 - 04:42 PM' timestamp='1275691375' post='2123828']
Fascinating. I do speculate that some sort of allotment approach to moderation (as opposed to a fixed team) would generally be more effective at thwarting such spams promptly (much greater chance of there being a mod 'on duty' at any given time). Also things like requiring registration, IP-based banning, flood control, etc., would make a big flood of spam more difficult. It sounds like that chan site is basically asking for it.
[/quote]

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='04 June 2010 - 06:54 PM' timestamp='1275695670' post='2123862']
wow, w00ting is so fun.

w00t!!!
[/quote]

w00t for Cardinal Ottaviani, who wrote an awesome Intervention.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='goldenchild17' date='04 June 2010 - 07:56 PM' timestamp='1275695789' post='2123864']
hmm like that. Switched vote from indifferent to good idea.
[/quote]


Rockin' the vote.


[quote name='Resurrexi' date='04 June 2010 - 07:59 PM' timestamp='1275695970' post='2123866']
w00t for Cardinal Ottaviani, who wrote an awesome Intervention.

[/quote]
Woooots! for all time!