+ Log in or register to post
Results 61 to 70 of 78
Thursday, 12th November, 2009, 04:14 AM #61
Defender (Lvl 8)
- EN World
- has no influence
- on adverts that
- are displayed by
- Google Adsense
Thursday, 12th November, 2009, 08:38 AM #62
Thursday, 12th November, 2009, 11:13 AM #63
Superhero (Lvl 15)
Thursday, 12th November, 2009, 01:41 PM #64
Thursday, 12th November, 2009, 05:57 PM #65
To answer the question, once you get the real secret decoder ring I believe you will be able to vote on the proposals that are still open but dead in the water - there's no statue of limitations in the charter. (I wonder if we should make a provision to withdraw the votes of inactive judges, since they wouldn't get that 48 hour period to go in and change their votes if a proposal's reactivated after months?)
Friday, 13th November, 2009, 10:14 AM #66
Defender (Lvl 8)
Friday, 13th November, 2009, 04:06 PM #67
Well, certainly "has declared that they're taking a sabbatical". I'm not sure if a month is long enough to declare someone totally inactive, but it at least keeps things consistent with the other voting periods.
Another option is to automatically close proposals that haven't received any votes for a month. (Either we could consider this an automatic fail, so no re-proposing them for a month, or just discard all existing votes but if somebody wanted to reopen it tomorrow they could.) Or maybe it should be "no posts for a month", which means people who don't want a proposal to die could keep it open by bumping it.
Friday, 13th November, 2009, 04:26 PM #68
Acolyte (Lvl 2)
I would say that two months, certainly makes someone inactive. One moth: stuff happens, people move, internet gets shut down, and power grids go out... it happens. That's life. 2 months, however, is a pretty sure sign of abandonment. I mean, if the boards are important enough to you that you became a judge, then I think you can find time in a 2 month span to visit a library or other place of internet capability to post SOMETHING saying that you're still alive and well.
As for the votes themselves: I think if nothing has been posted to a proposal for an entire month, then the proposal should auto-fail. If it's important enough for you to propose something, it should be important enough for you to at least bump the proposal once a month while the judges make up their minds.
So here is my proposal:
Votes that a judge makes in a still-open proposal are rescinded if that judge has not posted anywhere in two months. In addition, any proposal that has not had a post in greater than 1 months time (from day X of month Y, to day X of month Z) should auto-fail. These proposals can be re-proposed one month from the date of auto-failure (on day X of the month following the date of auto-failure).
Even if something auto-fails, if it's important enough to the proposer that something NOT be included in our house rules (or changes be made to those rules, since pretty much everything is automatically in after only a month due to the new proposal system), they can propose it again in only a month.
Friday, 13th November, 2009, 05:37 PM #69
Waghalter (Lvl 7)
Slightly altered version of Kalidrev's Proposal:
Votes that a judge makes in a still-open proposal are rescinded if that judge has not posted anywhere in two months. In addition, any proposal that has not had a post in greater than 1 months time (from day X of month Y, to day X of month Z) will auto-fail. The affected proposals can be re-proposed one month from the date of auto-failure (on day X of the month following the date of auto-failure).Stipulation
Friday, 13th November, 2009, 06:25 PM #70
Acolyte (Lvl 2)
CaBaNa... if rescinding a judges vote cannot cause the proposal to pass or fail... then there is no point in rescinding his/her vote at all. The point of rescinding the absent judge's vote is to treat them as if they had not been there to vote at all, thus a proposal with a rescinded vote should be treated as such, though I would say that the proposal should not pass/fail for 48 hours from the time of the judges vote being rescinded, giving time for other judges to add/change their votes, as normal with a proposal.