ACK! That time again! [Archive] - TheHolo.Net Forums

Navaria Tarkin

Apr 23rd, 2003, 08:46:09 PM

Due to finals >_< I can't volunteer...

perhaps the best thing to do is pull that voting thread in here and re-read it to see what needs to be done?

Marcus Telcontar

Apr 24th, 2003, 07:32:19 AM

I'll pull the thread in question here tomorrow, unless someone beats me to it.

I think on thing we might need to think of - and this doesnt make me feel good to put this up for discussion - but Yog aint been around. we gave other Jedi like Liam the arse for not being around last election. Much as Yog is a very good friend, I cant really say he should have permanent seat any more. The permanent should go to someone else.

Navaria Tarkin

Apr 24th, 2003, 01:05:19 PM

Unfortunately I agree :\ It was decided because he was around often enough, and now he isn't around at all :( So, yes ... Marcus is right.

Figrin D'an

Apr 24th, 2003, 03:12:25 PM

I have to agree. At the time, the idea of a permenant seat for Yog worked very well. But, he just isn't around enough to function in that role anymore. Maybe, when his schedule lightens up a little, he'll start to post again, and we can revisit the idea. But, it isn't really fair to everyone to have a Council seat, and thus a vote and a voice, taken up by someone whom just isn't active.

Morgan Evanar

Apr 24th, 2003, 03:19:49 PM

I say scrap the permanet seat, and give it to someone elected. Yog hasn't really participated in a meaningful scale in over six months, more or less.

TheHolo.Net

Apr 24th, 2003, 04:56:45 PM

I say scrap the permanent seat

Marcus Telcontar

Apr 24th, 2003, 07:13:09 PM

Yes to that. I cant think of anyone else that a permanent seat would be appropriate for.

Ryla Relvinian

Apr 24th, 2003, 08:21:44 PM

Arglefuck.?????? New one for me.

I can help tally, if you need it. :)

I also agree with scrapping the perma-seat. Why not award it to somebody like AB who has consistently been the top-voted member?

Morgan Evanar

Apr 24th, 2003, 08:32:10 PM

Because people leave and sometimes real life is inconvient. The Order is a dynamic, changing group of people. Tying in another person is pretty foolish at this point.

AmazonBabe

Apr 24th, 2003, 10:44:57 PM

Why not award it to somebody like AB who has consistently been the top-voted member?

That was very sweet, Ryla. Thank you. :)

But, in all honesty, I wouldn't want to be tied down to a permanent seat. To me, it's too much of a "special, more important" position than the other spots. And all the spots should be equal and feel the same.

Getting rid of the permanent seat is a good idea. Just make it a regular seat on the Council. So, instead of allowing votes for 8, we now allow votes for 9.

And if no one else has volunteered, I would like to volunteer to run the voting/tallying/whatever. :)

BTW, was this (http://www.swforums.net/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=26675) the thread in question?

Marcus Telcontar

Apr 24th, 2003, 10:54:31 PM

http://www.sw-fans.net/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=28987

Last comments thread - I'd think the way we did it before, coupled with the changes thought up in that thread is the way to go. The other thing is maybe reassessing how often the elections are held. Maybe every four months? It's like bink, then we're electing again.

this time too, we do something different - sort everything out and then get the vote going. No finger pointing, but for the last couple of years, we have always been very haphazard, mainy cause we simply dont remember election time is up. Rushed etc.

My thought is this time, caling for nomiations first and building an election list. If we only have 8 noms, then cool, no election needed. More than 8, election on.

Figrin D'an

Apr 25th, 2003, 12:24:02 AM

:thumbup

Sounds good to me.

- Nomination thread, canidates must be Knight or Master to be eligible for nomination, and must accept or decline if they are nominated. All accepted nominations go on the list for the election.

- Election thread, people vote for those on nomination list (up to 9, with the permenant seat having been dissolved). Top 9 vote getters become the new Council.

The only question then is... how long of a period do we allow for nominations, before moving onto the actual vote?

Marcus Telcontar

Apr 25th, 2003, 07:42:24 AM

Agh, give em a week or two. That'll be enough.

- Additional qualification - a nominee must have contributed in some postive manner and been a Knight for at least three months.

Thence, if Liam was nominated and for arguments sake he suddenly appeared and accepted, I would not hesitate to override the nomination and declare Liam ineligible. Anyone not about like that should be declared ineligible.

Morgan Evanar

Apr 25th, 2003, 12:11:45 PM

Absolutely. The person must have been an active, visible participant for the previous term.

AmazonBabe

Apr 25th, 2003, 05:01:25 PM

Soooooooo... when you want me to get the nomination thread started?

In the thread I'd put down who is eligable for nominations and keep a tally.

I think in the nomination thread we should also inform ppl that the pernanent seat has been disolved and that there is now voting for 9 as opposed to 8. But obviously they wouldn't have to worry bout all that till the actual voting thread.

(BTW, Marcus, we posted the same link. :p)

Navaria Tarkin

Apr 26th, 2003, 09:50:49 PM

I think we should start a nomination thread and get the ball rolling AB. May first is fricking this thursday ack!

I like everything suggested thus far... and four months is a good idea. One more month isn't going to make or break anything at all

Marcus Telcontar

Apr 26th, 2003, 10:21:51 PM

Yep, when your ready AB, start the noms off and let peeps know what the procedure si this time around. I'll help with tallying and etc as well.

AmazonBabe

Apr 26th, 2003, 10:24:46 PM

:: Salutes ::

Gottcha. I'll get it going now.

Marcus: If you see any other rules/comments need to be added to the post, then go for it.

Marcus Telcontar

Apr 27th, 2003, 02:52:38 AM

Just did - only really one thing that we missed this time around - I think it would have been best for one nomination per person. Other than that, just emphasised criteria 1).

TheHolo.Net

Apr 27th, 2003, 07:15:17 PM

With the Council being an IC governing body, I have decided to abstain from nominating or voting this period due to my inactivity on an IC basis in GJO.

AmazonBabe

Apr 27th, 2003, 07:20:24 PM

I think it would have been best for one nomination per person.

Noted, and it will be applied for the next nomination time.

(Yes, I'm keeping notes for next time so we don't forget all this stuff. :))

Ryla Relvinian

May 4th, 2003, 04:48:04 PM

I think it's time to close the nomination thread and start a vote thread. Anybody? Anybody?

Figrin D'an

May 4th, 2003, 05:38:00 PM

Yeah... it's been a week. I'm guessing those are all the nominees that were going to get.

TheHolo.Net

May 4th, 2003, 09:09:59 PM

Aye, and thar she goes.

Figrin D'an

May 4th, 2003, 09:40:05 PM

'k... there is an issue...

I interpreted the elimination of the permenant seat as meaning that there would be 9 total seats available. It slipped my mind that last election, there was a tie for the last seat... thus, we ended up with 9 council members, including Yog. So, technically, there are only supposed to be 8 seats.

However... 8 seats leads to a problem... there can be ties on items on which the council must vote. Having 9 members would avoid this problem.

So... we need to decide if we want to go with 8 or 9 seats.

AmazonBabe

May 4th, 2003, 09:47:31 PM

I say 9.

GJO is large enough to hold up to that many, AND it does cut back on the chance of a tied vote for whatever is being voted on by the Council.

Morgan Evanar

May 4th, 2003, 09:55:25 PM

We essentially ran on 7 for over a year, since Yog voting was pretty much a non issue. The votes usually ended up being heavily one way or the other anyway, and I don't really care one way or the other.

At the end of the day, I'll still have my bowl of cereal tommorow and it won't really matter much.

Marcus Telcontar

May 4th, 2003, 10:10:33 PM

Eh, tied issues almost never happen and the last one I think I broke. That's how long ago it was.

8, 9, dont bother me. 9'll give others a chance to get on.

TheHolo.Net

May 4th, 2003, 10:23:26 PM

I'm okay with 8, but if thought really needed, 9 is cool by me.

Figrin D'an

May 4th, 2003, 11:04:09 PM

Gee, everyone is so agreeable tonight. I guess that stuff I put in the water really did work...

I mean... umm... yeah... :mischief

In all seriousness... nine seems more logical to me. If nobody objects objects, then let's just leave it at nine. It effectively gives two more people (with Yog not being around) a chance to serve on the council, which is good. It gives the group some new life, to counter those of us that have been around for the last eon or two. ;)

Marcus Telcontar

May 4th, 2003, 11:11:18 PM

Dude, you've been here since the Big Bang :p

AmazonBabe

May 5th, 2003, 10:49:47 AM

It gives the group some new life, to counter those of us that have been around for the last eon or two. ;)

:lol

Dude, you've been here since the Big Bang :p

:lol!!

Soooo... what does that make you, Marcus? :D

Ryla Relvinian

May 5th, 2003, 10:30:48 PM

Oh, I don't think you really wanted to ask that. :D

*runs for cover, just in case*

But seriously, nine=good. There are so many qualified and interested people around here anyway. :)