A major goal of the RFC process was to avoid badgering the larger, less-interested-in-the-sausage-making part of the community with binding votes on each line item. I think it’s our responsibility to come up with a proposal that’s complete, or at least nearly so, for up-or-down ratification.
I’m not sure there’s any such thing as a perfect poll to try to solicit community input, as supplying enough options so as to not be pushing a specific loaded agenda is at odds with settling on a clear consensus, but the purpose of the polls early in an RFC is to find what is broadly acceptable, not necessarily to hit 50%+1. We don’t necessarily need bottomless polls if we can read the room, and we’re already seeing considerably fewer voters in polls this deep in the thread. Unlimited mods has been consistently favored over a set number (which I find pretty surprising, but that’s why we do this process), and a requirement that someone other than the proposed mod do the nomination has never garnered any real support. People still have time to voice objections to the text, but at this point, I think the appetite for more granularity isn’t very large.
You are free to start an in-thread poll on whether there should be separate community votes for each. If you can convince enough people, then your perspective will win out.
Maybe this is what you are saying, but you should feel free to have a poll in this thread with several “bundle options” competing against each other. Doing so, of course, would allow people to express their preferences over combos which might not be so easily reflected over separate independent polls.
Another straw poll of this type would probably not hurt at this point. Although, as pointed out above, the number of votes cast will likely be fairly low at this point.
There’s no time limit, but neither is there a prohibition on me advancing the proposal to the up and down vote. As to how to do it, it was stated for you:
From the way this thread is going, either you do it or no one will do it, which can be taken as a sign that maybe your POV won’t win a poll. It’s up to you if you want to put that to a test vote.
The process has already become too burdensome for the average user to seriously participate. Adding more to it isn’t helping anything.
I suspect most people on this site don’t understand the need for any of this when a bit of adulting should have resolved it.
Most people don’t want to get sucked into this drama vortex.
I am pretty much going to vote against anything that makes any of this more complicated and convuluted than absolutely necessary. Which means almost everything.
I would argue that the proposal up for a vote is just about the simplest system of picking mods that is also community driven that one could come up with, and that voting yes for it is most definitely a vote against keeping this whole thing going with additional complexity and complication, so I would think about switching to yes.
I think the goal was to eliminate drama and ease the moderator’s burden of not knowing which decisions were ok to make or not. Yes, it is likely overcomplicated, but I think it is achieving both ends.
I also will probably vote against this becoming more complicated unless it is necessary.
But hey, we already bootstrapped a process that elected a moderator by the rules we voted and agreed upon - I think that’s not nothing. And in the event we grow, these rules will become more necessary.
Because the proposed text followed ratified procedure and met the standards to go before a community vote, and because no one put forth any alternative that showed greater popularity.