If you could shift around any of your votes as necessary to match your current opinion, I’d appreciate it, so that we have an accurate picture of current community sentiment.
1 Like
Already done.
1 Like
Mods should feel comfortable stepping down whenever they feel like it.
I am against term limits and a set number of mods.
Nobody should feel trapped into being a mod. I understand that an open ended window may feel daunting to some, specific terms have their own issues.
One person should feel comfortable signing up and modding for three months while another does it for a year.
I’m not sure a well defined box of servitude is that much more appealing over supporting moderators setting their own parameters for donating their time to the community.
None whatsoever. Term limits for moderators seems to be to me a pretty transparent attempt by a small minority of posters to get rid of moderators they don’t like but who have widespread community approval to stay in their current roles. Nobody is going to not sign up for a voluntary mod role because they’re worried they wont’ be able to quit after a certain amount of time, that’s ludicrous.
Are those the votes at the beginning of this thread/. Or somewhere else? I’ve lost track.
3/6/12 doesn’t mean you can’t be elected to another term. It just means those are the size of the terms. This argument doesn’t hold water.
Edit; The mods can serve any number of terms so long a s they keep meeting a 2/3 majority has a majority. To put a finer point on it.
Anywhere, but the ones in the OP show the least clear sentiment.
seems like a weird conclusion to come to when 48% have voted for term limits. i voted for term limits because i think good mods are more likely to step down after one term, bad/over-eager mods will want to be re-elected, and the 2/3 threshold will only stop the really really really really bad ones.
3 Likes
Why do you think that a mod who is bad and yet can meet the 2/3 threshold and who also would want to serve an indefinite term would be thwarted by having to serve non-consecutive 6 month terms as opposed to consecutive terms?
Am I confused? It seems like 66% have voted for terms, not term limits.
Now you’re just being dishonest. The poll your quoting is about the length of the term not whether there is a limit to the number of the terms.. The reason we know this is because there was a subsequent poll in the same damned post that you have conveniently left out that asked that very question where term limits is losing. But I’m not shocked that you would continue to be so dishonest here.
And yet, you didn’t edit your original post to remove the falsehood. Shocking. You’re not dumb and the poll directly on point is located directly below the one you keep quoting, so there’s no way this is unintentional.
I don’t think they would be thwarted, i would fully expect them to run again in 6 months. i think under term limits the forum would be able to vote for a better candidate in the next cycle if one pops up, which is preferable to the awkward position of having to vote against someone who they might otherwise get along with.
2 Likes
Right now, thread sentiment is leaning towards no limits on the number of mods, so there would not be competition between candidates, nor would there be cycles.
Do you think this describes me? Do you think it describes microbet?
4 Likes
Unlimited mods with 6 month terms and no term limits seems to be the most broadly acceptable system in here. I think we’re about ready to certify some text along those lines to put before the larger community, so I can work on drafting some unless anyone feels both inspired and fast.
2 Likes
The next step in the process is an up or down vote on the final text in toto. If you think we need more polls to finalize thread sentiment before that, go ahead and make them, but based on the polling above and the lack of any firm objections posted to unlimited mods with 6 month terms and no term limits, I’m pretty confident that’s the direction we’re heading in.
1 Like
I’ll just point out the rules technically say for the admin to run a poll in the RFC thread and then use that to start a separate binding vote thread and that didn’t happen for making PC a forum cop. I don’t think it’s a big deal with something so uncontroversial, but it’s worth noting.
Selecting mods doesn’t have to go through the same bureaucratic stuff for rules changes, especially since there is no debate on the wording of “should we make this person a mod” and the process should be streamlined. Nomination thread open for at least x days, any poster can move that we can go for an up-and-down vote and start an in-thread poll, vote happens if they get at least a certain level of support for moving to a vote (so we don’t need to trouble jmakin or whoever to start a poll), with a threshold less than needed to elect a moderator.
That’s fine. The idea was to draft text, have a bit for any last minute rewordings, and then ping jmakin to make the poll.
Yea if that last part has been a barrier I apologize - I have been very busy and get @‘d a lot. If I don’t respond the best way to summon me is via PM.
1 Like