Welcome to Gaia! ::

absolutely, let everyone decide whom they feel they respect and would prefer to have on this council, based on their posts.

exactly, up until just a little bit ago, we three were the only ones actively trying to figure this out. I would really prefer if some of the other members would step up and be active in this community.

Yeah i agree with that, since evryone in the guild should have equil say evryone should decide on there own opinion of evryones posts and this will efect who they think should be in the council.
Or are you thinking that there should be a set group of people who are eligable to be on the council.

Well, I mean, that was sort of the point of the whole post count system. It wasn't a concrete rule of "once you have X posts you're eligible." It was more like "show us what you're like, and so long as you don't act like an a** we're set." The time thing is an issue too, only because it shows if someone is just a passerby, or if they have the actual dedication it will and does take to keep everything and everyone coordinated. I mean s**t, since this guild has opened I've checked it pretty much every day for inane bullshit ala Angsty Shem, for new applicants (I know what it feels like to have to wait two or three days before admittance to a guild, and sometimes one might lose the ambition that they had at the time of applying). That's the whole point of that system. Even infoshop collectives usually have a waiting trial as well as "be here helping for X hours a week" before going and making someone a collective member.

funny the what happens at an infoshop comes up since we're practically having a discussion on that right now in the meetings for the infoshop we'll be starting down here. I think ideally we wouldn't need something like the time limit etc, but I understand why people feel the need for it. I think that maybe the way we can make this work(and have a happy compromise) is that members are selected to the council and to stay on the community has to remain happy with the way they are working, if at any point the community is unhappy with the way a council member is working(this can include inactivity, I know that would make me unhappy) they are removed. Yeah, I guess that it may seem kinda reactive, but I dunno there's just something about time limits and what not I just don't really like.

that's what I've been arguing all along. People are mad council members because the community respects them and thinks they will do a good job. However council members must answer directly to the community, the second the community no longer respects them or feels they are no longer working in the interest of the community then they are removed from the power they had. It's kinda like a seperation of powers/ check and balances thing. Exept having judicial/executive/legislative branches, you have Council and Community, the council has the power to do things, but the Community has the power to make them no longer have any power.

So i think we'r all agreed on on the method of selecting who should be in the council, but how many people will be in it, obviously the original idea of 5% of the guild wont work bcause less than 5% of the guild are active, so how can we decide on the size of the council.

really I think we need to just think about how many people we really need to empower. This guild is not a high traffic fast pased guild, where we are going to need to do a whole lot of mod kinda stuff. I think that a small group who are able to be online at various times to check up on things is all that is necessary I'd say that a group of 5 individuals is probably the highest with 3 being the smallest, for the best size of the council.