Candidate Platforms *Updated* 9/28 | Page 6 | MCS: Marxism, Communism, Socialism | Guild Forums

Comrade Kotka

Shirtless Fatcat

Offline

Posted: Tue Aug 04, 2009 1:27 am

With what I've heard about some elections, what I am saying sounds like the most democratic way to me. I'll...leave it at that.

Posted: Tue Aug 04, 2009 1:32 am

Comrade Kotka

With what I've heard about some elections, what I am saying sounds like the most democratic way to me. I'll...leave it at that.

Democratic or simply unfair and needlessly filled with regulation yet still within the premise of being Democratic? You may leave it at that but I will continue to ask this question as a rightful member of this guild and one who wishes to see it succeed.

Director Mann

Offline

Dis Domnu

Offline

Posted: Tue Aug 04, 2009 1:38 am

I won't begrudge that. Ideally members would be active before an election.

As a former Admin and Mod on other forums, I know that it's hard to keep any active membership. Members do come around for things like elections, competitions, etc. But only when there's an attempt by the leadership to get them involved.

There was no attempt, as far as I could tell.

Posted: Tue Aug 04, 2009 9:41 am

Comrade Mann

Comrade Kotka

Comrade Mann

Comrade Kotka

Personally, I think it's pretty reasonable that someone so inactive that they haven't looked at the guild between when the election was announced and all the platforms were made etc. does not get to vote let alone run.

So then you think people like KatyushaRockets with mounting real life issues and not notification of anything despite being a long time valued member and being only some days ago not swamped with things returning should be deprived a vote? There's a reason we recognized not to kick people from the guild.

This situation I don't understand at all. He's active in the chat and ED-P...why not look here?

Anyway, what I'm really referring to is only voting in elections and never posting. I find this suspicious.

Find what suspicious? That suddenly we've gone from 5 mods to 3 with little reason except "dwindling attendance"? Or the fact that voting was supposed to begin the 4th but instead began the 3rd? That the registration of 3 members seems to be completely absent? There's a lot of thing suspicious here.

In any case I do understand the situation. I understand that many of us find the time to chat but not to post. This being because half the course members of NCS do it (including myself).

Suddenly?

There is nothing sudden about it at all!
This was suggested by me way back befor the elections were announced:
I proposed that the next election be a rather minor affair with only 3 mods, and that if there was decent activity after a few months then we would hold another election.

When there were only 7 people posting in the guild, it is rather stupid to have 5 of them mods, and even more stpud to vote for them in the way that we do, there would be a clear winner, and everyone else would be equal. That there was flooding of the guild for the elections does not change this. Activity will drop again shortly after, so why base the guild structure on immediate activity when it is pretty obvious long term activity is going to be low?

Considering how many hours are spent chatting, it is stupid to say you 'don't have the time.'

Especially when all it takes is a 'registered' to register.

Le Pere Duchesne
Captain

Beloved Prophet

Offline

Le Pere Duchesne
Captain

Beloved Prophet

Offline

Posted: Tue Aug 04, 2009 9:43 am

Dis Domnu

I won't begrudge that. Ideally members would be active before an election.

As a former Admin and Mod on other forums, I know that it's hard to keep any active membership. Members do come around for things like elections, competitions, etc. But only when there's an attempt by the leadership to get them involved.

There was no attempt, as far as I could tell.

No, there was. There was a flood of emails sent out around feb.

Posted: Tue Aug 04, 2009 11:50 am

Louis-Auguste Robespierre

Comrade Mann

Comrade Kotka

Comrade Mann

Comrade Kotka

Personally, I think it's pretty reasonable that someone so inactive that they haven't looked at the guild between when the election was announced and all the platforms were made etc. does not get to vote let alone run.

So then you think people like KatyushaRockets with mounting real life issues and not notification of anything despite being a long time valued member and being only some days ago not swamped with things returning should be deprived a vote? There's a reason we recognized not to kick people from the guild.

This situation I don't understand at all. He's active in the chat and ED-P...why not look here?

Anyway, what I'm really referring to is only voting in elections and never posting. I find this suspicious.

Find what suspicious? That suddenly we've gone from 5 mods to 3 with little reason except "dwindling attendance"? Or the fact that voting was supposed to begin the 4th but instead began the 3rd? That the registration of 3 members seems to be completely absent? There's a lot of thing suspicious here.

In any case I do understand the situation. I understand that many of us find the time to chat but not to post. This being because half the course members of NCS do it (including myself).

Suddenly?

There is nothing sudden about it at all!
This was suggested by me way back befor the elections were announced:
I proposed that the next election be a rather minor affair with only 3 mods, and that if there was decent activity after a few months then we would hold another election.

When there were only 7 people posting in the guild, it is rather stupid to have 5 of them mods, and even more stpud to vote for them in the way that we do, there would be a clear winner, and everyone else would be equal. That there was flooding of the guild for the elections does not change this. Activity will drop again shortly after, so why base the guild structure on immediate activity when it is pretty obvious long term activity is going to be low?

Considering how many hours are spent chatting, it is stupid to say you 'don't have the time.'

Especially when all it takes is a 'registered' to register.

It's one thing to tell a person "hey I wanna do etc." it's another to make it a formal proposal and or vote. beyond the fact that I and others have heard conflicting ideas on some of these issues.

Nevertheless, 3 mods was proposed with only that justification you gave but my problem with it is that should only apply were these mods to represent the membership, not simply moderate them. 5 guarantees though some modicum of activity from those three people. I mean Kageoru didn't post but she at least checked the membership requests often. Usually the people who run want to at least try at their elected office. So what if 7 people were the only posters, that would at least mean 5 of these people are obligated to post, just need to work on the other 2.

In addition again if you recall Kat would chat but his chat was often cut short with "BRB essay" or just loooooong periods of not being there. And I believe he told us both he's been swamped in his offline life. I just think a little more sympathy is required here.

Director Mann

Offline

Dis Domnu

Offline

Posted: Tue Aug 04, 2009 1:34 pm

Louis-Auguste Robespierre

Dis Domnu

I won't begrudge that. Ideally members would be active before an election.

As a former Admin and Mod on other forums, I know that it's hard to keep any active membership. Members do come around for things like elections, competitions, etc. But only when there's an attempt by the leadership to get them involved.

There was no attempt, as far as I could tell.

No, there was. There was a flood of emails sent out around feb.

Really now? I got nothing.

Welcome to Gaia! ::

Gaia Guilds

The Marxist, Communist, and Socialist Guild

Quick Reply

More Information