Open elections for Admins for all good standing members

[Rick7475]

No more priviledged voting.

No more cabals that continue to vote in their favorite admin.

Equal representation for all.

Voting lasts one week, for any admin position, all of ALFA gets the vote.

We are ONE community, not 5 or 10. We are all equal.

Paazin, it is time for you to make a legacy.

[Nalo Jade]

What is the reasoning for not having Admin choices in the hands of everyone?

I seem to recall something about the membership inadvertantly creating an "Anti-team", by voting in folks that refuse to work together.

If that is the only reason I agree with Rick. We are intelligent enough to see in the debates, and judge if someone will or won't work well with the others.

[Lusipher]

I think the majority of ALFans are intelligent enough to make a decision about who should run the ship here. Give every member a vote. As it is having a select few to decide who runs ALFA is really not fair because it allows catering to those individuals and people can "stack the deck" with folks that they know will see things their way. If you truly want to be fair give all ALFans the right to decide who runs this place not a select few who think they are entitled to vote.

[Hialmar]

I'm a hundred percent behind you on this Rick.

I've heard people say that if some group in ALFA could become big enough they could force election of people from their group and govern ALFA as a whole.

But this never happened for the PA. And we have had very good PAs elected by the whole membership.
I'm certain we could elect all admins in the same way and have as good admins as well.

Oh and of course this goes for the DMA as well.
DMs are members like others.

If the DM Admin is only elected by DMs then why isn't the TA only elected by builders and scripters and so on ?

We shouldn't oppose members (DMs vs players, NWN1 people vs NWN2 people, staff vs other members...) we should unite everyone with the same rights.

[FanaticusIncendi]

I assumed it went without saying that I am in favor of everyone getting a vote. Maybe not, so I'll say it. I support vote-enabling all members in good standing.

After all, everyone was able to vote for me and I'm awesome

[Rick7475]

That's two admins in favor. Just one more for a majority.


Come on Paazin, be the Admin that changed ALFA! Legacy in the first 2 days of office

[JaydeMoon]

Check your charter, Rick. You need 3 Admin and 2/3 current HDM approval to change the charter.

Voting constituencies are covered in section 3.2.2 of the charter, so it's a charter change to make this happen.

3 of 5 HDMs is not quite 2/3, so you need 4 HDMs to support this.

Also, it doesn't matter how many Admin or HDM support it, you need Lead or the CC to even suggest a charter change.

[FanaticusIncendi]

That's two admins in favor. Just one more for a majority.

Come on Paazin, be the Admin that changed ALFA! Legacy in the first 2 days of office

Actually, that's not how it would work in this case.

Voting constituencies are defined in the charter:

3.2.2 Voting Constituencies

The voting constituencies for Lead, Tech, and DM Administrators shall include all seated Administrators, all HDMs, vote-eligible Administrator Staff as defined in section 3.5, and all full ADMs. The same shall hold for recall votes (as defined in section 3.4) involving these Administrators.

The voting constituencies for the Infrastructure Administrator, as well as voting to recall said Administrator once the motion has been successfully carried, shall include all seated Administrators, all HDMs, EADMs for live and beta 3 servers as defined in section 2.3, and vote-eligible Administrator Staff as de-fined in section 3.5.

The voting constituency for Player Administrator shall include all members of ALFA. The same shall hold for Player Administrator recalls.

Therefore, a charter amendment would need to take place.

For that to happen, this would need to happen:

6 Amending the Charter

Only the Lead Administrator or the Constitutional Committee may make formal proposals for amendments and revisions to the ALFA Charter. Proposals from the Lead Administrator or the Constitutional Committee must be approved by at least three admin, and at least ⅔ of the HDMs casting votes on the matter to be implemented.

[FanaticusIncendi]

Bah Jayde beat me to it, lol.

[MorbidKate]

I'm very much in favor of one person one vote under the condition that "Good Standing" means members who are actually participating on a Live or Beta server (Play, DM, Build, Script, etc) in some capacity, not mere forum trolls.

Kate

[fluffmonster]

I'm very much in favor of one person one vote under the condition that "Good Standing" means members who are actually participating on a Live or Beta server (Play, DM, Build, Script, etc) in some capacity, not mere forum trolls.

Kate

difficult to monitor and open to divisive interpretation. Suppose my PC dies and I haven't made one it two weeks...am I no longer a participant? If I'm a DM on a server but haven't done anything in a while, am I no longer a participant? Keep it simple, and hope for wisdom in the majority to trump any trolls.

[MorbidKate]

difficult to monitor and open to divisive interpretation. Suppose my PC dies and I haven't made one it two weeks...am I no longer a participant? If I'm a DM on a server but haven't done anything in a while, am I no longer a participant? Keep it simple, and hope for wisdom in the majority to trump any trolls.

I agree that hoping for collective wisdom would be ideal but perhaps something can be tied into the CD Key initiative that's being discussed here?

http://www.alandfaraway.org/phpbbforum/ ... hp?t=39214

Kate

[Rick7475]

Let's hope that the LA will see a desire for change and move to poll the community in a more open democratic poll than a closed session with the whole of the community resting on the desires of 5 HDM's.


The closed door voting and hierachy of status is what is dividing this community. Certainly there is a need for some closed forums, but on the issue of the direction of the community, more power needs to be given to the people.

[NickD]

I suspect the CD Key initiative would miss the contributors who are building, but neither DMing nor playing.

If it were possible would add a more explicit interpretation of contributor as someone who has been an member for at least 6 months and have been active (play/DM/build) in the prior 6 months. i.e., they were around for the last election and have born witness to the in game effects of the current administrator.

But I suspect that would really be far more effort than it's worth.

Really... I'm alright with the way things are now.

[Phineus]

For what it's worth, I agree voting should be open to everyone in the community (one assumes if a member hasn't been banned then they are in good standing).

Otherwise what is the point of posting the Candidate Q&A threads in public forums?

"Oh this person seems really smart and I agree with all of his/her positions....I hope he/she gets voted in.."

Doesn't make a great deal of sense to me.