AU Mod-Power of the People

[Tassadar500]

We have now selected our panel. Now we need to select the Power of the People position. That position would just essentially break all the ties. Please vote for the person who you would think would listen to the people's suggestions the most and generally you have alot of confidence in.

[vmxa1]

Why don't you act as the VP and cast the tie breaker. That way we do not have to choose. Do not have to feel bad about picking one over another. It would be a very hard choice for me.

[alexman]

Nuclear Master, I think that by "power of the people" Dominae meant that for each decision of the mod, if the members of the panel are divided (3-3), we would set up a public poll and everyone would be welcome to vote for the tie-breaker.

At least that's how I understood it.

[Tassadar500]

Damn. I think your right alexman. By one of the sentence's Dominae stated I assumed it was a position.

[Theseus]

Without re-reading the thread, I understood Dominae's idea the same way NM did... one person would have the position of ombudsman.

That said, I like the way alexman has described "power of the people" more. I don;t think this type of lack of resolution will happen too often, and when it does we should open it up to the community (including posting where the modders will find it).

But feel free to vote for me.

/me abstains.

[Dominae]

Sorry for my confusing English.

By "power of the people" I meant that all non-panelists would be lumped together to get one vote on the panel. A poll would determine which way this vote would go.

This could be used solely to break ties. Or, "the people" could hold a full position on the panel.

Basically it's a way of getting everyone involved, but still use the basic panel idea I proposed.

The more I think about it, the more I dislike the idea. Let's keep it simple and stick with an odd number of individual panelists.


Dominae

[Catt]

Why don't we just leave the six panelists in place and provide that changes from stock require a majority (4 votes) so there is never a chance of a split deadlocking a proposal? If my intuition is correct, the precise number of panelists will change over time as people come and go, and demands on time cause panelists to reassess their availability.

Catt

[Dominae]

That's exactly why I would prefer a small number of dedicated panelists.

It's not that this is a time-intensive job, it's that if people come and go the panel, and consequently the AU mod, will lack coherence.

Remember that the panel is only there to decide on controversial changes. Everyone gets a voice in the AU mod; the panel is only there to settle disputes, and to remind everyone of the AU mod philosophy (because all ideas are welcome, but only some are appropriate).


Dominae

[Tassadar500]

I'll leave this thread open so we can discuss what to do with the number of panelists and all that other stuff

[Catt]

Originally posted by Dominae
That's exactly why I would prefer a small number of dedicated panelists.

It's not that this is a time-intensive job, it's that if people come and go the panel, and consequently the AU mod, will lack coherence.

I don't know lockstep or ZargonX enough to say, but each of you, alexman, Nor Me and Theseus have all come and gone and come, to a degree, from the forums (just as I have as well). As you point out, the panel is "formally" useful as only a dispute resolution mechanism (and "informally" as those posters most likely, perhaps, to bring reasoned change proposals to the masses), which means that after a brief spurt of activity some weeks from now as C3C changes to the AU Mod are proposed and debated, the panel is unlikely to be called on all that often. I'm thinking more about the longer term (i.e., 3 months out) when there is an institutionalized dispute resolution mechanism the doesn't work because it has become rusty -- by instituting a "majority rule" or a "50% +1" rule, you eliminate going through a whole bureaucratic polling process everytime a panel member drifts away or is unavailable for several discussions.

BTW -- and quite a bit off-topic -- why in the heck is cdgroup.org credited with the AU Mod submission on the C3C Bonus CD?

Catt

[Tassadar500]

I wonder why it's called the Apolyton University Mod. It's not like it's from Apolyton or anything

[Catt]

Originally posted by Nuclear Master
I wonder why it's called the Apolyton University Mod. It's not like it's from Apolyton or anything

Exactly - but unless you open the readme, you'll have no idea what "AU" even stands for, let alone what 'Poly is.

Catt

[Dominae]

Originally posted by Catt
BTW -- and quite a bit off-topic -- why in the heck is cdgroup.org credited with the AU Mod submission on the C3C Bonus CD?

Probably because the one who submitted it called it that way.

Nuclear Master, check your PMs.


Dominae

[Tassadar500]

Dominae, check YOUR PMs

[Catt]

Originally posted by Dominae

Probably because the one who submitted it called it that way.

Likely accurate but also unhelpful - like the response of the farmer in the field in the oft-repeated ballonist joke (substitute your favorite downtrodden individual / position for the man on the ground and your favorite punching bag / position for the balloonist):

A man is flying in a hot air balloon and realizes he is lost. He reduces height and spots a man down below.

He lowers the balloon further and shouts: "Excuse me, can you tell me where I am?"

The man below says: "yes you're in a hot air balloon, hovering 30 feet above this field."

"You must work in Information Technology," says the balloonist.

"I do," replies the man. "How did you know?"

"Well" says the balloonist, "everything you have told me is technically correct, but it's no use to anyone."

The man below says, "You must work in Management".

"I do" replies the balloonist, "but how did you know?"

"Well", says the man, "you don't know where you are, or where you're going, but you expect me to be able to help. You're in the same position you were before we met, but now it's my fault."

Catt