 |
What panelist should get the Power of the People position?
This poll is closed. |
| Theseus |
   |
3 |
23.08% |
| Dominae |
   |
5 |
38.46% |
| Nor Me |
   |
0 |
0% |
| Alexman |
   |
5 |
38.46% |
| Lockstep |
   |
0 |
0% |
| Zargon X |
   |
0 |
0% |
| Total: |
13 voters |
100% |
|
| |
|
|
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
|
|
| |
|
|
|
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
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Catt
|
 |
California - SF Bay Area
May 2002
time: 21:32
|
|
quote:
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 
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Catt
|
|
California - SF Bay Area
May 2002
time: 21:32
|
|
quote:
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):
quote:
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
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dominae
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Catt
Likely accurate but also unhelpful |
Sorry, I misread your question (which is about cdgroup.org and not the AU name). Thanks for the joke; in my circles it usually involves programmers and management.
Dominae
Last edited by Dominae on 18-11-2003 at 21:17
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
lockstep
|
 |
Vienna, Austria
Aug 2001
time: 06:32
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by 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? |
I can imagine a few instances where this rule WOULD produce some kind of deadlock. E.g., the panelists all agree that some game feature needs to be changed (say, Communism as it was in PtW), there are TWO elaborated, yet outright different proposals how to improve this feature, and the panel is split on these proposals (3-3). The majority rule would result in no change at all, although the panelists DO regard this as the worst solution.
Also, there's the possible case that a new feature (say, wheeled tanks) is included because of a majority (4-2). Later, some exploit involving this feature is discovered (say, Catt manages to fool the AI by roading a mountain chain with a worker SOD in one turn and then striking with his tank force ). One panelist changes his mind and there's a split again (3-3). Now, is this sufficient to retract the feature? (Maybe the panel soon comes up with 'yes' or 'no', but it's a potential controversy.)
So, I'm with Dominae and would prefer an odd number of panelists (even if that would make me drop out) just to keep things simple. An even number plus a public poll (only acting as a tie-breaker) is also acceptable for me, although I'd like to mention the possibility that the public poll results in a tie.
BTW, Catt, considering the dedication you show at these forums you'd really be suited as a panelist. 
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:32.
Apolyton Time is 00:32. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
17-11-2003 01:27
Attachment: 
|
