Official moderator nominator

I also think that if someone isn't elected the first time that they should be allowed to try for another forum as long as they are interested in what it is about.
 
s4, what you suggested would be no different than the first idea we came up with, which, as you know, has already met some opposition in this thread. But then the other ideas have met some form of opposition as well.

It seems like just deciding on how to vote is going to take forever. *sigh* :(
 
Maybe the senate should take this debate in camera and let we the people know when it's decided what the electoral laws are and which day is voting day.
 
Originally posted by s4
It would be an uncomplicated way of doing it though. What if you elect two mods that want to fight over the same forum? I think if someone isn't interested in being a mod of that forum then they shouldn't try for it. There can be only one winner so why elect several people at once?
Click to expand...

I think you missed my point, but oh well. Just seems simpler to vote for mods as a group, instead of having several elections spread out over several forums, with candidates trying to figure out whether to run for a forum or not. Once the mods are elected, they can take a vote withing themselves to assign forums if there is any conflict.

But, it's just my suggestion. Add it to the others, let's pick a way to do it, and get the show on the road!

;)
 
The method you choose is up to you. The way I suggested will take longer, but will be fair.

If someone else already suggested what I said then I apologize because I didn't see it. It's a little hard to keep up with all the threads.
 
Just look at the damned US Congress for inspiration. First, go to a sub-committee to see if the committe would find that person objectionable. Once you pass the mod in the sub-committee, then send the mod to the full committee for arguments. Should the to-be mod pass muster & a 2/3's vote in committee then send their name to the floor. Pro's & con's can be argued by the full moderating panel. Upon majority vote +1 by mods, they then go to the supermods. Tyhe supermods kick around the idea for awhile, taking breaks to fill their coffers by lobbyists. Upon a full vote by the supermods it can then be sent to the admin(s) for final approval. If the admin says no, start over but now the votes must be 3/5 the mods & 3/4 the supermods.


Or just ask if anybody thinks the person would suck. :p
 
Originally posted by samcurry
mufu, dude i dont think they have showed up yet:)
Click to expand...

I know, I just want to make sure when they do, they know that they have to set an example and can't go wild; cussing and swearing like a couple of teenage boys and posting pornographic material after years of containing themselves at HWC. ;)

MuFu.
 
Originally posted by MuFu
I know, I just want to make sure when they do, they know that they have to set an example and can't go wild; cussive and swearing like a couple of teenage boys and posting pornographic material after years of containing themselves at HWC. ;)

MuFu.
Click to expand...

Lol. :D I'm sure they'll appreciate that. ;)
 
I think that Justintime was a good decision.
I also vote for L. In HWC right from the start she tried helping everyone she could (even as a newbie). Not only that, we would have a token chick as a mod ;) That way no feminen activist groups will say the board is sexist.
 
If you wanted to get two mods for each forum, you could take the two top vote getters from each vote that I suggested.

Don't worry sbcanada has enough energy to carry the board for a while. He's wearing me out. :D
 
You mean you'll look after a joint while fury is away. I know you Canadians and your bud... :headbang:

MuFu
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top