• Before posting an article from a specific source, check this list here to see how much the Orange Room trust it. You can also vote/change your vote based on the source track record.
  • We are back

Orange Room Elections 2019 The Orange Room elections 2019 announcement thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

!Aoune32

Well-Known Member
People who read the forum regularly but don't post deserve to vote, as moderation affects their experience and they should have a say in it.

Users who barely log in all year are a different story. Maybe those users should lose their right to vote. But is that even enforceable?

there are people who havent posted for the whole year. why would they vote? do they even know the new candidates or just the old ones that have been there for 6-7-10 years.
 

Isabella

The queen of "Bazella"
Orange Room Supporter
there are people who havent posted for the whole year. why would they vote? do they even know the new candidates or just the old ones that have been there for 6-7-10 years.

If they are actively logging in just not posting means they are reading what's being posted and can make up their minds about the candidates. It should be members who have been completely inactive for over 6 months or year or whatever you prefer that should not have a right to vote. Same goes for new members but that's already the case
 

!Aoune32

Well-Known Member
If someone isn't posting, doesn't mean they're not reading. They likely know the candidates as well as anyone.

i disagree. some of the old members could be friends of other members who are candidates and these old members havent posted or been here for over 1 year. they come vote and then go for the year.
 

!Aoune32

Well-Known Member
If they are actively logging in just not posting means they are reading what's being posted and can make up their minds about the candidates. It should be members who have been completely inactive for over 6 months or year or whatever you prefer that should not have a right to vote. Same goes for new members but that's already the case

yep agree. i wish this could be implemented. those not active or havent come on for more than 6 months just to make it fair for everyone.
 

Dr. Strangelove

Nuclear War Expert
Staff member
i disagree. some of the old members could be friends of other members who are candidates and these old members havent posted or been here for over 1 year. they come vote and then go for the year.

Bel 3aks, we agree. Please reread my post:

People who read the forum regularly but don't post deserve to vote, as moderation affects their experience and they should have a say in it.

Users who barely log in all year are a different story. Maybe those users should lose their right to vote. But is that even enforceable?

Not logging in all year except to vote = voting privileges should probably be revoked
Logging in all year but not posting = voting privileges should be not be revoked
 

Joe tayyar

Legendary Member
Orange Room Supporter
I think anyone should vote, apart from those who registered yesterday to vote today.
Those are still forum members, means they are on laweyi7 el shateb lol.
Many users are still reading the forum offline and they are not logging in because the forum is not like before, lots of tehreej and spamming, so thise have the right to vote, to change and one day come back!
 

loubnaniTO

Legendary Member
Staff member
Super Penguin
Hi Jo, I think forum members who do not have at least 6 posts in the last 6 months should not be allowed to vote for moderators.
They do not need moderators to moderate their non-participation. They are mostly spectating much like guests to the forum.
Please take this suggestion into consideration :)
i raised this also. people who have not made one post in a year why should they vote??
If they are actively logging in just not posting means they are reading what's being posted and can make up their minds about the candidates. It should be members who have been completely inactive for over 6 months or year or whatever you prefer that should not have a right to vote. Same goes for new members but that's already the case

i beg to differ.
1- members who do not post: those are members who are still logging in and reading. They have every right in having a say in who they believe can do a good job in keeping this forum decent. There is no condition to post when someone is registering to become a member.
2- someone who has been away for 6 months should not be excluded either. Why? I, for example, have been a member here for 15 years, and your humble servant for many of those years, but I have been away from the forum for many months in a row for personal/work reasons. But I always come back. And I don’t see why I shouldn’t have a say in who is best fit to moderate, as I will be back and I want to make sure the forum is well maintained. Even in general elections in any decent country expats have the right to vote.
3- the only exclusion I would suggest is brand new members who registered since the elections were announced (or say a month). (A) they don’t know members well enough to vote for them and (B) There is a risk a candidate could he lining up friends and family to register and vote. And that would not be fair.
 

Isabella

The queen of "Bazella"
Orange Room Supporter
i beg to differ.
1- members who do not post: those are members who are still logging in and reading. They have every right in having a say in who they believe can do a good job in keeping this forum decent. There is no condition to post when someone is registering to become a member.
2- someone who has been away for 6 months should not be excluded either. Why? I, for example, have been a member here for 15 years, and your humble servant for many of those years, but I have been away from the forum for many months in a row for personal/work reasons. But I always come back. And I don’t see why I shouldn’t have a say in who is best fit to moderate, as I will be back and I want to make sure the forum is well maintained. Even in general elections in any decent country expats have the right to vote.
3- the only exclusion I would suggest is brand new members who registered since the elections were announced (or say a month). (A) they don’t know members well enough to vote for them and (B) There is a risk a candidate could he lining up friends and family to register and vote. And that would not be fair.

But for example @The_FPMer and @StopWorryingLoveTheBomb are both newish candidates that have a pretty decent campaign so far and they're at an unfair disadvantage when it comes to voters who haven't been logging into the forum but would like to vote. They don't know them and they would not be likely to vote for them
 

loubnaniTO

Legendary Member
Staff member
Super Penguin
But for example @The_FPMer and @StopWorryingLoveTheBomb are both newish candidates that have a pretty decent campaign so far and they're at an unfair disadvantage when it comes to voters who haven't been logging into the forum but would like to vote. They don't know them and they would not be likely to vote for them

it will never be perfect. They could always ask their trusted friends on the forum about them or take the time to read some of their posts. They could also read their programs and see the reaction of the members to them. That’s what I would do :)
 

Nonan

Legendary Member
Orange Room Supporter

Nonan

Legendary Member
Orange Room Supporter
Four are very easy to exclude from this list. Three are already on my ignore list ;-). I can’t fathom a world where they are being rational let alone objective or unbiased
 

Apostate

Your will, my hands.
Orange Room Supporter
But for example @The_FPMer and @StopWorryingLoveTheBomb are both newish candidates that have a pretty decent campaign so far and they're at an unfair disadvantage when it comes to voters who haven't been logging into the forum but would like to vote. They don't know them and they would not be likely to vote for them

They'll both get my vote. They surely have shown they're decent people in the time they have been here.
 

Dr. Strangelove

Nuclear War Expert
Staff member
Four are very easy to exclude from this list. Three are already on my ignore list ;-). I can’t fathom a world where they are being rational let alone objective or unbiased

Hey man, just because I love Kubrick's work doesn't mean I can't appreciate Francis Ford Coppola or Martin Scorsese. 3ayb hel 7ake.
 

joseph_lubnan

Legendary Member
i beg to differ.
1- members who do not post: those are members who are still logging in and reading. They have every right in having a say in who they believe can do a good job in keeping this forum decent. There is no condition to post when someone is registering to become a member.
2- someone who has been away for 6 months should not be excluded either. Why? I, for example, have been a member here for 15 years, and your humble servant for many of those years, but I have been away from the forum for many months in a row for personal/work reasons. But I always come back. And I don’t see why I shouldn’t have a say in who is best fit to moderate, as I will be back and I want to make sure the forum is well maintained. Even in general elections in any decent country expats have the right to vote.
3- the only exclusion I would suggest is brand new members who registered since the elections were announced (or say a month). (A) they don’t know members well enough to vote for them and (B) There is a risk a candidate could he lining up friends and family to register and vote. And that would not be fair.

Good points but I beg to differ.

Moderation mostly and directly affect members contributing content. Spectating members are marginally affected, and should have less of a say into who is fit to moderate. They do not experience the effect of moderation first hand on their contributions, interactions and ideas, because they do not contribute. The fact that posting is not a requirement to register and login does not give one the right to vote, the two are not linked. Moderation directly affects the active community, and the active community should be the one voting for them - This is not a parliamentary elections, and citizenship rights :)

If someone takes a hiatus for 6 months, it is not the end of the world, because within another 6 months or so, they will get to vote if they are active and contributing again. Besides the thresholds I suggested are very reasonable.
 

Apostate

Your will, my hands.
Orange Room Supporter
Elections are around the corner starting midnight! Make your voices heard!
#VoteApostate

!!من ساحات النضال على الأرض، إلى ساحات النضال في المنتدى... دفاعاً عن الحرية
Click here for candidacy program

Thawra.jpg
vote apostate.png
 
  • Love
Reactions: Jo
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top