The icedragon101 election archive including poll

longhair75 · Aug 4, 2007

Good evening friends

It seems we are ready for elections. I have notified my supervisor to be ready for the results and I hope we can install the newly elected moderators ASAP.

If this meets your approval, I will start a public poll for a yes or no vote for each of those who have been nominated and seconded. I will leave these polls open for seven days. Once the polls are closed, I will forward the results to my supervisor for action.

Once they are accepted, there is a short training period, and then you will have moderators you elected responsible for your forum. I will remain part of the team at least until the end of the year when my term expires as per the rules established earlier this month.

To allow for input on this process, I will wait 24 hours before starting these polls. please add your comments on my proposal to this thread.

Thank you all for your kind attention,

lh75

TrustAndObey · Aug 4, 2007

thecountrydoc told me he'd like to help moderate on here, but I think he may be having computer problems at the moment.

I sent him an e-mail asking him to please come to the thread where he was nominated to publicly accept or decline and I haven't heard back from him.

I think we should definitely wait until we have a "yes" or a "no" from the people nominated before we start any polls. 3 that were nominated have said they wouldn't mind doing it.

longhair75 · Aug 4, 2007

I have been discussing this with my Supervisor. There are procedures already in place for these elections. as soon as I get them sorted out, I will post them here

IntoTheCrimsonSky · Aug 4, 2007

So the thread that allows people to ask questions for those that are up for votes will be seperate, or the same as the poll thread?

longhair75 · Aug 5, 2007

This can be done in the poll thread itself or as a separate thread. Just my opinion, but keeping it to one thread lessens the confusion

TrustAndObey · Aug 5, 2007

I'm a little confused. EACH person up for election will have their own poll thread, right? That's where we'll ask questions of them, correct?

TrustAndObey · Aug 5, 2007

Never mind, I was clicking on the wrong thing.....

tall73 · Aug 5, 2007

Longhair, I realize it would be easier but since we are using the default guidelines we should follow them to the letter.

longhair75 · Aug 5, 2007

Friend Tall73,

my thought is to keep the threads here rather than at the Ecumenical Moderator Applications to keep it from the general membership. We can sure put the threads there, but that will result in some non-SDA votes that will need to be sorted out. Also, if the Q&A is open to the general public we could end up with a highjack or two.

My attempt was to make it as easy on the SDA forum as possible. I will, however, do it any way you decide.

TrustAndObey · Aug 5, 2007

I like the idea of keeping it here. We already have a problem with our members not wanting to go to the wiki because it's inconvenient.

TrustAndObey · Aug 5, 2007

Then they gripe about what was decided in the wiki discussions.

Sophia7 · Aug 5, 2007

longhair75 said:
Friend Tall73,

my thought is to keep the threads here rather than at the Ecumenical Moderator Applications to keep it from the general membership. We can sure put the threads there, but that will result in some non-SDA votes that will need to be sorted out. Also, if the Q&A is open to the general public we could end up with a highjack or two.

My attempt was to make it as easy on the SDA forum as possible. I will, however, do it any way you decide.

The issue isn't whether we should keep the election threads in the SDA forum or have them in the Ecumenical Mod Aps. It's whether we should make separate poll threads in the SDA forum for each candidate. The CF temporary guidelines currently state that that's how it should be done, with a poll thread and a Q&A thread for each candidate. Other congregational forums are also doing this in their home areas.

Here again are the temporary guidelines announced by herev (our current HR Chief), to be eventually replaced by the forum-specific procedures that are supposed to be set up in the congregational areas:

BELOW IS THE CURRENT PROCEDURE

1. This current guideline is only in effect until the community establishes WIKI guidelines for holding moderator elections, and no later than December 31, 2007.

2. Moderators elected under this guideline keep their positions until December 31, 2007.

3. These guidelines will only serve for election of moderators outside of the Congregational Forums, and for forums which do not have election guidelines already established in their respective WIKI's.

4. To receive a nomination, a candidate must approach or be approached by a moderator and receive their support.

5. The supporting moderator will start two threads.
a. A poll with two options. "Yes" and "Apply Later".
b. A thread for Q&A with the candidate. In this thread there will be no more than ONE primary post per member (questions or statements)--with the ONLY exception being ONE additional post for one of the following reasons:
1. to ask ONE follow up question (must be directly related to the original question)
2. to clarify the orignial question IF asked by the applicatant, or
3. to recant a statement made by the member in the original post the member made.
c. While the application itself is no longer necessary, it might be usefull to use the old mod application to glean some of the questions for the applicant.
6. The poll and Q&A threads will remain open for 7 days. At this point they will be closed.

7. The poll thread will be used ONLY for voting purposes. The only posts to be made in this thread are to indicate a change in voting. All other posts will be moved to the Q&A thread.

8. At the end of the seven days, the votes will be tabulated. Greater than 70% approval (Yes votes) will result in the candidate being elected. This option is chosen over a simple majority (50% +1%) to avoid polarizing the fora. 70% or greater demonstrates a wide degree of acceptance of the candidate.

http://www.christianforums.com/t5746767-reopen-mod-apps-see-protocol-and-procedure-here.html

longhair75 · Aug 5, 2007

Friend Sophia7

This paragraph was the beginning point of my discussion with friend Tishri1 last night. there has been some discussion here in SDA about the two threads. We will need to conduct our election in accordance with this document. My concern so far is that we have the ability to conduct them , within the structure of this document, here in the SDA forum.

tall73 · Aug 5, 2007

It doesn't say anything about having them anywhere else. Yes, conduct them here, but we need not approve any further guidelines. We have them in the generic ones.

IntoTheCrimsonSky · Aug 5, 2007

TrustAndObey said:
I like the idea of keeping it here. We already have a problem with our members not wanting to go to the wiki because it's inconvenient.

That's why I like having the subscriptions on the control panel page. I never have to look for anything once I've posted once, so I can be lazy.

longhair75 said:
Friend Tall73,

my thought is to keep the threads here rather than at the Ecumenical Moderator Applications to keep it from the general membership. We can sure put the threads there, but that will result in some non-SDA votes that will need to be sorted out. Also, if the Q&A is open to the general public we could end up with a highjack or two.

My attempt was to make it as easy on the SDA forum as possible. I will, however, do it any way you decide.

Makes sense to have it here, then. I'm for it.

thecountrydoc · Aug 5, 2007

The simplest way is usualy hard enough. I also vote to keep it here.

In response to T&O's mentioning that I should come by the forum, I must say that I'm sorry I missed a couple of days over the weekend, but there are some things that just don't run with a stop watch. I got paged on Friday and it was this morning before I got any sleep.

By the way I did accept the nomination as a mod.

Your brother in Christ,
Doc

TrustAndObey · Aug 5, 2007

Doc, I am going to ask each potential mod 8 questions, but I already interviewed you via e-mail so you get spared.

DarylFawcett · Aug 6, 2007

I think questions to nominated mods should be public so that we can vote intelligently.

tall73 · Aug 7, 2007

clarification...the rules call for 70 percent, correct?

IntoTheCrimsonSky · Aug 7, 2007

DarylFawcett said:
I think questions to nominated mods should be public so that we can vote intelligently.

At the time, it was being put out that everyone could only ask ONE question on the elction thread..So T&O sent them privately. As Tall recently pointed out, though..the rules state one primary POST, not question. So we shouldn't have a problem with this now.

tall73 said:
clarification...the rules call for 70 percent, correct?

I believe so. 50-50 would end up with a split decision.

The icedragon101 election archive including poll

Should Icedragon101 be an SDA Moderator?

Yes

Apply later

Searching once more

TrustAndObey

Guest

Searching once more

~ ¤ Love. It's in you. ¤ ~

Searching once more

TrustAndObey

Guest

TrustAndObey

Guest

Sophia7's husband

Searching once more

TrustAndObey

Guest

TrustAndObey

Guest

Tall73's Wife

Searching once more

Sophia7's husband

~ ¤ Love. It's in you. ¤ ~

Senior Veteran

TrustAndObey

Guest

Ticket Support Manager

Sophia7's husband

~ ¤ Love. It's in you. ¤ ~

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency