nsx

I'd like to discuss any non-controversial clarifications to the TalkBoard Guidelines in this thread.

The first issue is selection of TalkBoard officers. The current guideline paragraph is:

This paragraph calls for a nugatory runoff after a 5-4-0 (or even 5-4-0-0) vote for TalkBoard officer positions. There is no method specified to break ties for second place or to deal with a 3-3-3 vote. I propose a simple "kick it to the Community Director" provision for these difficult cases.

wharvey

With all the black helicopters that seem to be around anything done here, I would not want the CD put in the position of deciding these issues... heaven forbid, she should decide for a moderator vs non-moderator.

As I said in the other thread, I would recommend the following:

If any ties have to be broken, the "winner" will be decided by who receives the highest percentage votes of the membership in their previous election (votes received/votes cast).

goalie

While I completely agree with you on not having the CD decide the outcome (as if that be the case, we could just have the CD choose based on a list of candidates and be done with the elections all together <ducking>) but as to determining the winner based on prior vote percentage from previous elections, I have an issue with that.

Let's say for sake of argument, Candidate 1 is "in the lead" over Candidate 2 for TB President but does not have enough to win (i.e. a 5-4 vote) and again for sake of argument, Candidate 1 is the better choice but Candidate 1 "squeaked in" to TB as the 5th of the 5 winners (in the case of this year's elections") with a minimal amount of votes and Candidate 2 came in first in their election a year ago with 65% of the votes. Using your example, Candidate 2 would be declared the winner but I see that as apples and oranges as you have the variable of who was in the election field from this year's elections and last year's elections. I don't know if I'm making any sense or not but I think it should still be decided by TB members in an election on a first ballot, second ballot and so on. Yes, there are only 9 voters on TB and that could lead to a lot of 5-4 results on a first ballot (or, second or third and etc) but folks need to step up and eventually do what's right for FT and put internal friendships and politics aside. Call me Pollyanna <pause> but that's my two hockey pucks.

Smaug

I could throw out two other possibilities for tie breaking: 1) The TB member that has the earliest "Join Date" on FT. 2) The TB member with the longer (longest) service time on TB.

wharvey

I totally agree that Talkboard should determine their leadership; but if they cannot, I guess (based on past complaints and conspiracy theories) I would prefer the broader membership to have some say.

I believe my suggestion would still give it to Candidate #1, not sure how you see it differently. Unless Candidate #2 received more than 65% of the vote in their last election, they would lose out to Candidate #1.

goalie

Must be that I'm still not properly caffeinated

Example:

This year's election: 5 candidates win with "winner number 5" (Candidate 1) receiving 22% of the vote.

Last year's election: 4 candidates win with "winner number 1" (Candidate 2) receiving 65% of the vote

Candidate 1 and candidate 2 run for TB President. No winner as it's a 5-4 vote. Candidate 1 is the better choice than Candidate 2 but Candidate 2 wins because they had a higher vote percentage in their election that that of Candidate 1 in their election.

kokonutz

I just posted this in the private TB forum:

SkiAdcock

Since mine was the notion that koko was disagreeing with when he quoted his quote, I thought I should post to clarify. I am not advocating private or secrets, so let's get that out of the way.

I asked nsx in the private TB forum why he had posted in the public TB forum before giving TB members a chance to review what he was proposing and get their input on the matter.

I have no problem with FTers posting their thoughts on anything we discuss, but usually in the private TB forum we discuss (and argue), flesh out ideas, point out loopholes, come up with work-arounds &/or corrections, before we submit a topic or motion for consideration by FTers & asking for their input pro/con and finding any problems or loopholes we might have missed.

I wasn't asking for days & months of discussion in the private TB forum before asking for FTers input, but more than a few minutes .

Cheers.

kokonutz

Sometimes on Survivor when there is a tie it comes down to who can build a fire the fastest. @:-)

wharvey

I was only talking about situations where there is a TIE.... which is what I thought was being proposed when candidates got the same number of votes.

5-4 vote is an obvious winner with two candidates... if three candidates, then the one with no votes is out and then you vote just for the final two... and majority wins.

PVDtoDEL

Or perhaps it should be post count. That'll have a lot of TB members supporting OMNI post counts now <ducking>.

nsx

That pure evil genius!

DeaconFlyer

Looks like the times are a-changin'.

SkiAdcock

I've been one of the most active TB members in both the public & private TB forums, so nothing's changed there. @:-) Of course the 5-minute rule is probably a change

Cheers.

FlyinHawaiian

I'd like to suggest the Guidelines replace "FlyerTalk Host" with "FlyerTalk Community Director" - seems that is the current term.

Thank you.