Discussion: TalkBoard motion pass/fail results reported in real-time? & related.
 

There has been discussion on the "Comments Welcome: Voting Underway-Non-counting of Posts in a Games Forum" thread that it would be nice to know when a motion has 6 yes or no votes. Rather than sidetrack that thread more than it already has been, I thought we should start a new discussion thread.

This would allow members to know that a motion has passed or failed to pass in real-time, rather than speculating on its status until the vote closes. It would reduce heated debate, and while no action could really be taken on the implementation of the motion if it passed, it would at least allow everyone to know the status, rather than keeping them in the dark for up to 2 weeks.

Personally, I love this idea, and I think in this world of instant/on-demand entertainment, I think it would appeal to a majority of FT members to know the status of a vote as soon as it's "in the bag" (or as close to it as humanly possible by the person/persons responsible for reporting the results).

I agree with comments in the other thread that how TB members voted or which members have/haven't voted should NOT be posted until all nine votes are cast or the time deadline has passed.

This thread had evolved to the point where there were a number of options on the table.

• Announce when 6 yes or 4 no votes are achieved.
  
• Have the TB vote live in public.
  
• Have open debate but no voting then a shortened voting period.
  
• Keep the status quo.

I am a proponent of some type of reform. I think it wastes posters time to be kept in the dark that an issue has been settled, leading them to continue to debate a matter that is, in reality, closed.

While this has not been much of an issue in the past, it appears that it may be a problem this session so we may as well fix it once and for all.

I favor for voting in public because I think the more transparency we have the better but am open to any of those options other than the status quo.

I'd say to start with something that might actually have a chance of passing, and I don't know that voting in public would. So, if I were drafting a TalkBoard motion, it would probably read something like, "During all TalkBoard votes, once there are 6 pass votes or 4 fail votes, this information will be posted to the discussion thread."

My preference is to keep the status quo. At 14 days, the voting window is short anyway.

I appreciate there may be situations where a TB member might need the full time slot to consult with the membership before finally decided which way to vote, irrespective of votes already cast by other TBers.

Members may be reticent to engage if they sense a fate accompli.

I posted the following today in the private TalkBoard forum:

This seems like a minor change that improves the current situation. My only hesitation is that voting on such a minor matter feeds the perception (which may be accurate!) that the TalkBoard mostly focuses on itself. :o

I would be for announcing the pass/fail of a montion once the required votes are made. As others have said, there is no need to keep people in the dark and trying to make persuasive arguments the deal is already done.


14 days is fine as it is, and I really don't need to see it in real time.

It's just getting it off the table and settled when the last vote(s) really wouldn't make a difference.

Personally, I like the notion of everyone being notified once the required votes have been reached for either passing or failing.

My only suggestion is that instead of just opening it up to any TB member, it might make more sense to have the VP make the annoucement. That might make things run a little more smoothly.

As I posted in the private forum:

"I'm mixed on this.

The voting process is votes are open for 2 weeks or until all TB members have voted. This allows time for FTers to provide their input on what's being voted on, provides an opportunity for TB members to consider the input, do their own homework, and it also allocates some time for those who might be traveling and/or offline who might not be able to vote if the vote timeframe was shortened.

Sometimes votes end sooner; sometimes they go the full two weeks. Sometimes the motion will pass or fail based on numbers before all have voted, but to say that FTers should still not be allowed to provide input does a disservice to both those FTers and to those TB members who haven't decided & want to vote what they think is right, based on FT input, their homework and their judgment.

The FT world will NOT fall apart if a vote occasionally goes the full 2 weeks & FTers have to wait a few days to find out if the motion passed/didn't pass, and who voted which way."

Based on the above & the underlining above I'm against it.

Having said that, if a TB member is dragging out voting due to snit fit/teddy-pram thing (something that didn't happen in the first year I served), that would lead me to support this.

I am against shortening the 2-week voting period itself for the reasons italicized above.

As I said I'm mixed on this one. Not dead-set against; not gung-ho for.

hhoope01 makes a good point about who does the announcing, though, and it would be consistent with the VP doing the final announcing.

Cheers.

Yup. Stunning. I agree again.

I need to get myself checked out. You, as well as Kipper, keep on agreeing with me.

I must be ill :D

Actually, I'd rather see public discussion held, then closed and then have the vote take place as this would further eliminate the heated debate-and then if a motion passes or fails with the required number of votes before the voting period has ended, you could then post the results.

Public discussion opens
Public discussion held
Public discussion closes
Vote held
Vote results published

Yes, this might/could/would add time to the whole process but imho, it's a better way to go

How's this:

How's this:

D. Public Notice Procedures
i. Once a motion has been put before TalkBoard for a vote the Vice President/Secretary shall post a new thread in the public TalkBoard Topics forum announcing the vote along with the voting end date as quickly as feasible. Once that thread is posted, the TalkBoard Vice President/Secretary will submit a request to the FlyerTalk Host or representative to create an site-wide announcment of the vote with a link to the discussion/voting thread in the TalkBoard Topics Forum. The Announcement will be available until either voting is completed and a decision is made or the voting period ends.
ii. Motions on topics related to the internal administration of TalkBoard as determined by the President and some topics requested for discussion or input by the FlyerTalk Host will be exempted from this public posting requirement.
iii. The purpose of posting voting topics in the public TalkBoard Topics forum is to solicit member feedback on any motions that are up for a vote and to allow for comments after a vote is made. It is at the sole discretion of the individual TalkBoard members whether they choose to post in the public discussion thread, there being no requirement to do so.
iv. Once an active proposal has received sufficient Yes votes for approval or sufficient No votes that approval is not possible, the Vice President/Secretary shall post this fact in the public TalkBaord Topics thread announcing the vote.
iv.v. Once voting is completed and the TalkBoard President has formally announced the results of the vote in the TalkBoard forum the Vice President/Secretary shall announce the full results of the roll call vote in
a. the public TalkBoard Topics thread announcing the vote
b. a new thread in the Town Hall forum.

I like this version better than the "In addition, TalkBoard members are free to disclose publicly the fact that an active proposal has received sufficient Yes votes for approval or sufficient No votes that approval is not possible." This version doesn't leave it to the whims of TalkBoard, but insists that it be posted, and formalizes that process.

I realize that there is also discussion in this thread about changing voting/discussion procedure or timeframes, and right now, I'd rather not add all of that into the discussion, at least on this thread, since there are other threads in which to discuss that. I'd like to keep this to discussion on if TalkBoard motion voting information should be reported when the motion has received enough votes for it or enough votes that it cannot pass. :D

(My post copied from the private forum.)

I'm flexible with how we go about this as long as some mechanism is put in place whereby one (or a few) person (people) can't hold the vote hostage.

I was most uncomfortable with allowing anyone to post the results as it seems undignified for the sixth vote to race out and announce the results. I'm happy to make it a duty of the TB VP as I'm confident Sharon will do so in a timely manner.

By all means, anyone should be able to take the full voting period. Just means the names will be withheld until the ninth vote is cast or the time expires.

As far as debate and voting timescales, I'm flexible there, too, but I'd prefer to see motion to completion stay at two weeks. If we want to enforce a 3 day required debate time, fine, but then let's make the actual voting period 11 days. And I'm not a fan of shutting down debate, although closing a thread after a reasonable time after the vote's over makes sense to me.