nonfuinoncuro

joined 1 year ago
[–] nonfuinoncuro 3 points 1 year ago

Each week the current slate of pending votes is posted and voting can occur with upvotes and downvotes on an aye, nay, and abstention comments inside the post.

I really like this, helps keep it neat and easy to find each question on the "ballot" which will have a natural time limit

[–] nonfuinoncuro 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Some people want a secret ballot. Shitbags deserve a vote too 🤷🏻‍♂️

It's not perfect, but like you said, it's simple enough, and IMHO it's better than our current system

[–] nonfuinoncuro 2 points 1 year ago

Just do what takes the least effort because at the end of the day there is no way to prevent outside voting.

I voted aye initially but after thinking about it, this makes the most sense.

[–] nonfuinoncuro 17 points 1 year ago (7 children)

My suggestion here would allow for this:

The current aye/nay system is cluttered and clunky. How about we allow comments in [discussion] posts and then have a separate [vote] post with a single comment for each option so people can choose up/down/abstain? Then nobody has to count anything, human or bot, or worry about typos, formatting, sarcasm, etc.

I also propose a minimum of 3 days, maximum of 1 week per each [vote], no time limits for discussion. You can choose when to start the official [vote] after discussion starts.

[–] nonfuinoncuro 18 points 1 year ago (12 children)

The current aye/nay system is cluttered and clunky. How about we allow comments in [discussion] posts and then have a separate [vote] post with a single comment for each option so people can choose up/down/abstain? Then nobody has to count anything, human or bot, or worry about typos, formatting, sarcasm, etc.

I also propose a minimum of 3 days, maximum of 1 week per each [vote], no time limits for discussion. You can choose when to start the official [vote] after discussion starts.

[–] nonfuinoncuro 4 points 1 year ago (6 children)

correct me if I'm wrong as a noob, but all I can see are numbers of posts, not "karma" which depends on up votes?

[–] nonfuinoncuro 8 points 1 year ago

nay, down vote and move on. if it really bothers you, unsubscribe/block. defederate only if they start brigading and normal mod controls stop working, if it's just a few bad actors should be easy enough to ban them

[–] nonfuinoncuro 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Aye, I agree; I think this is a good starting point.

Perhaps we should also require a time limit for each vote, so we can officially state a result at a defined point in time instead of dragging it out forever. I am assuming a [vote] will result in a rule change, while a [poll] is nonbinding and simply gauges the community's thoughts. If we do have a time limit, I think it's a good idea to have a minimum of 3 business days or something like that so someone can't hold a secret 1 hour vote on a weekend or holiday. I know not everyone lives in Canada or the US, but we could use those countries as starting points for holidays.

Edit: expanded on my thoughts here

The current aye/nay system is cluttered and clunky. How about we allow comments in [discussion] posts and then have a separate [vote] post with a single comment for each option so people can choose up/down/abstain? Then nobody has to count anything, human or bot, or worry about typos, formatting, sarcasm, etc.

I also propose a minimum of 3 days, maximum of 1 week per each [vote], no time limits for discussion. You can choose when to start the official [vote] after discussion starts.

[–] nonfuinoncuro 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

edit: changed to nay after reading thedude

[–] nonfuinoncuro 1 points 1 year ago

hellOOOOOOOOOOooooo

 

if so, how? Does Jerboa support this as well?

view more: next ›