TW Council - UPDATED w/ structure

[LF]

Personally if he puts personal hate towards certain staffers aside and focuses on the topics presented I think LF would be a good candidate.

I don't really hate anybody on staff, except maybe loki/hurricane but I don't think he's staff anymore. I just think the majority of you are far too green/inexperienced/young/useless to be considered decision makers. With that said I have zero desire to participate in this so don't even include me on any ballets or whatever you plan to use to vote people in. If I stop getting blacklisted for always being right then I'll consider hosting again, but until then I'm perfectly content just playing twd, chatting and making fun of primary because of his skin color/lack of education.

[qan]

Of course there is no information on how long people are allowed to hold these positions of influence or how they might be removed (surely people would not be axed because they voted certain ways). Although I understand Qan's reservations about meetings I am still unsure how topics get presented, opinions solicited, and how the voting takes place.

As Eph's pointed out, yes, much remains to be decided. I could have written up a complete system for this (as I did for TWPS) -- but I already know how I imagine it running, and am interested in how everyone else would like this to work. That's not a cop-out; it's a genuine interest in making this a useful mechanism for change in the zone. I'm not confident in my ability to do this alone, and I don't think I'd trust anyone who is. That said, we do have a small number of things decided -- things that, in all likelihood, will be able to be changed by council vote if it turns out they don't work for the good of the zone, or at least don't in the opinion of the Council.

We have a chance here to do something that will actually break some of the gridlock in zone policy, an effect I've affectionately referred to as "staff being afraid of its own shadow."

I think important things like that need to be addressed and no more of that bullshit "interpretative rules" thing that has become commonplace among this zone as it leads to corruption and other bullshit.

Agreed, Warkster. All these things need to be addressed. Please keep bringing them up. Most of this I've discussed or at least thought about before, but not openly.

Here are some of the questions brought up in this thread so far.

1. What constitutes a majority?
2. What is considered quorum (min # members for the meeting to be valid)?
3. How is someone removed from the Council, whether player or staff?
4. How do we prevent staff abuse/rank strong-arming?
5. How long is a term on Council? For players? For staff?
6. How are new motions/topics of discussion presented?
7. Is there a time of deliberation after they are presented?
8. Can members abstain from a vote?
9. What is the scope of Council?

In the next post I'll give you what I'm imagining the answer will be to each, but that's not representative of what will actually be the case. This is all TBD. Thoughts appreciated. If you have a second and would like to answer the questions yourself, that would also be very helpful.

[Reckful]

Personally if he puts personal hate towards certain staffers aside and focuses on the topics presented I think LF would be a good candidate.

[kthx]

Again staffs ideas of "completely uncooperative" is just about as fucking loose as all the other loosely written language you have in the rules that you tend to ban people for. A vote from enough of the rest of the council being what, 15/18, 12/18 or.. 9/18. Also what if staff feels that x player is making it hard for their agenda to get passed with the kangaroo court idea, do they just get rid of the player and remove him from the council because fuck it your staff? I think important things like that need to be addressed and no more of that bullshit "interpretative rules" thing that has become commonplace among this zone as it leads to corruption and other bullshit.

[Shaddowknight]

IMO this is a major step forward for the zone. Ideally all positions, both the staff and players, would be elected positions. This would then make everyone responsible for the decisions they make but I guess the ‘good ol boy’ staff culture won’t allow this.

Many, many details have not been revealed on how this will work so it is hard to pass judgment on it. While the 49%-51% split is a bit worrisome I have been in several partnerships where it worked out because all parties were good people. While it can be abused it will be quite obvious when it is. I know several people on staff that do actually have balls/backbones and I cannot imagine that they could be strong-armed into voting a certain way if they really felt strongly on the topic.

Of course there is no information on how long people are allowed to hold these positions of influence or how they might be removed (surely people would not be axed because they voted certain ways). Although I understand Qan's reservations about meetings I am still unsure how topics get presented, opinions solicited, and how the voting takes place. For example; is voting held open for several days to make sure everyone votes? How do people come up to speed on the topics? Can people abstain from a vote? What happens in cases of ties (people not present or have abstained)?

The first step in improving the existing staff structure has now taking form. It may or may not be too late but it certainly can’t hurt at this point. Instead of folks all bitching about it let ask good questions and get this thing flushed out the best we can.
eph

From the top: We aren't entirely sure on how things will work or what we will actually working on either (at least when I had asked qan about it, I still need to talk to M_M and Demonic about that).
I would guess that people will be removed if they become inactive or completely uncooperative, at the vote of enough of the rest of council. qan mentioned working on a bot to help monitor meetings (and stop us from getting stuck on a single topic) and such, so I would assume much of the topic list/voting will be done with that. Forums will likely be used to keep track of past/future information, as well as voting stats. As for how voting and some other things will go, a meeting of the staff core will probably be meeting soon to set the basics, which we can then change as we feel is needed.

Staff structure has already changed significantly. I am likely going to be announcing it tomorrow or Thursday (sorry, been lazy with the second coming of the Ice Age upon America.)

[Spock!]

I'm in for running for Council....Somebody needs to represent the Pub player in the midst of a bunch of League players....

Spock, The Voice of Pub.

[Crescent Seal]

okyo> ey me should be in tw council
okyo> funy

i nominate okyo for 9th spot

[qan]

9th player slot added, bringing the balance to 50/50 staff/players. A majority will be needed to pass anything.

Nurse. will be representing TWD on the staff side.

Nine staffers that will always vote what the SysOps say or else get axed. Eight players that will argue over everything, and even if they had any good ideas would be ignored by the staffers.

I realize this is probably what a lot of people think this is going to be (and why)... but it's a pretty unique set of circumstances that made this possible. There's been a lot more honesty lately. In some respects, the air's been clearer in staff than it's ever been in the decade I've been upper staff on and off. Lately I've told sysops some things that in older times would not just get me axed, but also shipped in a box in little pieces around the globe. There's contention, yes... but it's been good for the zone. Things are happening that I haven't seen happen in way too long. I'll agree that it may be too little, too late. But it's what we have and I'll be damned if we aren't going to try to make it work, to sidestep the inner megalomaniac in us all.

There will always be sycophants. There will always be toadying. This is the nature of politics. But this is a step away from that -- or it's my sincerest hope that it is. I believe in this. That's not to say that, from the darkest recesses of human behavior, a corrupt staffer still would not be able to remove someone from Council (ostensibly for something else) if they don't like how they're voting. That sort of thing happens all the time outside of spaceland ... we'd be naive to think it doesn't sometimes happen within it. There will be pressure, sure. Maybe a bit of scheming. Plotting, even. We are all human. We can only hope all that nonsense is kept to a minimum. We're just trying to get to a place where it's more fair than before. That's all. This is a chance for those who still want to improve things, even at this late hour, to have a shot at doing it.

[Ephemeral]

IMO this is a major step forward for the zone. Ideally all positions, both the staff and players, would be elected positions. This would then make everyone responsible for the decisions they make but I guess the ‘good ol boy’ staff culture won’t allow this.

Many, many details have not been revealed on how this will work so it is hard to pass judgment on it. While the 49%-51% split is a bit worrisome I have been in several partnerships where it worked out because all parties were good people. While it can be abused it will be quite obvious when it is. I know several people on staff that do actually have balls/backbones and I cannot imagine that they could be strong-armed into voting a certain way if they really felt strongly on the topic.

Of course there is no information on how long people are allowed to hold these positions of influence or how they might be removed (surely people would not be axed because they voted certain ways). Although I understand Qan's reservations about meetings I am still unsure how topics get presented, opinions solicited, and how the voting takes place. For example; is voting held open for several days to make sure everyone votes? How do people come up to speed on the topics? Can people abstain from a vote? What happens in cases of ties (people not present or have abstained)?

The first step in improving the existing staff structure has now taking form. It may or may not be too late but it certainly can’t hurt at this point. Instead of folks all bitching about it let ask good questions and get this thing flushed out the best we can.
eph

[Crescent Seal]

this should have been implemented years ago when we brought it up. a little too late really because i doubt it will do much good. i can predict situations where some decisions won't allow player consultation. still a step in the right direction I feel. too many sheep on staff so not sure if the 9 to 8 would even work.

list:

kthx - pretty vocal. ex-staff. experienced in making staff realize they are putrid.
jessup - good relations with the newbie/pub population. easy to work with.
rasaq - a newb himself. offers good insight
lf - experienced ex-staff.
ph - experienced ex-staff. one of the best twl ops in history. x
ease - experienced twl veteran. ted mosby.
izor - experienced player. pub insight.
ephemeral - generates ideas. master of essays

staff should approach these people personally.

p.s. qpr u done...ppl like u and me not meant 4 structure. we chaos.

[Oranje]

Nominating:
Kthx
Lf
Cres

Obviously random order

[beam]

buncha newbies in that list

[kthx]

To expand my thoughts a little, staff has been filled with like minded individuals who agree with each other to a fault. The player committee should be the opposite of how staff has recruited, get people from different squads, different ships and who have different ideas on how the game should he ran. Only then will you get healthy disagreements on subjects and that is the only way you know if something will actually work. If 10 people who dislike each other agree o do something one way its a winning decision. If staff hadn't been filled with yes men and people willing to bend over to get more space power this wouldn't even be necessary.

[kthx]

8 players 9 staffers, each vote counts for one. This is literally an insult to the players you bring on to this. There should be 10 player and 9 staff slots open to avoid collusion. The fact your tossing this out means even staff knows its toxic and needs help to make things better, yet you fix the system so that staff can't truly be forced into saving the zone from themselves. I doubt anyone who respects themselves would accept this invitation but if you correct the problem I would say ease and Ph if either still plays.

[zidane]

should be 50/50 or this serves literally no purpose as morh/ph already said