Board Thread:The Seven Seas Court/@comment-4093783-20160508161618

I probably should have just lumped this in with my last request as one big "#ReformVoting2k16" vote, but I didn't think of it. Basically, some of the voting rules we have aren't really any good and need to be changed or repealed entirely:

1.) "Must have 10 votes to win or reject" (only listed for "major requests"). I don't know how this rule is meant to be interpreted, but the way it has be gone a couple omebody has 10 voters ready to go right when the blog opens up. Discussion is necessary (as long as it doesn't become a dramafest) to ensure that everybody understands the nuances of both sides'   een is that once 10 votes are reached, the vote is closed. This has resulted in a few votes (including recent ones) being closed within a day or even a few hours, when they should hav  days longer. Interpreting the rule like this results in any conversation about the vote being squashed as long as sarguments.

2.) "All votes require the Support or Oppose side to have at least 2/3 Majority and the required amount of votes or days (whichever comes first) to be fulfilled." Again, not really sure how this is meant to be interpreted. I assume it ties in with the last rule about how you need 10 votes to win, in which case it should be tossed.

''Voting needs to be simple: the vote blog is opened up and left open for the amount of days required. At the end, whichever side has the most votes wins. I don't understand why things have to be more complicated than this.''

3.) Rollback and Chat Moderator promotion requests should be re-classified from "Minor Requests" to "Major Requests." Anybody who will receive moderating privileges of any kind and voting privileges on the SSC should have to go through the community first.



Thanks for considering my request. #ReformVoting2k16

  