User blog:G-man./Community Vote: Voting Changes

From Nults McKagan's SSC post.

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 Basically, some of the voting rules we have aren't really any good and need to be changed or repealed entirely: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 been is that if somebody  has 10 voters ready to go right when the blog opens up, they can get the vote passed within a very short amount of time without any kind of discussion. Discussion is necessary (as long as it doesn't become a dramafest) to ensure that everybody understands the nuances of both sides'  arguments . The way things have been done has resulted in a few votes (including recent ones) being closed within a day or even a few hours, when they should have gone for a couple of  days longer. Interpreting the rule like this results in any conversation about the vote being squashed as long as somebody has 10 voters ready to go right when the blog opens up.

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.''






 * 1) G-man.