Jump to content

Sleepy

Sleepy

Member Since 27 Nov 2008
Offline Last Active 18 minutes ago
*****

In Topic: New Staff Member Election

Yesterday, 08:54 PM

This thread is updating so far. I think there were 4 new posts while I replied one xD

So apologizes if what I post is outdated by the time I actually post it.... I'll try to correct that as I go.

 

 

I feel like we need to stream line the list a fair bit. Be it the three I originally brought up or a higher one. Having Krow in serious contention because of a meme seems silly. Having a higher threshold is better since it better zeros in on the most supported candidates, but my earlier comment does create issues with that.

So I'll ask you, which seems better.
1) Leave the threshold at 3
2) Move it up to a higher amount
3) Move it up to a higher amount and leave the thread open for an extra 24 hours?

 

I like option 3. 24 hours is better IMO.

Maybe by then 3 votes might be a low threshold to pass, but from what I see, it looks like the list has 3 tiers regardless of specific numbers. The 4 or so top candidates, the ones that right now have a single mention, and then another patch that's midway. 

 

Another option is defining a number of candidates to handle, and make the cut based on top numbers, as to make sure you don't end up with too many or too few no matter what.
Not that I'm pushing for this specifically, I'm just trying to come up with ideas to throw up into the table.


In Topic: New Staff Member Election

Yesterday, 08:46 PM

Sadly I have to disagree. Because it causes the risk of people voting for someone who is far behind and their vote basically being wasted.

 

And the thing is, at least for me, I only nominated who I did because I felt they were the best fit. There are others (You and Fusion for instance) that I think could be good. But I didn't nominate because I wanted to only nominate the absolute top of my list. I didn't say it cause I don't want to skew things but since its brought up I find the "sure I'll nominate X to bump them over the threshold" to be an...odd choice to say the least.

 

I also am not increasing the votes I originally submitted, but I don't know if everybody was in the same wavelength there with the votes. 

Right now it seems we'll have a sprout of activity on trying to lift up names past the threshold for the next 7 hours. That's basically for those who are online tonight.

 

The amount of people nominated with 1 vote aren't astronomically big though. I doubt we'd have a 2 page list of nominations or anything either way.

Well.... I guess it's up to waiting and seeing what the list looks like a few hours from now.


In Topic: New Staff Member Election

Yesterday, 08:30 PM

I think at least for round 1, we do need to keep everybody nominated in the list.

This voting threshold was suggested within these latter pages, while earlier on in the thread it was just about showing submitting names.

 

For a proper threshold I think you'd be better off defining that this is happening from the get go. Otherwise many voters have come and gone already with potentially different mindsets between not wanting to name somebody they support that had already been named a couple times, and those that wanted to make sure a name appeared any number of times to help showcase how much more that member is wanted.


In Topic: New Staff Member Election

Yesterday, 08:19 PM

Assuming everything's in line with how it looks in the OP, I'd say 5+ should be the cutoff. It's high enough to cut off the majority that didn't get as many nominations, but if you go any higher than that, the numbers instantly skip to the four people with 9+ nominations (myself, CowCow, Black, and Parenthesis). Granted, 5 or possibly even 4 only saves Fusion and Sleepy. Just an observation, since not many people got more than three nominations, and most of the ones that did are the four most popular picks in the thread. But again, it kinda assumes everything's still in line with how it is in the OP.

 

To be fair, the count by Black is back at page 6 and only covered up to some point in page 7 last time I checked. Some more names could make the cut if it was 6+


In Topic: New Staff Member Election

Yesterday, 01:47 PM

A long time ago I saw Pika post a video on that method. Let me go fetch it for visual help: