[Discussion]Ideal Size Of The Senate

A failed experiment whereby board users were invited to advise the Senate, and instead attempted to replace the Senate.
User avatar
Stark
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 36169
Joined: 2002-07-03 09:56pm
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Contact:

Re: [Discussion]Ideal Size Of The Senate

Post by Stark » 2009-10-12 07:34pm

As is probably obvious, I'm pretty pessmistic about most of those voting on the issue even having read these threads, let alone considering the discussion. I think it's far too early for such a vote; ideas have been floated and people are thinking about the issue, but there's certainly no reason to expect any of them have sunk in.

Honestly, the Senate voting to dissolve itself, even after considering the discussion was completed with it was determined it was largely useless, would be an expression of maturity I would never expect from the internet.

User avatar
Starglider
Miles Dyson
Posts: 8620
Joined: 2007-04-05 09:44pm
Location: Isle of Dogs
Contact:

Re: [Discussion]Ideal Size Of The Senate

Post by Starglider » 2009-10-12 07:41pm

Stark wrote:Honestly, the Senate voting to dissolve itself, even after considering the discussion was completed with it was determined it was largely useless, would be an expression of maturity I would never expect from the internet.
Look, to make this reverse psychology thing work, you have to sweeten it by offering to eat some item of headgear if you are proven wrong. :)

User avatar
Big Phil
BANNED
Posts: 4555
Joined: 2004-10-15 02:18pm

Re: [Discussion]Ideal Size Of The Senate

Post by Big Phil » 2009-10-12 08:16pm

Stark wrote:Honestly, the Senate voting to dissolve itself, even after considering the discussion was completed with it was determined it was largely useless, would be an expression of maturity I would never expect from the internet.
Well, it's probably not going to happen. As Wilkens pointed out you may not even be allowed to do it, but even if it were allowed (Duchess' initial response is probably only the tip of a much larger, silent, iceberg) there are people personally invested in their Senatorial status who will never vote to eliminate their "elite*" status.


*"I have value as a person because I'm a SENATOR on SDNet!"
In Brazil they say that Pele was the best, but Garrincha was better

User avatar
Havok
Miscreant
Posts: 13016
Joined: 2005-07-02 10:41pm
Location: Oakland CA
Contact:

Re: [Discussion]Ideal Size Of The Senate

Post by Havok » 2009-10-12 08:35pm

Honestly, I don't think most Senators really care.
Image
It's 106 miles to Chicago, we got a full tank of gas, half a pack of cigarettes, it's dark... and we're wearing sunglasses.
Hit it.
Blank Yellow (NSFW)
"Mostly Harmless Nutcase"

User avatar
Darth Wong
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
Posts: 70027
Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Re: [Discussion]Ideal Size Of The Senate

Post by Darth Wong » 2009-10-12 09:21pm

Starglider wrote:Restricting membership of the Senate serves three possible functions. It used to restrict who can discuss board issues. This was already dubious (to the point of serious discussion being forced to Testing) before the HoC was created, and it is completely worthless now. As various senators have recognised, discussion here works at least as well as in the Senate. There is no tidal wave of spam.
No, but there is input from users who, to be honest, are part of the problem rather than the solution. They may not consider their input "spam", but that doesn't mean it is desirable.
So the first purpose is pointless. The second possible purpose is recognising good debaters. The Senate used to be ok for that with the badge and the editing and the regular additions. Now that there are no perks, no recognition and no new admissions, it is utterly worthless in this role.
This function would still be served if people were rotated out of the Senate. The problem is that such rotation would be viewed as some kind of assault or heinous insult upon the person in question. I have been meaning to try to make modifications to the board software to bring back some of the badges and perks, but I keep forgetting. My personal to-do list is long and varied, and it's just too easy for this particular item to keep sliding off the bottom.
The only remaining purpose is to restrict who can vote on punishment threads. This is currently irrelevant because the mods aren't paying attention to the Senate, and >95% of mod action occurs without a senate vote. However I agree that in principle having votes is a good idea, and that in principle we might want to limit who can vote rather more strictly than who can discuss.
This is actually something I've been meaning to bring up with the mods, but which I haven't had time to lately. Far too many of them are acting more and more unilaterally (perhaps in inverse proportion to my presence on the board, since I have always taken a dim view of that behaviour).
Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html

User avatar
Stark
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 36169
Joined: 2002-07-03 09:56pm
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Contact:

Re: [Discussion]Ideal Size Of The Senate

Post by Stark » 2009-10-12 09:37pm

I think that's a pretty clear statement of intent. :)

With regard to the board software stuff, is it a matter of finding the time to change options, or would someone changing the code help?

User avatar
Hotfoot
Avatar of Confusion
Posts: 5835
Joined: 2002-10-12 04:38pm
Location: Peace River: Badlands, Terra Nova Winter 1936
Contact:

Re: [Discussion]Ideal Size Of The Senate

Post by Hotfoot » 2009-10-12 10:25pm

Darth Wong wrote:This function would still be served if people were rotated out of the Senate. The problem is that such rotation would be viewed as some kind of assault or heinous insult upon the person in question.
Then why not nuke the whole thing and start over? The original concept of the Senate was as some sort of reward, and when the reward is taken away, people feel miffed, even if the reward itself was more work and an illusion of status.

Moreover, if it is something that's designed to keep the board running smoothly, or at least make some aspect easier or less of a hassle, then those in the role should be actively attempting to perform to the best of their abilities and not just dead weight, granted however that it is an unpaid position.

At the end of the day, I'm not going to shed tears over anyone in the Senate who is upset at the loss of their position. If tomorrow I was removed from the Senate, oh well. I'd still likely be as active as I was before, and I'd probably still make whatever suggestions I had heard, as I did before I was a Senator in the first place. So long as the Senate exists, however, and so long as I am part of it, I will do what I can to make suggestions for what I feel would best help this board run smoothly. That is, as far as I'm concerned, my duty as a Senator, even if I think right now that abolishing the Senate is better for the board in the long run.

Of course, hey, I could be wrong. That's why I wanted to have this discussion. If there's a real reason to keep the Senate around, I do want to hear it, and if we are supposed to be the Judge and Jury to the Supermod and Admin Executioners, so be it, that's what the Senate is.
This is actually something I've been meaning to bring up with the mods, but which I haven't had time to lately. Far too many of them are acting more and more unilaterally (perhaps in inverse proportion to my presence on the board, since I have always taken a dim view of that behaviour).
If you give someone the ability to ban, they're generally going to use it as they see fit unless otherwise instructed. So far, I really haven't seen much of a problem there. Frankly I prefer quicker ban triggers, and banning from serious offenses (taunting/baiting the staff, etc.) seems to be the primary reason for banning. So be it. The nature of the board has already self-selected out the worst examples of spammers, trolls, and idiots. All that really remains are a few wandering time bombs that we can't select out until they go off and a bonafide invasion, which itself requires no Senate action for a response.
Do not meddle in the affairs of insomniacs, for they are cranky and can do things to you while you sleep.
Image
The Realm of Confusion
"Every time you talk about Teal'c, I keep imagining Thor's ass. Thank you very much for that, you fucking fucker." -Marcao
SG-14: Because in some cases, "Recon" means "Blow up a fucking planet or die trying."
SilCore Wiki! Come take a look!

User avatar
Starglider
Miles Dyson
Posts: 8620
Joined: 2007-04-05 09:44pm
Location: Isle of Dogs
Contact:

Re: [Discussion]Ideal Size Of The Senate

Post by Starglider » 2009-10-12 10:44pm

Thank you for weighing in Mike. If you would like any assistance with;
Darth Wong wrote:I have been meaning to try to make modifications to the board software to bring back some of the badges and perks, but I keep forgetting.
I am now more available after a long period of being too busy.

User avatar
Darth Wong
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
Posts: 70027
Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Re: [Discussion]Ideal Size Of The Senate

Post by Darth Wong » 2009-10-12 11:07pm

Starglider wrote:Thank you for weighing in Mike. If you would like any assistance with;
Darth Wong wrote:I have been meaning to try to make modifications to the board software to bring back some of the badges and perks, but I keep forgetting.
I am now more available after a long period of being too busy.
Well, the board is mostly stock now (the version 3 software is much more robust and secure than the old version 2 software and it includes things like the CAPTCHA and multiple login-attempt lockout out of the box, so a lot less modding was required), so if there was a mod to create a badge and a hard-coded edit permission for one particular group which worked with the stock phpbb3 software, I should be able to install it with little or no complications.
Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html

User avatar
RogueIce
_______
Posts: 13252
Joined: 2003-01-05 01:36am
Location: Tampa Bay, Florida, USA
Contact:

Re: [Discussion]Ideal Size Of The Senate

Post by RogueIce » 2009-10-13 03:23am

Darth Wong wrote:
Starglider wrote:Thank you for weighing in Mike. If you would like any assistance with;
Darth Wong wrote:I have been meaning to try to make modifications to the board software to bring back some of the badges and perks, but I keep forgetting.
I am now more available after a long period of being too busy.
Well, the board is mostly stock now (the version 3 software is much more robust and secure than the old version 2 software and it includes things like the CAPTCHA and multiple login-attempt lockout out of the box, so a lot less modding was required), so if there was a mod to create a badge and a hard-coded edit permission for one particular group which worked with the stock phpbb3 software, I should be able to install it with little or no complications.
Have you tried putting those permissions into the Senate usergroup (custom title and all that), and then changing the Senator's into have that as their default group? Because that's how supermods got their green names and Governor tags (the ones who don't still have Registered Users as the default).

I know it's an option for usergroups, because I've seen it. But I don't know if it works with 'regular' usergroups (Global Mods and Admins are 'special' groups) because I figured I'd get in trouble if I made it somebody's default. Mainly because I have no way to change it back, and also because I don't know that I'm allowed to anyway.

EDIT: Actually, maybe not. Lagmonster and Alyeska have green names but no tag, and Durandal, Stravo, Zaia and Master of Ossus have tags but no green names. So that blows my theory out of the water.
Image
"How can I wait unknowing?
This is the price of war,
We rise with noble intentions,
And we risk all that is pure..." - Angela & Jeff van Dyck, Forever (Rome: Total War)

"On and on, through the years,
The war continues on..." - Angela & Jeff van Dyck, We Are All One (Medieval 2: Total War)
"Courage is not the absence of fear, but rather the judgment that something else is more important than fear." - Ambrose Redmoon
"You either die a hero, or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain." - Harvey Dent, The Dark Knight

Locked