WHEN did the ELECTION PROCESS CHANGE?

Author: oromagi
oromagi
Mods
MEEPs
free and fair elections
RM for president

Posts

Total: 24
Topic's author
#1
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
I note that a new notice has been issued today regarding DART elections:

DART Presidential Election
Greetings DART!
The presidential process will begin starting Dec 27th.
From December 27th to January 16th, any user may nominate themselves. From that time, users may campaign for themselves following the regulation set.
On January 17th, the preliminary voting stage will begin, where the top three candidates move on to the general election
On January 20th, the final voting stage will begin, where a simple majority vote decides the president
On January 21st, the president is inaugurated
Hope everyone has a safe and happy holidays
Godspeed, SupaDudz
While I voted against the need for a Presidential office on DART, I accepted the preference of the majority as expressed in the MEEP that ended on Sept 29th, "MEEP: Reformed ban policy & DebateArt President" and in early December endorsed RationalMadman's Candidacy for our first DebateArt President.

That election process, as proposed by MisterChris and approved by us DebartArters clearly stated:

"The President shall be elected for a yearly term each December, to be formally instated January 1st of the following year. The first three weeks of December will be dedicated to optional campaigning, and the rest of the month will be dedicated to the election process, all of which will be overseen and managed by moderation."

Clearly, a number of DebateArtists including RM and myself were under the impression that these were the rules in play and have been campaigning since Dec 1 accordingly.  Now I see that the campaign dates and inauguration dates have been moved and a primary process inserted.  I guess I'm left wondering:

  • When did the election process change?
    • How did I miss it?
  • On what authority?
    • Does that authority over-ride MEEP decided policies?


#2
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
#3
Vader
Vader's avatar
Debates: 30
Posts: 14,984
5
8
11
Vader's avatar
Vader
5
8
11
-->
@oromagi
Hello oromagi. You are correct. We did not prevent any originally happening on the site but official nominations are not starting due to the 27th

I will take responsibility for this issue. I was overburdened with my exam finals that the process simply fled my mind as it did with the whole moderation teams. It was a hectic December and I simply did not have time to balance my schedule to run a full process

I changed the dates so that the 3 weeks are spent campaigning, but the adequate time for voting is also given too. 
#4
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,167
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@oromagi
R u runninhv
#5
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
Someone tag me when the election thread goes up so I don't forget to vote please.

#RM4prez
Topic's author
#6
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
So....SupaDudz > MEEP.  got it.
#7
Vader
Vader's avatar
Debates: 30
Posts: 14,984
5
8
11
Vader's avatar
Vader
5
8
11
-->
@oromagi
Sadly yes. I'd rather have an election where moderation as a whole can moderate it more fully versus letting it run rampant. It's never happened before but would you rather have an election which would have 0 care put into it or one with care put into it
Topic's author
#8
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Vader
-->@oromagi
Sadly yes. I'd rather have an election where moderation as a whole can moderate it more fully versus letting it run rampant. It's never happened before but would you rather have an election which would have 0 care put into it or one with care put into it
Well, from my perspective the election has been running for three weeks and is easily the least divisive project ever devised for this site:  one candidate with no sign of opposition. It's as if George Washington is running.   If that's the result of zero care and letting things run rampant, I guess I'm okay with it.
Topic's author
#9
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@ILikePie5
-->@oromagi
R u runninhv
who me?  nah.

I opposed the position initially and while I'm willing to voice my support for the majority will and democratic tradition, actually applying for a job that I deemed unnecessary seems a bit contrary.  Besides which, I'm not sure I could fairly represent all debateartists.  For example, I don't really think I could fairly represent greyparrot's interests so long as he has me blocked and falsely accuses me of bullying.  I think I could set most political  and personal divisions aside for the purposes of fair representation but I'd have a hard time lending any credence to people actively, unfairly defaming my reputation on the site.
#10
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,167
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
I’m offended you’re not voting for me
#11
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,167
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@oromagi
Well, from my perspective the election has been running for three weeks and is easily the least divisive project ever devised for this site:  one candidate with no sign of opposition. It's as if George Washington is running.   If that's the result of zero care and letting things run rampant, I guess I'm okay with it.
I was under the impression that mods had to announce it. I’m running officially, though I’m sure you’re going to vote for my opponent who has a history of opposing free speech
#12
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@ILikePie5
I don't know much about who is running. Truth is I voted no on the MEEP to have a President and my main reason for supporting RM is that he did too.
Topic's author
#13
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@ILikePie5
--> @oromagi
Well, from my perspective the election has been running for three weeks and is easily the least divisive project ever devised for this site:  one candidate with no sign of opposition. It's as if George Washington is running.   If that's the result of zero care and letting things run rampant, I guess I'm okay with it.
I was under the impression that mods had to announce it. I’m running officially, though I’m sure you’re going to vote for my opponent who has a history of opposing free speech
My point is that mods did announce it in September.  Now, three weeks deep into the announced election the rules have changed- new time frames, new primaries. Seems like a fairly corrupt way to go about it. 

I consider you a fine candidate for President although you are right, I am endorsing RM.   While you have a significant history on the forums, you have little experience or history on the debate side of this site, which I consider our core function. Nobody can claim more experience in debating+voting on this site than RM and RM also has significant investment in the forums, mafia side. Outside of mods, nobody has a more well rounded perspective on our needs and capacities than RM. 

Topic's author
#14
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@ILikePie5
I was under the impression that mods had to announce it.
Don't know why.  Here's what we voted about in September:

Election

The President shall be elected for a yearly term each December, to be formally instated January 1st of the following year. The first three weeks of December will be dedicated to optional campaigning, and the rest of the month will be dedicated to the election process, all of which will be overseen and managed by moderation.
The terms of the election make no mention of waiting for mods to announce or delay beyond the first three weeks of December should no announcement be forthcoming.   All of this eleventh hour new rule-making is news to me.

I’m sure you’re going to vote for my opponent who has a history of opposing free speech
While I agree that RM's history regarding free speech is somewhat checkered (he has blocked me three times, for example, and I am nothing if not harmless), I still rank RM as superior to you in the matter of free speech on this site.

That's because RM's positions on free speech are reliably self-interested and personal while you have a history of only promoting free speech you agree with and remaining silent in the defense of free speech you despise.  When greyparrot made his false and cowardly accusations of bullying against me just to relieve himself of the burden of having to rebut my critiques, I specifically asked you to condemn  your bff greyparrot's fake defanations and you lol'ingly declined. A debateartist truly commited to free speech would have encouraged  greyparrot to give up his unfair censorship and welcomed the refinement of ideas in the crucible of argument, even knowing that little of what greyparrot says can stand up to reasoned inquiry.  I truly believe that you would be an ardent supporter of free speech on behalf of thett or DrFranklin but I have little faith that you would take the same principled stand on behalf of FLWR or RM.  I think RM would stand up for most debateartist's freedom of speech, including yours, so long as that freedom did not cross his own self-interest.  I call that preferable to political or factional interest.

So, while I'd give you both a downcheck on the pursuit of free speech, I think RM's interests are objectively  more fair-minded than yours.

Topic's author
#15
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
I might also remark that the limitations on free speech for a site like this are necessarily more restrictive than those we might endorse on a national political scale.  Ultimately, excessively free speech is what killed debate.org and excessively free speech is still what makes DDO useless to our purposes even today.  As a Liberal, I am committed to making a free speech a priority but not at the expense of safety or good will or utility.  I suppose one can use one's freedom of speech to denounce the First Amendment specifically or Democracy or Liberalism generally but such nihilistic self-contradictions are the arguments of the Joker, not Madison.
#16
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,167
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@oromagi
That's because RM's positions on free speech are reliably self-interested and personal while you have a history of only promoting free speech you agree with and remaining silent in the defense of free speech you despise.  When greyparrot made his false and cowardly accusations of bullying against me just to relieve himself of the burden of having to rebut my critiques, I specifically asked you to condemn  your bff greyparrot's fake defanations and you lol'ingly declined. A debateartist truly commited to free speech would have encouraged  greyparrot to give up his unfair censorship and welcomed the refinement of ideas in the crucible of argument, even knowing that little of what greyparrot says can stand up to reasoned inquiry.  I truly believe that you would be an ardent supporter of free speech on behalf of thett or DrFranklin but I have little faith that you would take the same principled stand on behalf of FLWR or RM.  I think RM would stand up for most debateartist's freedom of speech, including yours, so long as that freedom did not cross his own self-interest.  I call that preferable to political or factional interest.
I don’t remember when you were censored tbh. If there’s a restraining order on you that’s a different story. 

If you, RM, or FLWR were banned for espousing liberal speech I would fully support reinstating you all. Free speech means being allowed to say what you want to say. Blocking a user is a site function which is a different story. Same thing with a restraining order that’s used to gauge harrassment. If you aren’t allowed to comment on GP’s forum posts, I believe you should be allowed to.
#17
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,167
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@oromagi
So, while I'd give you both a downcheck on the pursuit of free speech, I think RM's interests are objectively  more fair-minded than yours.
I would disagree. RM’s viewpoints on banning are on a personal level like against Wylted. Wylted was wrongfully banned upon review yet RM probably still believes to this day that he should be banned. That’s fine, after all it’s his opinion, but it directly goes against free speech.

I think you are criticizing me for the restraining order policy, which is not something I technically believe in. But it does serve a purpose in gauging harrassment.
#18
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,167
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
I don't know much about who is running. Truth is I voted no on the MEEP to have a President and my main reason for supporting RM is that he did too.
Lmfao, well I voted yes and I care about the office enough to vote yes so🤷‍♂️
#19
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@ILikePie5
Who else is running?
#20
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,167
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Who else is running?
Just us two atm I think. You can nominate someone if you want.
Topic's author
#21
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@ILikePie5
Free speech means being allowed to say what you want to say.....Same thing with a restraining order that’s used to gauge harrassment. If you aren’t allowed to comment on GP’s forum posts, I believe you should be allowed to.
Well you were a participant in the very conversations that GP called bullying and are better positioned than any other debateartist to testify that I was in no way threatening or abusive and that GP's requests for safe space protection was both inappropriate and contradictory to the spirit of this site, but for more than a year you've allowed GP's injustice to stand.  To clarify, the restraint is voluntary at the request of Mods and is there has been no suggestion of official enforcement.  Still,  I feel compelled by good citizenship to abide by that moderated request, however unfair and based in deception the initial complaint.  This is precisely the kind of safe space protection from criticism that you claim to abhor in academia but then fail to criticize when enjoyed by your friends.
#22
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,167
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@oromagi
Well you were a participant in the very conversations that GP called bullying and are better positioned than any other debateartist to testify that I was in no way threatening or abusive and that GP's requests for safe space protection was both inappropriate and contradictory to the spirit of this site, but for more than a year you've allowed GP's injustice to stand.  To clarify, the restraint is voluntary at the request of Mods and is there has been no suggestion of official enforcement.  Still,  I feel compelled by good citizenship to abide by that moderated request, however unfair and based in deception the initial complaint.  This is precisely the kind of safe space protection from criticism that you claim to abhor in academia but then fail to criticize when enjoyed by your friends.
You are willing refraining from exercising your right to talk with him. You are welcome to engage with him until you are faced with a restraining order. GP had the right to call you anything. If you’re restricting yourself then I can’t really do much. If you get banned for exercising your free speech right, I would definitely veto it though as President.
#23
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
Idk what exactly this thread is about and need to be careful I don't campaign in a thread that isn't my campaign thread but I will say this:

Blocking somebody and regarding their freedom of speech as invalidated aren't identical especially as I'm not a moderator.

If I block you, it means I don't want you @ing me or bothering me.

It's true that if I also don't like your freedom of speech here, I will block you as well but that's a tiny minority. Considering that I block a fair amount of people, I can conclusively tell you that me blocking you isn't an indication I'd ban you from the website and/or muzzle you.

I do not support the first amendment. I think it is a fallacious amendment and concept for society. I will not pretend to uphold it as a site value.

Talk with a tone of respect to other users outside of consensual disrespect arenas like a rap battle or idk some flame thread (but don't be racist).

I don't really get this idea of people thinking they can be as rude and disrespectful as they want without consequence, it's not even how I was raised alone (I was raised to be more tolerant/passive) it's just a trait I myself have. I don't like disrespect and I sure as fuck don't like any of this racism, sexism, lgbtqphobic bullcrap going on with some users.

Say your view without mocking and degrading. If you have a view that inherently degrades (that a race is superior etc) then please go to a dirty shithole on the Internet and excrete your fecal matter there.
#24
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@oromagi
 Besides which, I'm not sure I could fairly represent all debateartists.  For example, I don't really think I could fairly represent greyparrot's interests so long as he has me blocked and falsely accuses me of bullying.

If being blocked from GP's safe space is enough to disqualify one from the presidency then we may have a hard time finding enough eligible nominees for a competitive race.