The Future Section
 

I've noticed that voting for ORG status often takes more than a month. Anyone think that's a problem? For that reason I try to always make an effort to cast a vote. Such a system depends on its members to participate and if they don't (and our members clearly aren't participating) then it doesn't work.

In a perfect world more members would vote but that's not happenin'.

Are you folks OK with this wait as a necessary evil or should this be changed? Thoughts?

Re: The Future Section
 

Yes, I agree with you it's a problem, but we can't (or won't) "force" people to vote. If there's not enough interest in the discussion and/or voting, I'm not sure what else we can do other than to patiently wait and post reminders. What kind of change(s) did you have in mind that stays within the existing site structure?

Re: The Future Section
 

Honestly, I'm not sure what we can do, but I do agree it's a problem.

Lower the minimum votes needed, maybe?

320

Re: The Future Section
 

Go with M2's idea from back in the day. Elect a panel of 10-12 motivated members to be the representatives for the ORG. They and they alone will vote on each prospective member after an ORG-wide discussion period (which we have now), with 75% (e.g., 9 out of 12) approval needed for a member to be voted in.

Re: The Future Section
 

Screwball, this is a good idea. I can certainly think of some posters who could handle this.

320

Re: The Future Section
 

My personal opinion is, if you've been here long enough to build a reputation as a respectful poster, you should be good to go. I love reading the ORG board. I will never have the inside knowledge many of the ORG posters have, or the time it would take to do the statistical research many of you seem to have at your fingertips. But I'm a lifelong Reds fan and it'd be great to be able to join in the various discussions that take place on that board. Especially now that the Reds season has ended and the Sundeck board is slowing down. I respect the rules of this site and I believe seperate boards is a good idea, because it weeds out the troublemakers, posers, snipers, etc. However, I do feel it's a bit too difficult to reach ORG status. Great site though; I'm definitely here for the long haul - even if that means being a Sundecker for life. We have many, many good posters there too.

:beerme:

Re: The Future Section
 

I will say that I am strongly opposed to a panel of a few select people making the decisions. I am against voting on the issue in general, we are all here to talk baseball and it seems silly to me that we can't all interact with one another while talking about the Reds, just the farm system and 'other stuff'.

If we are going to keep the 'voting' process open though, I do think we should just lower the number of total votes required since a lot of people simply aren't voting.

Re: The Future Section
 

While I respect everyone's opinions on the matter, please let me make it clear that this thread is not going to be used to discuss the merits of the current site setup (i.e. having the ORG and Sun Deck forums). We've been there, done that hundreds of times over. It should be used strictly to discuss the topic mentioned in the original post (improving the current discussion/voting procedures).

Re: The Future Section
 

Of course you are. You've admittedly voted yes to every poster up for a vote, regardless if their post history warrants it or not. Electing a panel would take away your mini protest of the current site setup.

Boss, the current process has worked for a while, but with all the new posters that, frankly, simply blend together, the voting has become too cumbersome. I don't have the time nor the inclination to sift through numerous thoughtless Sun Deck posts to form an educated opinion on a prospective member, so instead of just voting 'yes' or 'no' for everyone, I abstain. I'm guessing many others do likewise for the same reasons.

Electing (or appointing) a panel of 12 or so takes care of that. We would have a core group of self-motivated posters that took the time to review each candidate thoroughly and fairly, and would be able to render a sound and objective verdict relatively quickly. There can still be a discussion period for all of the ORG to give his or her opinion if they still want, but there isn't the lag time afterwards that keeps the prospective member in limbo. Win-win if you ask me.

I liked the idea way back when and I like it even more now. Really, the hardest part would be getting the right group together for the panel. But, I'm sure we could work out any problems along the way.

Re: The Future Section
 

I think a nominate-and-vote thing (ironic, isn't it?) could have this taken care of in a month.

320

Re: The Future Section
 

Count me against a panel. If we're going to have a voting process, and clearly that's the direction the site has decided in favor of, then let's keep it open to all members.

I like the idea, if we're going to segregate the two forums, of deciding who we are going to converse with. I don't like the idea of a select few people deciding that for us.

I strongly oppose the panel. Maybe if we have a panel to make nominations, that would weed out some of the ones that are unlikely to get many yes votes. Then it would cut down on the amount of voting and discussion we have to make. I guess I'd be OK with that.

But give we the people the final vote.

Re: The Future Section
 

We already have. They're not voting. Hence the thread.

Re: The Future Section
 

It's working, just not as quickly as people want. The issue isn't whether or not the current process works, just a matter of can it be modified.

Re: The Future Section
 

I understand you're committed to the current model so with that in mind, my suggestion would be to keep it simple. Don't set up a new panel or anything. Too much hassle. Let the current MODs serve as "the Panel". MODs can decide who gets kicked off so I have no problem with them deciding who's accepted. When someone applies, you folks send PMs back and forth and come to a decision, seamlessly. The rest of us need not know the applicant was even being considered.

I'm fine with leaving the system like it is. It's no skin off my back but it seems a bit cumbersome.

Re: The Future Section
 

Two things:

A.) What I'm suggesting is a modification. A new member still joins the Sun Deck first, still puts in his time there, and still comes up to a vote to determine whether he'll join the ORG or not. All I'm just suggesting (or re-suggeting, actually, as this isn't my original idea) is we change who votes on him since it's become painfully obvious over the last several votes that apathy has set in with the vast majority of ORG. I mean, my goodness, Boss needs to send out 4 and 5 'reminders' just to get 1/6th of the ORG to vote on it's own new initiates.

B.) I'd posit it isn't working. I even had a long-winded paragraph typed up saying why. But rather than subject you to that, I'll just ask this: where's Steel? and M2? Stormy? RedlegJake? Hell, even Cyclone barely posts anymore. Perhaps it's just a coincidence the site's best posters have all decided to rarely post, or worse yet have left altogether. Or maybe it's a glaring sign something ain't right and needs changed.

I considered that as well, but my thinking is that it'd be just another pain in the ass for them to have to deal with. They already donate enough time moderating the board, I don't think they should be expected to carry the onus of thoroughly researching, discussing, and voting on prospective members as well. Of course, if they'd want to do it, have at it. But a seperate group would probably make things easier on all involved.