Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by NCommander on Wednesday April 23 2014, @10:00PM   Printer-friendly
from the apt-get-install-democracy dept.
I wanted to get feedback on how the community feels about our current name vote. There have been some concerns that we've had relatively small percentage (~10 percent) of members register to vote, and wanted to see if there was something more fundamental going on. As it is currently setup, here's how things are
  • You had to be registered by April 12th to have been included in the name vote; if you received a ballot for submission, you should have gotten ranking ballot
  • We haven't retroactively added in additional users, though it hasn't been clear that there was a hard cutoff
  • The submission phase went until the 19th, and the vote for the name will continue until the 27th
  • The current system is email only (but we are looking at getting something integrated into the website implemented for future votes)

I want to hear your feedback below from everyone. Based on what we get back, we'll roll improvements into future votes, or if need be, reset the vote and do it again; I know a lot of you are active here or at least more involved, so the relatively low turnout is a warning canary for me. Leave your comments below, and expect another story in a few days to see how we're using your comments.

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by Open4D on Thursday April 24 2014, @03:33PM

    by Open4D (371) on Thursday April 24 2014, @03:33PM (#35606) Journal

    The problem is that the vote has no legitimacy now

    Why? Some people haven't fully understood various instructions, but it's not like we're voting for a political representative or anything on that level of seriousness.

    Furthermore, anyone who voted wrongly can re-do it [soylentnews.org].

    Admittedly, people who didn't select the "Willing to Vote" option before the deadline have missed out. Ideally they would be accommodated now (without extending the voting period). But if that's not convenient for the administrators, then too bad.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by mojo chan on Thursday April 24 2014, @04:47PM

    by mojo chan (266) on Thursday April 24 2014, @04:47PM (#35651)

    Well, that's the problem, isn't it? The "willing to vote" option was silently added, and the call for suggestions was easy to miss. The suggestions aren't brilliant and I would have added mine if I had even known it was happening.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    • (Score: 2) by Open4D on Thursday April 24 2014, @04:58PM

      by Open4D (371) on Thursday April 24 2014, @04:58PM (#35661) Journal

      The "willing to vote" option was silently added

      It was announced by the 2nd sentence of the Call for Suggestions for Site Name Vote [soylentnews.org] submission.

      • (Score: 2) by xlefay on Thursday April 24 2014, @05:09PM

        by xlefay (65) on Thursday April 24 2014, @05:09PM (#35669) Journal

        That post was "at the top" of the list, for maybe 24 hours, hardly enough time for a lot of people to see it, unfortunately.

        • (Score: 2) by Open4D on Thursday April 24 2014, @05:33PM

          by Open4D (371) on Thursday April 24 2014, @05:33PM (#35683) Journal

          It may not have been at the top of the front page for long, but it was still available in amongst all the other stories, with an easily distinguishable headline. The fundamental usage scenario for this site is for people to look through the list of stories.

          You could complain that it was only 3 days (approx) between that story being posted and the first voting email. But there has to be some time limit, and there will always be someone inconvenienced by the limit. Other people are complaining about the process being too slow and making the incumbent name into the inevitable winner.

          It's not like we're voting for a political representative or anything on that level of seriousness.

    • (Score: 2) by Open4D on Thursday April 24 2014, @05:37PM

      by Open4D (371) on Thursday April 24 2014, @05:37PM (#35686) Journal

      The suggestions aren't brilliant and I would have added mine if I had even known it was happening.

      Might as well post them here. If you get lots of positive comments, maybe your suggestion will get in through the back door (via the staff vote?).

    • (Score: 2) by mrcoolbp on Friday April 25 2014, @03:50AM

      by mrcoolbp (68) <mrcoolbp@soylentnews.org> on Friday April 25 2014, @03:50AM (#35921) Homepage

      For what it's worth, we did at the users that spoke up in the week after the deadline passed back into the voting pool. We've learned a lot from this process, and I assure you, we'll improve this process in the future.

      --
      (Score:1^½, Radical)