Voting to ban members
ren wrote: The result of a vote (to ban) literally is 'popular opinion'. Discussing opinion is on-topic.
Which is exactly why I don't personally support banning people based on popular vote. Mob rule makes terrible government.
Please Log in to join the conversation.
- steamboat28
- Offline
- User
- Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Why should banning not be based on popular vote at that point? Especially in cases of repeat offenders? And especially when most bans around this place aren't permanent enough to really make a difference?
A.Div
IP | Apprentice | Seminary | Degree
AMA | Vlog | Meditation
Please Log in to join the conversation.
steamboat28 wrote: What would you have instead? The issues discussed here, those being voted on, are matters of record. Matters of record in a legally-recognized non-profit organization that has to be able to produce documentation every time it collectively wipes its ass.
Why should banning not be based on popular vote at that point? Especially in cases of repeat offenders? And especially when most bans around this place aren't permanent enough to really make a difference?
When I ran places, I had a council. They decided everything by vote. The members had no say, other than the one making the appeal.
Please Log in to join the conversation.
- steamboat28
- Offline
- User
- Si vis pacem, para bellum.
We tried to get the members a voice. Repeatedly. It's just not allowed here for some reason.
A.Div
IP | Apprentice | Seminary | Degree
AMA | Vlog | Meditation
Please Log in to join the conversation.
steamboat28 wrote: We have routinely petitioned for one or more representatives on the council that represent the common interest of members, and all of those propositions except one was shot down. The one they allowed us, they stripped power from those people, and when those representatives got burnt out, the Council refused to replace them.
We tried to get the members a voice. Repeatedly. It's just not allowed here for some reason.
Sounds like typical politics to me.
Please Log in to join the conversation.
- Carlos.Martinez3
- Offline
- Master
- Council Member
- Senior Ordained Clergy Person
- Posts: 7944
steamboat28 wrote: We have routinely petitioned for one or more representatives on the council that represent the common interest of members, and all of those propositions except one was shot down. The one they allowed us, they stripped power from those people, and when those representatives got burnt out, the Council refused to replace them.
We tried to get the members a voice. Repeatedly. It's just not allowed here for some reason.
Can u - and feel free to use ME for that purpose any time. I am almost 100 percent avalible anytime.
Pastor of Temple of the Jedi Order
pastor@templeofthejediorder.org
Build, not tear down.
Nosce te ipsum / Cerca trova
Please Log in to join the conversation.
steamboat28 wrote: We have routinely petitioned for one or more representatives on the council that represent the common interest of members, and all of those propositions except one was shot down. The one they allowed us, they stripped power from those people, and when those representatives got burnt out, the Council refused to replace them.
We tried to get the members a voice. Repeatedly. It's just not allowed here for some reason.
There is an entire forum, a council secretary, other councillors to whom members can make requests. I don't receive many, and neither did the previous secretary.
Convictions are more dangerous foes of truth than lies.
Please Log in to join the conversation.
- steamboat28
- Offline
- User
- Si vis pacem, para bellum.
A.Div
IP | Apprentice | Seminary | Degree
AMA | Vlog | Meditation
Please Log in to join the conversation.
- Carlos.Martinez3
- Offline
- Master
- Council Member
- Senior Ordained Clergy Person
- Posts: 7944
If ya need me I’m here. If ya don’t - well - I’m still here.
The truth no one says is this -
Banning sucks. Flat out. It hurts every one. There’s no ... easy way or magic words or even promise we -or I -or even any one can make to ease that fact. It should be a last result and after years and years (12) we still hurt after a banning or a threat of it. If there’s a better way - come out with it. I don’t use the word often but I HATE when people get banned. It shouldn’t be. We as humans should be aware and available mentally enough to know our limits and those around us.
Jedi teaching 3
Jedi are aware of the future impacts of action and inaction and of the influence of the past, but live in and focus on the Now. We let ourselves flow like water through the events around us. We embrace the ever changing and fluid world, adapting and changing as it does.
Jedi teaching 7.
Jedi understand their limitations. We recognise, and take responsibility, for our failures and develop a level of modesty about them. We respect the right for others to disagree and understand that they themselves are not perfect.
... and neither are we.
Pastor of Temple of the Jedi Order
pastor@templeofthejediorder.org
Build, not tear down.
Nosce te ipsum / Cerca trova
Please Log in to join the conversation.
Tempest Nox wrote:
ren wrote: The result of a vote (to ban) literally is 'popular opinion'. Discussing opinion is on-topic.
Which is exactly why I don't personally support banning people based on popular vote. Mob rule makes terrible government.
Can you point me to a successful government system that is not based off popular vote?
-Simply Jedi
"Do or Do Not, There is No Talk!" -Me
Tellahane's Initiate Journal
Tellahane's Apprenticeship Journal
Tellahane's Holocron Document
Tellahane's Knight Journal
Tellahane's Degree Journal
Please Log in to join the conversation.