Wow! Thanks, Bob! This is an impressive compilation! It is very clear to read and well-organinzed. It looks like a lot of work went into it. Thank you for doing that, it is much appreciated!
I like your guideline recommendations you have written out. I’m going to go through some of your points to give feedback and to get some clarification:
Yes, a set time for each round would help. I agree with you about it being between Sunday sunset and Monday sunrise. That seems like an adequate amount of time. A specific time of when voting ends might help, though. Say 12:00am EST?1) ROUND TIMING/MANAGEMENT
a) There should be a set time rounds end and begin. Traditionally it is sometime on Saturday or Sunday, but a specific set time would improve things. I would recommend it be sometime between Sunday sunset and Monday sunrise, but the details should be decided by y'all.
I like this. Stating what is ended using the number, announcing the winner and then saying that the new round is beginning would definitely help keep track of everything. But cooperation from all participants would be needed if the first person to post on Monday is supposed to be the one posting all this.b) As a sanity-checking practice, it should be made clear when voting for a round is beginning. Perhaps the round numbers could be used - e.g. 'Round #X is over and the winner is Bob; round #Y is beginning". The first person on Monday should probably be the one to announce the previous week's winner, ending the previous week and starting the new one at once.
I agree on both two points: Yes, others may make a mistake, so everyone should check the calendar to be sure that a round is still going on. I like the second one, Point 1d, which states that if a lot of time passes, then the new poster would still need to give the results in the proper format from above. This will work well if we ever accidentally miss a week. Again, cooperation with getting the correct format will be needed from the person posting.c) Always look at the actual dates when evaluating whether a round is ongoing; don't just take someone's word for it.
d) If a lot of time elapses between one round and another, the new poster should still give the final results for the last round, the same as if it had happened recently.
The only problem I can see with Point 1d is that if this topic abruptly goes dead for an extremely long period of time in the middle of a voting period, a new member may revive this topic without looking at the previous posts and may not realize they need to post the results for that previous week. This is probably an inevitable problem, but hopefully if we use correct format consistently, then it will help make this clear.
I completely agree with this. Keeping the timing is important and would help keep track of rounds better. When round #63 started late in the week (on Tuesday), I nominated Bart and made sure voting ended on the day it usually started (Sunday) without having it drag out another week. I agree with you that it’s the best way to manage each round.e) If a round begins late, say, on a Thursday, it should simply be a short round. That is, the hard rule of 'the round ends on such and such a time on the weekend' should always remain in play. In practice, the rounds are too difficult to manage any other way, even if 168 hours per round would be more fair.
Yes, I like this. Keeping voting distinctive is important. A person making clear statement of, “I vote Smith” with the character written in bold letters should make it pretty obvious as to the person they are voting for.2) VOTING AND VOTE-COUNTING REGULATIONS
a) When voting for someone, a member should put the character they're voting for's name in a distinctive fashion, like bold text. Nobody should have to guess or assume your vote.
I’m slightly confused about this one. Can you please clarify? When you say, “include a vote for their character”, do you mean that a person will need to make two separate statements, one saying “I nominate Jay and then another one saying, “I vote Jay”? Or could it just be assumed that the person is also voting for the character they nominated without making another statement that they vote for the person they nominated? I always assumed that nominating a character was the same as casting your one vote.
A list of the characters each person voted for sounds good. So, the first person who posts at the end of the week would also include this list, I suppose?c) Roll calls are useful for establishing accurate vote counts. A good 'closing' post for a round should probably include each vote, in turn, and the names of those who voted for them. This makes it easier to account for vote-changing.
Good point. It is not really necessary for the results so far to be counted in the middle of the week. If we do, an additional roll call makes sense.d) There is a common practice of counting the votes while the round is ongoing. Sometimes this is helpful, but often it just confuses people, especially when someone misses a vote or two (as happens frequently), counts both votes from members who have changed their vote, or includes their own new vote in the total. If you do count votes while the round is ongoing, I strongly recommend that you do it with a complete roll call, not just a flat assertion like "x - 5, y - 4".
I also agree with this one. A clear statement would definitely help keep track of who switched their votes.e) Roll calls and greater awareness of what round it is will go a long way towards protecting against this, but if you voted in a round before, and change your vote, it should be customary to note that you are changing your vote from x and instead voting for y. It might not be strictly necessary, but it makes counting things easier.
I don’t understand what you mean by this. I completely agree that off-topic chatter should be in different threads. But what exactly do you mean by making a ‘Character of the Week’ chat thread? Creating a new topic for any discussion related to this topic? I don’t understand.
Also, what do you mean by “Off-topic chatter”? Would reasoning as to why a character deserves to be the winner be considered off-topic? While I agree that discussions about life events (such as crashing bikes into fences) or anything else not related to electing a character are entirely off-topic in this thread, I think that discussion about why a character deserves to be Character of the week is relevant. Do you mean that discussion about that deserves a separate thread?
I also agree with this. Although I think it would help to reset everything and have previous winners become available for nomination again. It has been more than five years since some of those characters have won. Maybe we can make a rule that says if a certain amount of time passes then previous winners can be nominated again?4) PROPOSED ADDITIONAL RULES + commentary
a) Nelson proposed that previous winners should not be able to repeat, and people generally agreed to this rule I’d be in favor of this rule.
I’m not sure I’d be a fan of this either. But I’m willing to discuss it.b) Bethany Shepard suggested that there be a 3-character limit on nominations, but nobody else really seemed to respond
I agree with mostly all of these guidelines. I’m going to summarize everything; let me know if I got this right:
Voting begins at a specific time on Sunday and would end on Monday of the next week. The first person to post on Monday would make a post that includes the round number that ended, the winner of that round in bold, colored lettering, a list of the participant’s votes in that round, the numbered round that is now beginning, and a clear statement of who is being nominated with the character being written in bold letters. It would look something like this:
Everyone else will either nominate or vote with their characters written in bold letters. If anyone wants to change their votes, they must make a clear statement indicating what they are changing their vote to.Round #164 is over and the winner is Buck Oliver.
Person #1 voted for Jay Smouse.
Person #2, #3, and #4 voted for Buck Oliver.
Person #5 voted for John Whittaker but changed their vote to Matthew Parker.
Round #165 is now beginning. This week, I nominate Zoe Grant.
A roll call of who has voted for who so far is required if anyone wants to count the current results in the middle of the week.
If the voting for the week starts late, the round will still conclude on usual ending date, which is Monday.
Previous winners will not be available to nominate again.
Anything off-topic should be moved to a different thread.
(I think I covered everything.)
Again, the main thing that is needed is cooperation from all participants to use the correct format when it comes to nominating characters and starting a new week if they are the first person to post at the end of the allotted voting time. If we consistently keep this format, then there should not be a problem.
Now, there are some things that we need to figure out:
I suggest we have a specific time that the voting period ends. I propose 12:00am EST, since that’s the time zone that the Soda Shop is set to whenever I’m not logged in.
Bob suggested that a character who has already won cannot be nominated again. I suggested this be changed to the winning character becoming available for nomination again after a certain amount of time passes. Would everyone agree with this idea?
Anyway, those are my thoughts on the guidelines. I agree with mostly everything Bob suggested, but I’d like to know other people’s input. What does everyone else think?
Thanks again for doing this, Bob!