Arbiter Term

[Stracius]

Alright, I may as well start this out by extending my pow... err, I mean by making a change some of you mentioned you'd like to see .

This thread is for everyone to throw their 2 cents in, reasonable arguments or not (the former preferred). If there's enough interest in changing the term length to 2 years then we'll throw up a vote/poll and go from there. I'm content with having 1 year terms for the arbiter position, but some of you lazy bums don't seem to want to be bothered so frequently.

On a side note, I think it's silly to nominate people you're not going to vote for. We had 2 people receive 4 nominations between them, and yet ended up with only 1 vote between them. I mean, some poor weiner didn't even get a single vote

[BlackDove]

I approve of this arbiter. He makes fun of old people.

Four more years.

[Anubis]

Personally, I am a believer that we should keep electing yearly - I see it as an important process for both involving the community and freshening up the faith placed in the Arbiter. A lot can change over twelve months, and just because we have yet to have a situation where an Arbiter has (in the view of the membership) conducted himself inproperly or has taken the wrong approach to an issue, that does not mean we never will.

Regular yearly elections, whilst repetitive (and believe me, I can certainly understand why some people feel the way they do) I feel are important for that reason. They're a sensible way to keep our system renewed, and ensure that if things go wrong something can be done.

It may be irritating for some people to see happen every year unnecessarily, but I do feel it is necessary to leave it in place.

[M.Steiner]

...I see it as an important process for both involving the community...

Whilst normally I would agree, for 18 people's votes? Unless we have some new groups form before then and we've had some recruiting going on chances are we'll have around the same next year too, or maybe even less (2006: 59, 2007: 30, 2008: 32, 2009: 18).

I think it would make more sense to increase it to 2yrs whilst our activity is low, review it at the end of that and if things are nice & lively here by then like they have been in the past, then we go back to 1yr. For me, it's not really a matter of finding them irritating, not important or that I don't want to be bothered with them every year. Quite the opposite really, people like myself and QD really stressed the importance of it back when our WoW group was around which was part of the reason why we had so many votes in 2006. It's also a perfect way of bringing all the different groups together as one, everyone playing their part and hopefully having everyone feel a part of the community, every vote counts. But, activity & numbers wise our "community" isn't what it used to be and because of that doesn't really require an election every year like we used to either. Just my opinion at the end of the day, but i'm fine with keeping it to 1yr if that's what the majority want.

[Kon]

If we're going to be too lazy even to vote for the arbiter every year, then we might just as well put up a proposal on whether we should shut down the forums. Really, people. How hard is it to vote in one poll a year?

[Isileth]

Yeah I agree with Kahn, its not a huge amount of time out for people.

Plus it would seem when a big issue is lack of activity what we should not be doing is trying to cut that down even more.

[M.Steiner]

Plus it would seem when a big issue is lack of activity what we should not be doing is trying to cut that down even more.

You do make a good point there...


What bugs me is that our Arbiter elections ARE repetitive as Anny says (not in a bad way, lemme finish), we've had them every single year, every September since this place has been here. Anyone who has been here for a while knows when we have them even without seeing the global announcements across the forums, website front page and our IRC channel to remind them sometimes. I can understand some people being short of time and it simply slipping their mind or some people not being able to get to pc at the time maybe... No matter how active some of us may be nowadays, I still find it an easy month to remember personally and how long does it take to vote anyway? Tis just the one poll we have every year which involves everyone, or should. Yet out of our members list of 171 people only 18 showed up to vote. Besides the people which may fit into the above and are understandable, what about everyone else? (That list may not be as accurate as it once was either, but surely it doesn't need a mass prune...)

I just saw it as a bit pointless having a vote like that whilst so few of us are actually active atm or just don't care/can't be bothered to vote once per year. Thought it may have been best to increase it to 2 until things are more lively here again and so the polls actually do reflect how many members we have, cos 18 was a very sad turnout and is likely to be next year too until some more games & groups come along. Maybe Isi is right though and that's just going to cut the activity down even more? I dunno... Just sharing my thoughts.

[Isileth]

I do however also see not only the vote but perhaps even the position pretty pointless at the mo.

There just into the active player base to really warrant it. But at the same time it is something we will need when things pick up again.


Activity is something that needs to be addressed however, while there will be a boost when the new mmos hit I don't see it being enough on its own or soon enough. Might be nice to see some more members, don't have to compromise the values of the group. Just make sure everyone is inviting their friends and making the offer to suitable people ingame.

And those who are already members remember to post and get on irc, plenty of people active there but more are always welcome.

[Inquisitor]

2 years

[esd]

Plus it would seem when a big issue is lack of activity what we should not be doing is trying to cut that down even more.

This.

1 year.

[BlackDove]

Everything's a vote these days.

[Padishar]

I vote we vote about voting...

or not.




BTW 2 years FTW

[enlightened]

First of all I would like to apologize to Kahn since I fit the category of people he described I forgot to vote! I was pretty active, viewing the information the arbiters presented about themselves and all but the actual vote slipped my mind...sigh

Regarding the term, one year seems good to me (although a two year term wouldn't be bad either).

Also, about activity, I'd just like to restate the fact that activity does depend a lot on something cool that might be out around which all of us can gather and can focus on, such as a good MMO. Due to various reasons, the forums might seem empty, however I would just like to say that Stars always shine! (sometimes they just become dimmer)

[Kon]

Oh, no need to apologize to me! I didn't vote either! Again, not because of inactivity, but because none of the candidates seemed to be too pleased with the idea of stepping up to the plate.

But yes, keeping the terms at one year is definitely the way to go. As has already been said, extending the terms will only further increase inactivity; which I would think that nobody here particularly wants.

[Stracius]

I think I've seen enough argument against the idea (and the one argument for it). Seems most of the people for the idea are the ones that have been/keep getting nominated... makes one wonder .

I don't see an annual vote as being an effect on activity as much as it is the other way around. Meaning, if anything, I think it's a good way to keep track of how we're doing in terms of active members. If we reduce this to every other year (or longer) I suspect we'll find it more difficult to gauge our progress. I don't believe we have people thinking, "Hmm, maybe I should stop visiting the site... but wait, there's always the arbiter vote!"

And as for repetition, I don't see it as being a discouraging factor either. Granted, certain people will not enjoy posting why they may or may not be a good arbiter on an annual basis (and if that's the case, get over it ). However, I think it's a good way for members to keep in touch with who we are as individuals and that, yes, we do exist.

I'm going to keep the term to one year - I don't think a vote will be necessary in this case. If anyone strongly disagrees, PM me or catch me on IRC or AIM. I think we're done here for now.

[Inquisitor]

but because none of the candidates seemed to be too pleased with the idea of stepping up to the plate.

If someone cannot recognize their weaknesses, they will fall to those weaknesses. Its far more telling to read an honest "why shouldn't you vote for me, but if you do I will serve anyway" than any pandering campaign speech.

You should have voted.

[Kon]

I agree, I would much rather read those than some stereotypical campaign-type fluff. But the candidates this time around seemed to have a rather negative outlook, and no one particularly had any plans on what they would do to fix things. Pretty much the only proposal made was to double the length of the Arbiter's term.

[Stracius]

and no one particularly had any plans on what they would do to fix things

Is something broken that requires the attention of the arbiter? Or are you confusing the position with something else, perhaps? If you're referring to our activity level and are looking for leadership to turn it around, look no further than yourself; you might recall that the proposal for term length was from a member. I've already made clear how I view the role - I'm here to facilitate, not to dictate. If you disagree with that then nominate someone you think would do a better/different job next year, or even throw your own hat into the ring. And vote.

[Isileth]

I agree with Strac, this isn't a situation the Arbiter can make a post about and it will suddenly fix itself.

The responsibility of activity and involvement lies with all Members.


It does seem we are sitting back waiting for new mmos to give us a boost. Honestly im not sure this is an amazing idea, how many have we had interest in that have flopped on release?
But at the same time what is there for us to rally around at the moment?


Really I think its going to have to work through small subgroups just arranging something (Much like the Fantasy League) that people can get involved in. Even just arranging to play a few rounds of an FPS with a couple other members. Something to keep activity going as well as maybe start to turn into a more regular arrangement that might expand to other members and even new recruits.

We shouldn't need to do anything drastic, just simply be active and that will attract more activity.

[Kon]

My comments certainly weren't directed at you personally, Strac. You are right that the Arbiter position is not really a leadership role. As for nominating someone else, the issue really is that I don't think anyone here could have done much better. It's going to be very difficult to solve the issue of inactivity when even all of the "active" people are just sitting around the forums, and not actually active in any game. I agree with Isi that the only way to improve activity is not to sit around waiting for an MMO (just look at TR or AoC), but to just find a game that doesn't require much time investment that a few of us can jump in for a few rounds now and again.