From: rhinoceros (rhinoceros@freemail.gr)
Date: Fri Aug 29 2003 - 21:15:33 MDT
[Hermit]
Game over.
[rhinoceros]
A strange game. It looks like Jake won by losing.
[Jake]
While I find this interesting feedback, it really strikes me as rule by incestuous polling. Have we mistaken a useful feedback mechanism for an appropriate control mechanism? Important issues of Virian Doctrine deserve better consideration.
http://virus.lucifer.com/bbs/index.php?board=;action=voteResults;idvote=42
[rhinoceros]
I do see a point in Jake's vote topic, although I would put it somehow differently.
Before getting into the specifics, I should point out that there seem to be objections to the fact that Jake posted that vote topic in the way he did, as allowed by the system. This very fact seems to be an argument *for* Jake. In principle, Jake's vote topic could have produced a result without even being disussed.
About our reputation/voiting system: It is a very good mechanism which can be part of a control system, but not an acceptable full blown control system. We'll have to figure out its limitations and take care of them with a kind of a "constitution", "bill of rights", or whatever else it takes. For example, should a majority of, say, 80% be able to silence a minority of 20% just on the grounds of disagreement? Or should they have to prove that those people harm the community? The important thing is to put our administrative efforts in the service of our more general goals such as growing in numbers, attracting thinking people and especially young ones who won't take anyone's word for granted, and making our discussions more deep, diverse, and entertaining. We should also take into account that this is an online community, not a real life environment, and that we have to compete with other forums for the most valuable and interesting people.
Back to the vote system. I can see several main categories of topics on my screen. There are factual polls, opinion polls, votes on philosphical/worldview questions, votes on general CoV administration questions, votes on personal CoV administration questions and so on. Apparently, the meaning and the significance of a vote is not the same for all these categories. For example, what is the significance of a majority vote on "what is truth" or on the "pusuit of happiness" or on "human nature"? Would someone who is in the minority on some of these topics be subject to a "Disciplinary process", according to this?
http://virus.lucifer.com/wiki/DisciplinaryProcess
"If somebody asserts that they are a member of this community, then the opinion and will of the community is binding upon that member, and the will of the community governs that persons acceptance as a member."
Or should that person keep their mouth shut until they get a chance to sneak in some votes to change the consensus, *if* that particular poll happens to be still open. I am jesting, of course, because I don't think this is what a vote on those topics signifies. Or is it?
The pure administrative votes have a different significance. There are two issues here. First, the way the poll is implemented (title and options), as Lucifer pointed out in the case of Jake's post. I will just add that emotional expressions and adjectives are not the only way in which one can try to influence the voters. Second, no matter how wise and influential the voters are, nothing can replace a good discussion which will bring the thorny side-issues to the surface. In my opinion, this is the most important point in Jake's vote topic. I suggest we require a discussion in the BBS where the participants should have a certain total amount of equity for any important and/or binding administrative and/or personal issues. A frictionless vote cast is not likely to grasp the implications of a decision.
By the way, here is another problem, although not directly related to the topic of this thread. I think the reputation votes are somehow one-dimensional. That is, suppose I give someone a high rating for his knowledge and quality of posts and then something new comes up and I realize that he has been using his influence acting on some of his other qualities which I did not appreciate. However, I had to vote on the full package. Is there an easy way to resolved this? Maybe in the future we will be able to embed our simple reputaton algorithm in a more complex structure. In real life, law is separate from administration, and the control mechanisms for both are also different.
---- This message was posted by rhinoceros to the Virus 2003 board on Church of Virus BBS. <http://virus.lucifer.com/bbs/index.php?board=54;action=display;threadid=29174> --- To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Aug 29 2003 - 21:16:00 MDT