Voting Question

undrin · Post by **undrin** » Mon Feb 27, 2006 3:38 pm

It was mentioned to me by a few people that during this weekends Guild Vent meeting, that some people are of the opinion that if you are not able to make the meeting time, that your vote in certain matters should not count.

Now I have a problem with that way of thinking. If I am not able to make a meeting our two does that mean my opinion is not important. Does that mean that if my fun in game may be affected, I cannot talk to someone to voice my opinion for me?

I have times when I am not going to be able to make a weekly meeting. However, I still play this game with the rest of you. I still have a vested interest (i.e. I pay money every month like the rest of you) in how our Guild does business. I also still wish to enjoy this game as much as the rest of you. If we are all equal, than regardless of how my intent to vote on something comes, through it should still be valid.

Now I am not saying that I have to be involved in every vote. I am speaking more of special circumstance votes that there is a problem that seems to be larger than most.

If people have a problem with me or others not being on vent for the vote, than I would like to suggest that we put the vote on the forums. I have seen this done in many situations including the one I am eluding too. That would allow for the openness and integrity of this Guild to shine in the troubled and heated issues that many people feel strongly and differently about.

Bladesinger · Post by **Bladesinger** » Mon Feb 27, 2006 4:04 pm

I agree. All important votes should be taken both in Vent and on the forums. I think Vent's the better place to discuss the issues but we have to account for all of our members when it comes to important level voting.

Regards,
Phil

Rlyan · Post by **Rlyan** » Tue Feb 28, 2006 7:54 pm

Couldn't possibly agree more. Votes should be counted whether or not you are in attendance on the vent meeting. These meetings are beginning to take forever, and sometimes not every thing is resolved or few things are actually accomplished. I do however want to stress the importance of attending these meetings if you are able to. This weekend's meeting was much more stressful, because we didn't have the usual amounts of people to weigh in their opinions, thoughts, beliefs, or what have you. Very important to attend!!

lili · Post by **lili** » Tue Feb 28, 2006 10:55 pm

I agree that just because real life issues comes up to prevent us from going to meeting does not mean that our votes doesn't count. I actually called liz and voiced my concerns even though I wasn't able to make the meeting. We all know the meeting are important and we all try to attend as much as we can but there's always times when that's just not possible so I know for me I try to let someone know how I feel about things that are going to be brought up.

requiemdreamer · Post by **requiemdreamer** » Wed Mar 01, 2006 1:21 am

lili wrote:I agree that just because real life issues comes up to prevent us from going to meeting does not mean that our votes doesn't count. I actually called liz and voiced my concerns even though I wasn't able to make the meeting. We all know the meeting are important and we all try to attend as much as we can but there's always times when that's just not possible so I know for me I try to let someone know how I feel about things that are going to be brought up.

I think we all agree with that.

Rlyan wrote:Couldn't possibly agree more. Votes should be counted whether or not you are in attendance on the vent meeting. These meetings are beginning to take forever, and sometimes not every thing is resolved or few things are actually accomplished. I do however want to stress the importance of attending these meetings if you are able to. This weekend's meeting was much more stressful, because we didn't have the usual amounts of people to weigh in their opinions, thoughts, beliefs, or what have you. Very important to attend!!

The problem with with meetings taking too long is a case of a few things, I think. Firstly, we need to keep a structured itinerary of what is going to be brought up, in what order, etc. Also, I think that there is a little too much indecision on a lot of things that makes everything take so long. Once we develop a set of standard procedures for how we handle things (of course there will be special circumstances) we can keep things moving along quickly. For instance, setting a schedule for how to handle the initial formal part of the meetings, then open the floor for any informal discussions. That way we have everyone there to vote on issues or voice concerns, then get the important stuff out of the way so that people can leave if they have to.
I think that once we get the initiates list cleared up it will help things out because we will be able to keep our list to the max of 5 initiates as we previosly decided.

We also need to figure out a procedure for handling situations we discussed concerning a few people voting no and everyone else voting yes, in terms of an initiate becoming a member.

[Example 1]
An initiate is brought up for promotion after 2 weeks. 1 or more people vote NO and moderators are assigned for the following week. This continues to happen until the initiate reaches their 4th and final week of promotion. What happens if there are still only a few people voting NO and everyone else voting YES? Do we just hold a final vote and if the minimum percentage or YES's is met do we just tell the people who were voting NO "to bad?" In this case, what would the minimum percentage of YES's be? Would it be the normal 75%? Would it be something like 50% in these cases? Or do we just kick the initiate out if there is still at least 1 NO vote?

[Example 2]
An initiate is pushed off every week until their 4th and final week of consideration for membership because the minimum 75% of YES votes was not met, and there weren't any NO votes. What happens to that person now? Are they promoted because there weren't any NO votes?

Anyone else seeing that these types of situations can cause a lot of problems unless we figure out a set way of handling these situations?
I'm referencing most of this off of what was covered in the Meeting Minutes

undrin · Post by **undrin** » Wed Mar 01, 2006 2:26 pm

requiemdreamer wrote:
lili wrote:I agree that just because real life issues comes up to prevent us from going to meeting does not mean that our votes doesn't count. I actually called liz and voiced my concerns even though I wasn't able to make the meeting. We all know the meeting are important and we all try to attend as much as we can but there's always times when that's just not possible so I know for me I try to let someone know how I feel about things that are going to be brought up.
I think we all agree with that.

Rlyan wrote:Couldn't possibly agree more. Votes should be counted whether or not you are in attendance on the vent meeting. These meetings are beginning to take forever, and sometimes not every thing is resolved or few things are actually accomplished. I do however want to stress the importance of attending these meetings if you are able to. This weekend's meeting was much more stressful, because we didn't have the usual amounts of people to weigh in their opinions, thoughts, beliefs, or what have you. Very important to attend!!
The problem with with meetings taking too long is a case of a few things, I think. Firstly, we need to keep a structured itinerary of what is going to be brought up, in what order, etc. Also, I think that there is a little too much indecision on a lot of things that makes everything take so long. Once we develop a set of standard procedures for how we handle things (of course there will be special circumstances) we can keep things moving along quickly. For instance, setting a schedule for how to handle the initial formal part of the meetings, then open the floor for any informal discussions. That way we have everyone there to vote on issues or voice concerns, then get the important stuff out of the way so that people can leave if they have to.
I think that once we get the initiates list cleared up it will help things out because we will be able to keep our list to the max of 5 initiates as we previosly decided.

We also need to figure out a procedure for handling situations we discussed concerning a few people voting no and everyone else voting yes, in terms of an initiate becoming a member.

[Example 1]
An initiate is brought up for promotion after 2 weeks. 1 or more people vote NO and moderators are assigned for the following week. This continues to happen until the initiate reaches their 4th and final week of promotion. What happens if there are still only a few people voting NO and everyone else voting YES? Do we just hold a final vote and if the minimum percentage or YES's is met do we just tell the people who were voting NO "to bad?" In this case, what would the minimum percentage of YES's be? Would it be the normal 75%? Would it be something like 50% in these cases? Or do we just kick the initiate out if there is still at least 1 NO vote?

[Example 2]
An initiate is pushed off every week until their 4th and final week of consideration for membership because the minimum 75% of YES votes was not met, and there weren't any NO votes. What happens to that person now? Are they promoted because there weren't any NO votes?

Anyone else seeing that these types of situations can cause a lot of problems unless we figure out a set way of handling these situations?
I'm referencing most of this off of what was covered in the Meeting Minutes

For some reason I thought one no vote could stop the whole thing. But it looks like that part wasnt covered in the mins. I would like to ask what a few means though. In my experience in meetings and such 25% of the people that usually attend the meetings is a pretty big number. So I guess I agree with Sean in asing what would the minimum amount of votes percentage wise have to be. To me it would seem that if some people have a problem with someone, that should seriously be considered because they are full members and they would have to play with that person as this is a group game for the most part at lvl 60.

lili · Post by **lili** » Wed Mar 01, 2006 9:35 pm

Same. I thought that one no vote after moderation means that it ends there.

undrin · Post by **undrin** » Wed Mar 01, 2006 10:12 pm

lili wrote:Same. I thought that one no vote after moderation means that it ends there.

I thought I remembered the conversations basically saying if there was a major problem than one no vote owuld do it because current membership was more important. I could be worng but I think that was the basic meaning of it.

requiemdreamer · Post by **requiemdreamer** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 1:00 am

Well, if that is what we decided I guess it settles that issue then.

Still a little curious about my second example since we set 75% as the minimum ammount of positive votes required for promotion. Did we decide on what would happen in that case, where there are no negative votes but not enough positive votes?

undrin · Post by **undrin** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 2:24 pm

requiemdreamer wrote:Well, if that is what we decided I guess it settles that issue then.

Still a little curious about my second example since we set 75% as the minimum ammount of positive votes required for promotion. Did we decide on what would happen in that case, where there are no negative votes but not enough positive votes?

For that one I don't know. I hope someone can help to clear this part up.

requiemdreamer · Post by **requiemdreamer** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 6:13 pm

undrin wrote:For that one I don't know. I hope someone can help to clear this part up.

Something to bring up this saturday I suppose

undrin · Post by **undrin** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 6:25 pm

requiemdreamer wrote:
undrin wrote:For that one I don't know. I hope someone can help to clear this part up.
Something to bring up this saturday I suppose

Yes that is a good idea. The only problem is quite a few of us will not be online this weekend.

Magdalena · Post by **Magdalena** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 7:54 pm

If there are enough positive votes with no negatives coming from anyone, then they become a member.

If there are a lot of positive votes and only one or two negatives our first meeting decided these would be on a case by case basis depending on the effect it would have on the guild. The reason this was left open was because of the endless possibilities that could cause a situation like this.

Also stated in that meeting was that if someone had issues they voiced prior to the meeting, their vote would be needed in order to proceed with that person's process. They could however leave their opinion with an officer to be voiced for them if they knew they weren't going to be able to make the meeting.

I looked back, and this was all in the meeting minutes that were posted, though not so wordy...

Votes to promote people from initiate to member status will be held weekly and be voted on by all SSX-Mannoroth members.

A person must be an initiate for at least 2 weeks before a vote is taken to possibly promote them to member status.

A minimum of 75% of the meeting must vote yes to promote an initiate to member status and there must be no negative votes. People abstaining from the vote are counted as neutral, neither positive or negative.

If there is even one negative vote, a primary and secondary officer will be assigned at that time to mediate between the two and try to come to a resolution to whatever the issue is.

If 50% or more of the members voting have negative votes, remediation will not be attempted and they will be removed from the guild.

Instances where one person keeps saying no and everyone else says yes will have to be dealt with on a case by case basis depending on the situation. There are too many variables to set a standard for this happening.

An initiate will go through a maximum of 4 votes before something has to be determined. This will be dealt with on a case by case basis looking at why their vote keeps getting pushed forward, but something has to be decided at this point.

There must be a minimum of 7 members present at a meeting before a vote can be taken, with at least 3 of those members having to be officers.
If someone has voiced a concern against an initiate, they must be present as well or have someone knowing their current vote status for that particular initiate to be voted on.