On Tue, 01 Apr 2008 06:15:06 -0700, Troia wrote:
> eilis40@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>> 3. Voters. Who can vote? Do we maintain the current database system
>> and modify how people get added? Do we ditch the database and find
>> some other system? Say, go back to public voting on the newsgroup?
>> Have the C*b*l just select the winner?
>>
>> First off, NO MAIL-IN. Secondly, I think the database needs to be gone
>> over, and if someone has not voted for some time (just how long would
>> have to be determined), that person should be dropped. This would take
>> care of people who, as an example, went to C9 because it was local and
>> never attended another Convergence before or since.
>>
>> ... As it stands now, the guy who
>> found out about C13 from a ****tland newspaper and has no clue that C14
>> is even happening can vote and have the same say as someone who has
>> been a regular attendee for years. That doesn't seem fair.
>>
>>
> I disagree. The guy who found out about C13 from a ****tland newspaper
> is not going to care about voting on C14, nor are they going to have any
> awareness unless they've become part of the (sorry) community on-line.
> And if that's happened, then why shouldn't they vote on C14?
The whole key is, I think, figuring out a way to find out who cares
where Convergence is as opposed to where the next Convergence wvent is.
The
people whom I think should have the biggest voice in the matter are the
ones that really care the least where the event is held, because they're
the ones that are going to go anyway. In an ideal universe, EVERYONE has
to travel four hours to get there.
> I also disagree about those who don't travel after attending a local
> one. I imagine there are more-than-enough people who would -like- to go
> to another one but simply can't manage the travel aspects for their own
> reasons. Should that automatically exclude them from the community?
> How about people who think they -might- be able to do so and then find
> out they can't?
It shouldn't exclude then from the community per se, but it should have
the community realize that anyone that isn't going to go shouldn't care
where the event is held. I just wish there was some "put up or shut up"
concept we could work in, like a vote costs $10 and becomes a credit
toward the voter's eventual ticket, wherever the event is.
> Too much "slippery slope" there IMO.
Axel's plan would make them a voter, IF they show up in the "community",
participate, and make themselves known. By his measure, you'd be voting
as well. Sorry, I don't remember what the secret handshake is, nor do I
know what the official cocktail is. (The corpgothers have one, though,
and maybe they'd share.)
> -- Troia
> not able to do Ybor &
> would love to do Saratoga Springs as we once discussed, but doubting
> that too
I'm still hoping for Kansas. Even if the planner of that bid DID move to
Seattle or something.
--
The only thing I'd use on guinea-fowl is a shredder. Same with peacocks.
The sound of peacocks being shredded can't possibly be any worse than
the sound of peacocks not being shredded.
-- Tanuki
|
