Further proposals for your consideration:

  1. .That each chatter will declare which faction he or she plans to vote in at least a week before the election.
  2. That factional alignment should represent political ideology and that changes in alignment be the result of changes in political ideology.
  3. That there be declared candidates for each faction and campaigns.
  4. That the election of superops be held starting at 00:01 EST Saturday, January 31 and running till midnight, 24:00 EST, Tuesday, February 3. All ballots must be received by 24:00 EST, February 3. The ballots will be sent by e-mail to alllie who will count them. This will be a secret ballot and alllie's memory is so bad that she will forget who voted for whom quickly and promises to keep her mouth shut till she does.
  5. Each e-mail ballot must include the chatter's nick, the faction he or she is voting in and the name of the person chosen for superop.
  6. After the election of superops, vice-superops be appointed or elected by each faction to relieve in the absence of the superop. Vice-superops to have no additional power except in the absence of superops.
  7. That the superop of any faction can be removed by a 75% recall vote (recalls to last no more than 30 days) of the entire channel.
  8. That each faction can remove that its superops by a vote of 50% plus 1 vote.


Sat Jan 3 :28 2004
Private Message Log between riprap and alllie discussing channel organization and the election of superops

<riprap> Probably the best rule is that ops don't ban other ops
<alllie> and no punishing on one channel for what happens on another
<riprap> especially that
<riprap> we just need to tell all ops to not boot other ops
<riprap> maybe have an organizing meeting or something and let everyone have a chance for input
<alllie> but not a lot of insults
<alllie> and not calling people cunts!!
<riprap> that is why you have to include the righties, even though they are probably in minority. their voice has to be preserved and a true democracy will give them zero voice
<alllie> yes
<alllie> okay..so we let them come here and fight
<riprap> the fighting does not worry me as long as it is not constant
<alllie> and we have a meeting to talk to the ops about the rules?
<riprap> fair and balanced is difficult at best
<riprap> in a way, you have to be unfair to the left so that the right is not slighted
alllie> yes
<riprap> and that has to be explained to the left
<alllie> do you think we need to ...recruit a channel manager? someone to do the day to day management?
<riprap> that is the republican part of the democratic republic form of government
<alllie> yep...true
<alllie> maybe elect a channel manager?
<alllie> give someone a 400 or 450 and let them do most of the management?
<riprap> I think it might be wise to allow the different factions to elect/appoint one or 2 head-ops
<alllie> and you and I sit it out
<alllie> okay
<alllie> that's a good idea
<riprap> 3 factions...
<alllie> each side elect a head op..and those ops run the channel?
<alllie> okay
<alllie> that's a very good idea
<alllie> what would the 3 factions be?
<alllie> left
<alllie> right
<alllie> independent?
<riprap> yup
<alllie> okay....
<riprap> or...anyone who could get 10 people to sign could start their own faction
<alllie> okay cool
<alllie> my only fear is that a rightie would claim to be an independent, as they frequently do, then ally with the rightie top op
<alllie> and you and I could vet them....like...if X claimed to be an independent...we could say...in a pig's eye
<riprap> LOL
<riprap> not me
<alllie> hmm
<alllie> you're as bad as me
<alllie> okay...we'll start talking about it on channel..okay?
<riprap> sounds good to me
<alllie> okay
<alllie> thank
<riprap> it's a very fine line we must walk
<alllie> yes
<alllie> tell me if I should do anything different
<alllie> rip I have another thing
<riprap> k
<alllie> how about a term
<alllie> like 3 months or 6 months between elections
<alllie> and recall petitions
<riprap> maybe leave that up to the factions to decide
<alllie> if any top ops have, say, 60-75% of people sign they want him removed, remove him or her have a new election for his spot?
<riprap> yes...75-80%
<alllie> okay
<riprap> 75% super-majority
<alllie> okay
<alllie> great
<alllie> I guess you need to write this up so we can put in on the website
<riprap> I'll add that to my list
<riprap> allie, think about posting this log of PM and letting everyone see how this day began
<alllie> Okay

Sat Jan 3 :28 2004
Undernet #news_garden
Channel discussion

<alllie> hey julee
<alllie> you know how you always want elected ops
<alllie> we are discussing electing some ops. One on the left. One on the right. and maybe one independent. and letting them run the channel.
<julee> alllie, yes... that's me
<itsMarty> so that's one on the rigt
<itsMarty> so that's one on the right
<alllie> itsMarty...yep..people will have to register...aka, tell us which side they want to vote on. There will be some vetting. Like certain people who support Bush in all things will not be able to claim to be lefties
<itsMarty> yes
<alllie> I'll have to start making a list
<itsMarty> lol
<julee> alllie, that sounds reasonable
<alllie> so people can tell which side they are on
<alllie> only people who are here and chat some will get to vote
<riprap> I think that is the only fair way to do it
<itsMarty> lol
<alllie> rip and I have been discussing the channel
<riprap> I think allie and I have come up with a good plan that most will find accommodating
<alllie> how about we elect 3 top ops for channel management. one from the left, one from the right, and one independent. rip would still have veto power if there is any craziness. But other than that the 3 top ops would manage the channel and could vote about things. Say how to handle bans for people who break the rules. how long etc
<weenerdog> i should be one of the top 3 op
<weenerdog> i have a RESUME
<alllie> weenerdog..if you got enough votes from the right you could be
<riprap> well, the basic plan is to allow factions of chatters to select/elect one lead-op to represent them. lefties get one op, righties one op. independents one op, ... anyone who can get 10 chatters can elect one op to sit on the board of head-ops.
<riprap> also, ops here don't ban other ops
<cableguy> you can't control chat folks...
<riprap> all the oldtimer chatters get ops. no one get auto-ops
<riprap> no vulgarities used against another op
<riprap> if an op deserves to be banned, then the lead-ops handle it
<alllie> Anise..anyone that needed to be banned probably wouldn't get to keep ops long
<riprap> so, any group that can gather signatures from 10 chatters can form their own faction and get one seat at the lead-ops board
<cableguy> then you better not op me....altho I'm passive...it will cause fights
<weenerdog> mae'll agree to disagree on that one i suppose
<alllie> we also will have recall petitions. If any top op gets 75% of chatters sign on for his removal he will be removed and there will be a new election for his spot
<Anise> 75% is too high
<riprap> it has to be high
<Sharonell> Well, 74% of chatters against one op isn't good either
<alllie> Sharonell...hmmm...people who chat here
<alllie> like umm_lemme could not vote because he doesn't chat
<Firecreek> alllie on a special day or in a certain period
<Firecreek> ?
<riprap> he was chatting last night
<Sharonell> alllie - how do you define people who chat here - and how do they register to vote?
<alllie> riprap..what do you think?
<riprap> we need to think about who can vote and how to verify
<Sharonell> We could have a residency requirement - so long chatting on the channel
<Sharonell> some period of time
<Sharonell> so, that people can't invite all their friends over on voting day
<cableguy> only registered usernames should be able to vote...
<Sharonell> they'd have to invite them right now to get them established as established chatters
<alllie> riprap..yep
<alllie> definitely
<riprap> the old timers are known to all
<Anise> cableguy, not all can register, those with yahoo email accounts can not
<alllie> and people will have to register as to which faction they vote for with challenges allowed. Like if someone I identify as a rightie wants to vote in the leftie election I would challenge that
<Sharonell> alllie - right
<Sharonell> Viridium - we're talking about voting for ops - registering and defining voters, etc
<riprap> so for now, anyone who wants ops needs to be registered with X and then tell me or allie or cableguy to add you to X's ops list
<riprap> all the oldtimers can be ops and then the factions will elect 'super-ops' who will handle most of channel business
<Firecreek> Pretzel buon anno !
<riprap> and ops dont kick other ops
<riprap> no more majority rule
<alllie> with challenges allowed. and any superop being able to be removed by a recall of 75% of chatters
<riprap> majority rule == righties get screwed
<Sharonell> and a successful channel incorporates all political factions
<riprap> the 'conflict' is what keeps the channel thriving and dynamic
<riprap> and we discourage it becoming personal
<riprap> most of us have been together now for 4+ years. we should be able to be decent to each other
<Sharonell> Well, that should be another issue for a vote - what kind of language
<alllie> I don't like the ops and people on the other NG discussed and criticized on channel. if you want to bitch about our sister channel please take it to PM
<Anise> language is mostly generational, reminds me of the man that was pardoned, lost his career over saying 'cuss words' today he'd be at the top of charts with his language
<riprap> the purpose of everyone having ops is so if X dies, we have people opped who are here and can op others until X gets bck
<riprap> and remember, the elected fractional super-ops will be doing most of the voting and deciding
<Firecreek> Sharonell 1 parameto insults and not abusing foul language. Sometimes a "bad word" can make something clearer. Butto have this effect it must be reserved for special moments
<julee> we all have been ops, and in a pretty successful channcnn #news_cafe which ran 24/7
<riprap> any group of 10 people can become a faction and elect a super-op
<Viridium> disputes WILL arise .. unless you work a mechanism for resolving disputes fairly and amicably .. they is potential for trouble
<Firecreek> this looks like a european parliament ;)
<riprap> the mechanism for resolving disputes is the 'super-ops'
<cableguy> in other words..you can `prick` your finger in channel..but dont `finger your ...`...well... you get the idea
<Viridium> sometimes sops are not around .. problems have a way of getting catastrophically bad
<Viridium> worse with every exchange
<Firecreek> we all could sign a paper that we try to behave and to act like adult democrats (not a special party is meant just a status of citizenship)
<riprap> the main reason for ops is to protect our ownership of the channel if X disappears and the main reason for the super-ops is to administer the channel
<riprap> any of the old-timer or regular chatters can get ops as long as they are registered with X
<fatima3> itsMarty there is no sense in opping under certain circumstances really
<riprap> and i will setup a bot that you can message and get ops while X is gone
<Viridium> no "conduct unbecoming" an op
<riprap> anyhow, all of this is in flux. get with your factions and decide what you wanna do

The channel organization and the method of electing Superops is now in flux.

Please let us know how you feel about it!

RipRap and alllie

The Rules
X Commands for OPS

[an error occurred while processing this directive]