When to Elect?

[Pryftan]

Instead of Nadnerb and I duking it out in "Leadership Poll", here's a new one concerning the election of a guild council.

My viewpoint, "Immediately", is that the Guild will be benefited by having a council as soon as possible to speed the development of projects and get us out of a near motionless "transition state". Others feel like such leadership is not at all necessary at the moment, and when such a time comes to elect a council we will be able to tell.

I'll let this poll run considerably longer than my other, as people seem to feel it's not reliably representative. That may be the case.

If you agree with me, check out Dovahn's Charter Draft.

[belford]

It is not clear to me how a council (or a guild leader) would speed the development of Age projects. What would these people do to aid development?

And (the real question) what is stopping these people from doing those things *now*? Are they being stopped solely by the lack of a Council hat?

EDIT-ADD: Going back, I see that this is exactly the topic of the "Leadership" thread which you were trying to get away from. Hrm. Continue here or there?

[Pryftan]

They would support specfic ideas and ask modellers or programmers to work on those ideas to speed development. They'd also be involved in organizing lists of contributors to each project and naming project leads.

As for doing it now, I think that might cause problems. For instance, I have the urge to go over to the Yinfara section and name Justin as the project leader, with a list of roles he should try and recruit people to fulfill. But I'm a moderator because I post a lot, not because I was elected. I think the power to make decisions like that should be given by the Writers.

Edit: If you want to respond to this post, you can respond in "Leadership" if you'd like to move it. I'm okay with continuing here though.

[Nadnerb]

Is that an invitation for me to duke it out with you here instead?

It's not the very concept of leadership that I'm going against here, it's the bureaucratic sense I'm getting from it, and lack of specific goal. It seems to me that a lengthy process involving charters with generalized rules, elections, and vague, clouded air, decisions is less conducive to the end that you profess to be aiming at. That of expediting the creation of the showcase age. If there is going be a lead, it should be specifically tailored to the goal. As far as I'm concerned (speaking for myself, of course) there's nothing stopping you from stepping forward to lead the creation of the showcase age in the right direction. I don't know how having a bunch of "elected" people do it would be any better.

[Pryftan]

It's just been my experience that stepping in and declaring yourself a leader is a bad idea among the explorers.

I agree with you though. I don't want this to be as bureaucratic as it's seemed to become. When Dovahn suggested a constitution I told him we should just poll on how many councilmen and how long they stey in office instead of making something more wordy and grandiose, and I support his charter because of the declaration of exactly those things.

I don't think this has to be bureaucratic. I think it can be as simple as setting up some more polls until we know what everybody wants to do.

The goal though is a little more broad than just the showcase Age. I want to expedite the process of making any Age that is being worked on publically in the Guild, and I feel like we can tailor a lead for that broader goal in this manner.

[Nadnerb]

I think the power to make decisions like that should be given by the Writers.

Another point. It is, either way. One is faster than the other. If you're elected, it'll take a while, and it's no guarantee that people will like your decisions. But if you just start putting them forward, people can either agree, or ignore them. No vote required. Heck, even if you are elected, people could still ignore you. It's not really serious power, it's a web forum.

Also...

It's just been my experience that stepping in and declaring yourself a leader is a bad idea among the explorers.

I've personally seen greater firestorms form around people who were actually elected. Like I said. If you declare yourself a leader, people can either take it or leave it, depending on how good a job you do. If you're elected, and serving a term, you just get a nice big sign: "Shoot stuff at me until term expires"

And who is going to seriously read those huge legal-esqe documents set up to explain the whole thing?

[Dovahn]

And the Council doesn't have to have too much power in terms of creation of ages. To address Nadnerb's point (basically, the council seems vague) it's because it is, at this point. We don't have a specific reason as to why we would need a council. Then why have one? As I see it, it's better to have a body of leadership with no power than leaving it a free-for-all. At least this way, there are people who can make decisions if they need to be made, or a group that Cyan can come to if they need to contact us.

As for the bureaucracy problem, I anticipated this when making the Charter, and I agree with it: yes, it might be a bit too complicated. So maybe we don't have to do that. I was (to be honest) simply suggesting the idea because I thought that it would be cool. No, there's no reason as to why we need a constitution, so to all those people in favor of simplicity and independence, I guess you don't really like it. But that's fine with me; again, it was just an idea. Pryftan's idea of continuing polls is our best shot as far as I can tell (except that not everyone visits the forums regularly).

Dovahn

[Pryftan]

I think we can do elections rather quickly if we don't make it too muddled in rules and confusion. As for "shoot stuff at me until term expires", I feel like that's a better way of making sure the leader does what they're there to do. It's a problem if somebody declares themselves project leader and then fails to lead. I mean, you can't vote out someone who hasn't been voted in.

I think elections give more power to the Writers in that instead of someone who may or may not be capable grabbing control of a project, the Writers can judge and decide who they think will do the best job.

[Nadnerb]

You can't vote out someone who hasn't been voted in? Why not? It's the natural selection vote. If the team shuns the project leader, they're not really leading anymore, are they? (though they may pretend to for a while)

Also, why would an elected person have more power? The most a leader can do here is make forceful suggestions. Doing this does not require prior election.

Also, if you're shot at until your term expires, (something I doubt is highly motivational, and likely quite depressing) you're likely to burn out and quit in a flash of flame. This is not something I want to see.

[Dovahn]

And who is going to seriously read those huge legal-esqe documents set up to explain the whole thing?

Sorry to jump around in the conversation, but this was one thing that I was concerned about, and to some extent agree with you on. You're right; they probably won't, and perhaps the solution is to simply make the charter simpler and in more readable language.